RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/78  
 
22 May 2023 
(23-3497) Page: 1/17 
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF  29 MARCH  2023  
INTERIM CHAIRPERSON: MR LOH JIA JIE  (SINGAPORE)  
The Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products held 
its 78th formal meeting on 29  March  2023. The airgram of the meeting was circulated in 
document  WTO/AIR/IT/17 , and an annotated agenda for the meeting wa s circulated in 
document  JOB/IT/32 . The meeting was chaired by an interim chairperson , Mr LOH Jia Jie 
(Singapore).  
 
1   REVIEW OF STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON 
TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS: DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE LAST 
COMMITTEE MEETING  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 2 
1.1   Request by China Regarding the United Kingdom's Participation in the  ITA .........................  2 
2   TRADE CONCERNS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS  ................................ ............................  3 
2.1   Request by the European Union,  Japan, and the United States Regarding an  
Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  ................................ ................................ .........  3 
2.2   Request by the United States Regarding Implementation Issues Concerning Egypt  ..............  4 
3   REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE  ................................ ................................ ................  6 
4   NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  ................................ ..............................  6 
5   EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA  PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.29)  ...........  7 
6   DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12, G/IT/29, G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -G/IT/W/40/ADD.21, G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4, 
AND JOB/IT/25)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  7 
6.1   Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of  
18 "Attachment  B" Products (G/IT/27)  ................................ ................................ .................  7 
6.2   Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of  
15 Additional "Attachment  B" Products (G/IT/29)  ................................ ................................ .. 8 
6.3   Possible HS2007  Classification for the Remaining "Attachment  B" Items: Note by the 
Secretariat (G/IT/W/40 and its Supplements and Addenda)  ................................ ....................  8 
7   NEW PARTICIPANTS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 8 
8   SECRETARIAT PRESENTATION ON RECENT TRENDS IN ITA  TRADE  ...........................  10 
9   SECRETARIAT REPORT ON THE WTO  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WORKSHOP FOR 
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE ITA AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION OF 
14-17 MARCH  2023  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  12 
10   FUNCTIONING OF THE ITA  COMMITTEE – INFORMATION FROM THE  
CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  13 
11   ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ...................  16 
12   DATE OF NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING  ................................ ................................ ...... 16 G/IT/M/78  
 
- 2 - 
 
  The interim Chairperson  (Mr LOH Jia Jie (Singapore) ) indicated the following:  
 
Mr Hazrul Imran Azahar , the Chairperson of this Committee, had to fly back to Malaysia urgently  
because of a family emergency . He is therefore not in a position to chair today's meeting . In my 
capacity as interim Chairperson  of this Committee1, I would like to express my sincere appreciation  
to all ITA Participants for the ir confidence and trust.  
 
1  REVIEW OF STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON 
TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS: DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE LAST 
COMMITTEE MEETING  
1.1  Request by China Regarding the United Kingdom's Participation in the ITA 
1.1.  The Chairperson  recalled t hat this agenda sub -item had been included at the request of China 
in a communication to the Secretariat dated 14  March.  
1.2.  He inform ed Participants that, on 8  November  2022, the Chairperson of the ITA  Committee 
had organized a joint meeting with both the Uni ted Kingdom and China  with a view to facilitating 
communication and exploring possible ways forward to address the issue. Both sides had expressed 
their willingness to engage on the issue and had indicated that they needed to check with their 
respective Ca pitals on some of the elements raised in the discussion. The Chairperson's 
understanding was that both delegations had held further bilateral discussions since then.  
1.3.  The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.4.  The United Kingdom wishes to report on its bilateral consultations with China regarding our 
recent exchanges under this agenda item. For the benefit of ITA Participants , this arose out of a 
discussion on specific procedural requirements after the U nited Kingdom 's withdrawal from the 
European Union.  
1.5.  Due to its unprecedented position in having ceased to be a member State of the European 
Union, the United Kingdom has clarified, for transparency purposes, the series of documents which 
comprise the United Kingdo m's commitments pursuant to its participation under the ITA  I and 
ITA Expansion.  
1.6.  By virtue of its previous membership of the European Union, the United Kingdom was covered 
by the European Union's  ITA I schedule , found in document  G/MA/TAR/RS/16 , dated 2  April 1997, 
including its subsequent rectifications and modifications . Specifically and respectively , these 
modifications can be found in document  G/MA/TAR/RS/47 , dated 10  February  1998, and 
document  G/MA/TAR/RS/74 , dated 15  December  2000.  Regarding the ITA  Expansion, the United 
Kingdom was covered by the European Union 's ITA  Expansion schedule found in 
document  G/MA/TAR/RS/456 , dated 27  February  2017.  
1.7.  ITA Participants  will recall that, on 17  December  2020, the United Kingdom com municated its 
continued participation in these agreements in its own right. Details of that communication can be 
found in document  G/IT/W/52 . 
1.8.  Subseq uently, in July  2018, the United Kingdom submitted for certification Schedule  XIX, 
document  G/MA/TAR/RS/570 , whereby all tariff liberali zation commitments with respect to the 
products listed in the Annexes of the ITA  I and the ITA  Expansion were carried over. Schedule  XIX 
also lists the United Kingdom 's ITA  Attachment  B products and remaining staging matrix. In 
document  G/MA/TAR/RS/570/Add.3 , circulated on 12  May 2022, these Attachment  B products have 
been updated to include all Attachment  B codes in HS2017  nomenclature.  
1.9.  For purposes of trans parency, the United Kingdom  therefore wishes to clarify that the 
documents outlined in detail today comprise the list of documents upon which our commitments 
under the ITA  I and ITA  Expansion rely. We reiterate that, as announced in previous statements, 
 
1 Following the rules of procedure of the ITA  Committee, a communication was circulated to all 
ITA Participants, on 21  March  2023, regarding the election of an interim Chair to preside over the Committee's 
meeting of 29 March only. As the Secretariat had received no objection or comment by 24  March, 
Mr LOH Jia Jie (Singapore) was elected interim Cha irperson to chair the ITA Committee's meeting of 29 March.  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 3 - 
 
  the UK has replicated all tariff liberali zation commitments previously undertaken under the ITA  I and 
ITA Expansion , and that these commitments are now reflected in Schedule  XIX. 
1.10.  We thank China for their shared commitment to transparency on this issue. If an y participants 
are interested in this further, please reach out to the United Kingdom . 
1.11.  The delegate of China  indicated the following:  
1.12.  China would like to thank the United Kingdom for its statement.  
1.13.  As this Committee is aware, China has been raising this issue since 2021  because China 
believe s that the ITA  Agreement should apply equally to all ITA Participants. Every participant , 
including the United Kingdom, should have its own ITA  schedule, and the Goods sch edule cannot 
replace the ITA  schedule in this Committee.  
1.14.  We are also aware that the United Kingdom had already implemented the ITA  Agreement as 
an EU member State before its withdrawal from the European Union . It is for this reason that China 
has showed fl exibility and taken a pragmatic approach to deal ing with the issue of the UK's 
participation in the ITA. China has clearly indicated that we have no intention to renegotiate its 
ITA commitments with the United Kingdom,  and nor do we question the UK's parti cipation to the 
ITA. In deed, in  the past two  years, the Committee has witnessed the UK 's active participation in the 
work of the Committee.  
1.15.  China  welcome s the United Kingdom's statement made today. It provides the list of 
documents that comprise the UK 's ITA commitment s. With these documents, ITA Participants can 
identify the UK's detailed ITA  commitment s. ITA Participants can also rely on these documents to 
engage with the United Kingdom  in this Committee if they have any questions or concerns regarding  
the UK 's ITA commitment s and its trade measures on ITA  products.  
1.16.  China looks forward to continuing to work constructively with the United Kingdom in this 
Committee.  
1.17.  The Chairperson  thanked the Unite d Kingdom and China and propose d that the Committee 
take note of the statements made.  
1.18.  It was so agreed . 
2  TRADE CONCERNS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS  
2.1  Request by the  European Union, Japan, and the  United States Regarding an 
Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that this  agenda item had been included at the request of the 
European Union, Japan, and the United States, in communications to the Secretariat dated 15  March.  
2.2.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
2.3.  Since May 2019, so for almost four years now, we have raised concerns with respect to 
Indonesia applying tariffs on select ICT  products that appear to exceed its WTO  bound tariff 
commitments.  
2.4.  Multiple Members have been raising this issue with Indonesia repeatedl y, across multiple 
WTO Committees , as well as bilaterally. Industry has also raised concerns directly with Indonesia.  
2.5.  We do urge Indonesia to constructively engage on this issue with Members and restore 
duty-free access for these select ICT  products in ac cordance with its commitments.  
2.6.  The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.7.  The European Union has made many repetitive calls to align the tariff treatment of certain 
ICT products classified under subheading  8517.62 with Indonesia 's WTO  comm itments. We are 
concerned about Indonesia 's significant tariff (10%) on products classified under tariff 
line 8517.62.10/49/69 , on which we have recorded a significant drop in exports.  
2.8.  During the meeting of the Committee on Market Access of 6 April 2022, Indonesia informed 
Members that, according to the 2022  Indonesian Customs Tariff Book, the products concerned were 
listed as 0%  tariff. We understand that the new customs tariff book entered into force on 
1 April 2022. After verification, we see that , despite Indonesia 's statement in the Committee on 
Market Access, the lines  8517.62.10, 8517.62.49 , and 8517.62.69 , still carry a 10%  duty. We invite 
Indonesia to explain why this is so, given that, according to its commitments , Indonesia shall ensure 
duty-free treatment . 
2.9.  The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
2.10.  Japan reiterates its concern about the issue of Indonesia 's continued application of tariffs of 
10% on certain ICT  products that fall under tariff heading  HS8517.62. In Indonesia 's 2022  tariff 
book, 10%  tariffs are provided for three  subheadings of HS8517.62 , namely 8517.62.10, 
8517. 62.49 and 8517. 62.69. In our view, this is clearly inconsistent with Indonesia 's zero -tariff 
commitments on all the subheadings of HS8517.62.  
2.11.  At previous meetings, I ndonesia has explained that this was a result of the integration of a 
number of tariff items by HS  conversion , and that it did not intend to violate its obligations. However, 
our concern has not yet been resolved , even in Indonesia 's 2022  tariff book. In o rder to examine 
this further, we request Indonesia to clarify the facts , and its plan to address this issue , as soon as 
possible.  
2.12.  The delegate of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
2.13.  Indonesia would like to thank the United States, the European Union, and Japan, and has 
taken note of their concerns.  In this regard, we would like to assure  ITA Participants of  Indonesia 's 
commitment to maintain ing that its measures remain in  compliance with the WTO  rules.  We would 
also like to highlight that the relevant Ministries governing this matter  in Indonesia are coordinating 
together , and we hope this matter can be resolved in a timely manner.  
2.14.  Indonesia will comply with , and respect , every agreement that it has signed , and will continue 
to carry out internal coordinati on to resolve this present issue.  In addition, we reaffirm that Indonesia 
has no intention of taking any action outside the scope of its obligations under the ITA  Agreement.  
2.15.  Indonesia, as mentioned in the Committee's previous meeting, stands ready to engage with 
the delegations  of the European Union, Japan, and the United States,  in resolving this matter.  
2.16.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
2.2  Request by the United States Regarding Implementation Issue s Concerning Egypt  
2.17.  The Chairperson  recalle d that this agenda item had been included at the request of the United 
States in a communication to the Secretariat dated 15 March.  
2.18.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
2.19.  It has come to our attention that Egypt may be applying tariffs o n mobile phones that appear 
inconsistent with its WTO  bound tariff commitments.  Our understanding is that Egypt has a duty -free 
bound tariff commitment for mobile phones, classified in tariff heading  8517.12 in 
HS2012  nomenclature.  However, a decree issued  by the President , from November  2021, raised the 
tariff on mobile phones to 10 %. Currently, the 10 % duty for mobile phones is listed on the Egyptian 
Customs Authority 's website, and industry has reported facing these tariffs on imported products.  
We would  appreciate an explanation from Egypt on the possible inconsistencies between its bound 
commitments and applied tariffs, and how it intends to resolve these inconsistencies as soon as 
possible.  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.20.  In addition to the 10 % import tariff, Egypt appears to be imposing additional charges, 
including a 5% fee by the National Telecom Regulatory Authority , on only imported mobile phone s. 
However, there is a lack of clarity surrounding these restrictions, with official regulations n ot being 
readily available.  We would appreciate  it if Egypt could provide documentation on the 5% fee, and 
any other measures that are applicable to the importation of mobile phones. Additional transparency 
would provide greater clarity to traders.  
2.21.  The Uni ted States places a high importance on ITA Participants  abiding by their 
ITA commitments, which ensures the integrity of this Agreement. We are concerned about the 
growing number of implementation issues, particularly on the same category of goods.  
2.22.  We look  forward to engaging with Egypt to resolve this issue as soon as possible . 
2.23.  The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
2.24.  The European Union understands that Egypt appears to levy a 10%  duty on certain products, 
in this case mobile phones, whi ch, according to Egypt 's ITA commitments , and its goods Schedule , 
are bound at zero. We would therefore welcome clarification  of this matter  from the Egyptian 
authorities, including on how they intend to resolve the issue.  
2.25.  The European Union  also reiterate s its concerns about the Egyptian import requirements 
regarding mandatory letters of credit. We have raised this in several WTO  committees ( namely, the 
Committee on Market Access and the Council for Trade in Goods ), and we understand that it also 
applies t o ITA  goods , such as mobile phones.  
2.26.  We therefore look forward to these issues being addressed positively and promptly.  
2.27.  The delegate of Chinese Taipei  indicated the following:  
2.28.  The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu would like to add our 
voice in expressing concern regarding the systemic implications arising from Egypt 's current practice.  
Egypt issued Decree No. 558/2021 in November  2021, which resulted in a 10% tariff increase on 
mobile phones classified under subheading  HS8517.12. However, these products should be subject 
to a zero -tariff duty according to Egypt's WTO  tariff schedule under HS2012. Therefore, w e request 
Egypt to provide an explanation for imposing this tariff and to clarify how the tariff is consistent wit h 
its obligations under Article  II:1(a) of the GATT  1994.  We urge Egypt to uphold its ITA  commitment 
and reinstate duty -free access for the affected products.  
2.29.  The delegate of the Republic of Korea  indicated the following:  
2.30.  The Republic of Korea t hanks the U nited States for raising this issue.  Korea would like to add 
its voice to the concerns raised over  Egypt's  application of tariff s on mobile phones.  Korea requests 
Egypt to expla in the issue in relation to Egypt's compliance with its ITA  commitment s. 
2.31.  The de legate of Japan  indicated the following:  
2.32.  Japan thanks  the United States for raising this agenda item , which is of interest also to Japan . 
Japan requests Egypt to provide the relevant information so that we can clarify the facts and their 
consistency with Egypt's ITA commitments. Japan will closely follow this issue.  
2.33.  The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
2.34.  The United Kingdom thanks the United States for highlighting this issue.  
2.35.  It is important that all Members adhere to the commitments we have made under the 
Information Technology Agreement. The proper implementation of these commitments not only 
ensures clarity for traders and businesses involved in glob al supply chains, but fundamentally creates 
an economic environment supporting growth and jobs, and ensuring access to crucial technologies.  
2.36.  We welcome clarification from Egypt on this matter; and we will be looking closely at the issue 
and will raise any questions bilaterally in due course.  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.37.  The delegate of Egypt  indicated the following:  
2.38.  Egypt thank s the United States, the European Union , Chinese Taipei, the Republic of Korea, 
Japan, and the United Kingdom, for their interest in this matter.  I wish to assur e ITA Participants 
that Egypt honours and respects its obligations in the WTO; accordingly, this matter has been 
referred to Capital. Our expects are analysing the situation and corrective action  will be taken in line 
with our obligations in this Organizat ion. 
2.39.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
3  REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE  
3.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, s ince the Committee's meeting of 15  May 2012, and as 
requested by some delegations, the "review of product coverage" had been included as a regul ar 
item on the Committee's agenda. This agenda item provided an opportunity for the Committee to 
receive reports and updates from those participants that were engaged in bilateral and plurilateral 
consultations relating to the review of product coverage pu rsuant to paragraph  3 of the Annex to 
the ITA.  
3.2.  The delegate of Canada  indicated the following:  
3.3.  I would like to report to the Committee here in my capacity as Chairperson of the Participants 
to the 2015  ITA Expansion Agreement.  We continue to implement that Agreement, and almost all 
participants have implemented their tariff reductions and elimination commitments under their 
ITA Expansion Schedules on an MFN  basis.  The Expansion Agreement remains open to all Members , 
and we would  encourage all Members to strongly consider participation in this initiative.  The Group 
of 2015  ITA Expansion participants will continue to reach out to other Members and provide them 
with information on the ITA  Expansion Agreement and its benefits.  
3.4.  The Co mmittee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter, as 
appropriate, at the ITA  Committee's next meeting.  
4  NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  
4.1.  The Chairperson  referred to paragraph  3 of the Annex to the 1996  Ministerial Declaration, 
which required that "Participants […] meet periodically … to consult on non -tariff barriers to trade in 
information technology products." He reiterated that the Committee had attached great importance 
to non-tariff barriers (NTBs) and that, since 2000, NTB s had become an essential part of the regular 
work of the Committee.  
4.2.  He recalled that on 7  May 2015 an industry -driven workshop dedicated to NTBs affecting trade 
in ICT  products had been organized. A factual report by the Chairperson had been circulated in  
document  G/IT/28 . At subsequent meetings of the Committee, the Chairperson had been tasked to 
continue consultations on the follow -up to the ITA  NTB Workshop. He also recalled that NTB  issues 
had been raised by certain guest speakers at the ITA  Symposium of 16 and 17  September  2021.  
4.3.  He noted that little progress had thus far been made, unfortunately. Regarding next steps, the 
incoming ITA  Chairperson would hold consultations with interested participants on NTB  issues 
relating to global trade in IT  products with a view to identifying topics for the Committee's future 
discussion.  
4.4.  In addition, he understood that, at its previous formal meeting, the Commit tee had agreed to 
invite Secretariat staff responsible for TBT  issues to share any relevant information with the 
Committee concerning ongoing discussions at the TBT  Committee relating to IT  products. Such an 
exchange might  prove helpful to enhance the syne rgy and cooperation between the ITA  Committee 
and other WTO  bodies. By way of follow -up, he understood that the ITA  Committee's Secretary had 
been in contact with the Secretariat staff concerned with a view to organizing this exchange at one 
of the Committee's future meetings.  
4.5.  The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 7 - 
 
  4.6.  The ITA and its Expansion have brought considerable benefits in eliminating tariffs. It is crucial 
that this is followed  up with progress to remove non -tariff barriers  with a view to further facilitating 
trade in IT  products.  We remain committed to that objective , even if the EU is aware of the 
challenges involved in moving towards commitment s in regulatory areas under the umbrella of the 
ITA. We are ready to play our p art in the context of the various discussions that may take place . We 
are indeed convinced that making progress in the work on non -tariff measures can bring tangible 
benefits to companies.  We therefore look forward to any further work that may be carried o ut in this 
area. Finally, regarding the interaction with colleagues working on TBT  issues, this is very welcome,  
and we  are looking forward to the proposed session.  
4.7.  The Committee took note  of the statements made , and agreed  to revert to this matter as 
appropriate at its next meeting.  
5  EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA  PARTICIPANTS ( G/IT/W/17/REV.29 ) 
5.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that one of the outcomes of the NTM  Work Programme had been the 
completion of a pilot project that had led to the adoption of the "Guidelines for Electromagnetic 
Compatibility (EMC) and Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Conformity Assessment Pro cedures". 
Upon adoption of these "Guidelines", the Secretariat had prepared a note on the "Draft List of Types 
of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used by ITA  Participants", as contained in 
document  G/IT/W/17  and its revisions. The note contained the responses to the survey and  other 
notifications received from Participants on the type of assessment procedures for EMC and EMI that 
they used. ITA  Participants had indicated on several occasions that they had found the information 
contained in this document very useful and wished t o have it completed.  
5.2.  The Chairperson was pleased to inform the Committee  that, since its  previous meeting, in a 
communication to the Secretariat dated 18  January, Israel had provided some information regarding 
its EMC/EMI  conformity assessment procedures T his information had been included and circulated 
in document  G/IT/W/17/Rev.29 , dated 19  January  2023.  
5.3.  The Chairperson noted that there were still nine (9) participants  that had not yet provided any 
information on their conformity assessment procedures, namely Afghanistan; Iceland;  the Stat e of 
Kuwait; the Kyrgyz Republic; Morocco; Nicaragua; Tajikistan; the United Arab Emirates; and Viet 
Nam. The Chairperson encouraged these 9 delegations to provide their information to the Secretariat 
as soon as possible so as to enable the Committee to co mplete this work.  
5.4.  The delegate of Israel  indicated the following:  
5.5.  Israel is pleased to be able to contribute to the EMC/EMI  pilot project with information about 
its conformity assessment procedure for ITA  products.  We find that the EMC/EMI serves as a useful 
point of reference,  and we appreciate the work of the Secretariat in preparing this document.  
5.6.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
6  DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1 , G/IT/W/6/REV.3 , G/IT/W/33 , G/IT/W/34 , G/IT/27 , 
JOB/IT/12 , G/IT/29 , G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -G/IT/W/40/ADD.21 , G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4 , 
AND JOB/IT/25 ) 
6.1  Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of 18 "Attachment  B" Products 
(G/IT/27 ) 
6.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 20 July 2013, the Committee had adopted a Decision for the 
HS1996  classification of 18  Attachment  B items, which had been circulated in document  G/IT/27 . As 
required by that Decision, each participant must reflect the agreed classifications in its 
WTO Schedule of concessions, as appropriate, following the 1980  Decision on the Procedures for 
Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25).  
6.2.  The Committee took note  of the statement made.  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 8 - 
 
  6.2  Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of 15  Additional 
"Attachment  B" Products ( G/IT/29 ) 
6.3.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 18  April 2016, the Committee had adopted the "Decision for 
HS2007  Classification of  15 Additional 'Attachment  B' Products", which had been circulated in 
document  G/IT/29 . Most of the items covered by this Decision related to HS2007  heading  8486 
(Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor boules or wafers) and one  item 
related to heading  8471 (automatic data processing machines and units thereof).  
6.4.  The Committee took note  of the statement made.  
6.3  Possible H S2007  Classifi cation for the Remaining "Attachment  B" Items: Note by the 
Secretariat ( G/IT/W/40  and its Supplements and Addenda)  
6.5.  The Chairperson  indicated that the Note by the Secretariat on "Divergence of Classification: 
Possible HS2007  Classification for the Remaining 37  'Attachment  B' Items" had been  originally 
circulated as document  G/IT/W/40 , based on the Swiss proposal for a three -step procedure 
(document  JOB/IT/12 ). 
6.6.  He recalled that, at the Committee's meeting of 31  Octobe r 2014, it had been agreed that: 
"Participants are expected to submit a communication to the Secretariat no later than 30  June 2015, 
indicating: (a)  the items that, in the participant's opinion, should be classified differently from the 
HS2007  codes listed  in column  8 of the Annex to this document; and (b)  the HS2007  subheading(s) 
that, in the participant's opinion, are relevant for the classification of the item in question." It had 
also been agreed that "The Secretariat will compile communications receive d in a separate 
document. On that basis, participants would then be expected to assess the next steps that could 
be taken to reduce any remaining divergence in classification."  
6.7.  He reported that, to date, the Secretariat had received comments from 21  partic ipants. These 
had been circulated as addenda to document  G/IT/W/40 . Comments had been received from the 
following participants: Norway (G/IT/W/40/Add.1); Chinese Taipei (G/IT/W/40/Add.2); Switzerland 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.3); the European Union (G/IT/W/40/Add.4); Hong Kong, China 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.5 ); China (G/IT/W/40/Add.6); Japan (G/IT/W/40/Add.7); Canada 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.8); the United States (G/IT/W/40/Add.9); India (G/IT/W/40/Add.10); Macao, 
China (G/IT/W/40/Add.11); El Salvador (G/IT/W/40/Add.12); the Republic of Korea 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.13); Panama (G/IT/W/40/Add.14); Thailand (G/IT/W/40/Add.15); Guatemala 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.16); Mauritius (G/IT/W/40/Add.17); Montenegro (G/IT/W/40/Add.18); 
the Russian  Federation (G/IT/W/40/Add.19); Seychelles (G/IT/W/40/Add.20); and New Zealand 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.21).  
6.8.  All these comments had been consolidated into document  G/IT/W/40/Suppl.4 , which also took 
into account the 2016  Decision on the classification of the ad ditional 15  items. Therefore, there 
remained 22  Attachment  B items for which Participants should provide their comments in order to 
arrive at a common HS  classification.  
6.9.  In this regard, the Chairperson invited delegations that had not yet provided their co mments 
on the possible HS2007  classification of these remaining 22  items to do so as soon as possible in 
order to arrive at a common classification for these products within existing HS  nomenclature and 
thereby also to fulfil the mandate of paragraph  5 of the Annex to the Ministerial Declaration on Trade 
in Information Technology Products.  
6.10.  The Committee took note  of the statement made.  
7  NEW PARTICIPANTS  
7.1.  The Chairperson  inform ed the Committee that Timor -Leste, an LDC  country in the process of 
acceding to the WTO, ha d recently expressed its intention to join the ITA and ITA  Expansion 
Agreements. On 27  February  2023, the Ambassador of Timor -Leste had written to the 
WTO Director -General expressing such an intention. The Ambassador's communication had included  
Timor -Leste's draft ITA  Schedule . The Secretariat ha d undertaken a technical verification of 
Timor -Leste's draft ITA  Schedule,  and was currently discussing with Timor -Leste's  authorit y certain G/IT/M/78  
 
- 9 - 
 
  modifications to it for the sake of consistency. Timor -Leste's  draft ITA  Schedule would be circulated 
in due course, but only once it had been checked for errors and deemed complete.  
7.2.  The delegation of Timor -Leste  indicated the following:  
7.3.  At the outset, I would like to thank the ITA  Committee for announcing Timor -Leste's intention 
to join the ITA and ITA  Expansion Agreements. As stated by Minister Joaquim Amaral during our 
fourth  Working Party meeting, we believe that joining the ITA  Agreements will eliminate the tariffs 
on a number of IT  products classified under the Agreement. In line with our commitment, in 2022  
the Secretariat already provided two  working sessions explaining the procedural steps in relation to 
our potential participation to the ITA. Considering the technical  nature  of the preparation s to join 
the ITA  Agreements, we kindly request the Committee and WTO  Secretariat's necessary technic al 
assistance support so that  Timor -Leste may finalize its ITA and ITA  Goods Schedules.  
7.4.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
7.5.  The United States congratulates  Timor -Leste, and welcome s Timor -Leste's request to join the 
ITA. We look forw ard to working with Timor -Leste to incorporate the ITA commitments into their 
accession schedules , and for the Committee to review its draft ITA  Schedule.  
7.6.  The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
7.7.  Japan also warmly welcomes Timor -Leste 's request to participate to the ITA. We look forward 
to receiving the necessary documents for formal participation and engaging constructively in 
discussions on technical details. In addition to Lao  PDR's recent participation, Timor -Leste 's interest 
in ITA  participation will provide good further momentum for expanding ITA  participation to 
developing Members.  
7.8.  The delegate of China  indicated the following:  
7.9.  China  warmly welcome s Timor -Leste 's intention to join the ITA and ITA Expansion ( ITA II). 
China will continue its constructive engagement with Timor -Leste,  and look s forward to welcoming 
Timor -Leste to the ITA family on the earliest possible date.  
7.10.  The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
7.11.  The United Kingdom would also like to welcom e Timor -Leste's expression of interest in joining 
the ITA as part of their accession process to the WTO. We look forward to working with them on 
their endeavours , and would encourage technical assistance to be provided to them , where possible , 
for this wor k. More widely, the UK welcomes all Members that are not yet Participants to the 
Agreement to consider joining  it. And I would note that , at a recent CMA  informal session exploring 
LDC experiences during the pandemic, we were encouraged to hear Lao PDR's  reference to their 
ITA accession as a method of stimulating economic recovery following the pandemic.  
7.12.  The delegate of Australia  indicated the following:  
7.13.  Firstly Australia wishes  to thank Timor -Leste for their intervention, and also join s others in 
welcoming their intention to join the ITA and ITA  Expansion. I would particularly welcome further 
bilateral engagement on the issue of technical assistance required , and hopefully we can assist 
Timor -Leste in that regard . And certainly we encour age other Members to assist Timor -Leste, 
particularly noting their LDC  status , and challenges in their development. This would be a great step 
forward.  
7.14.  The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
7.15.  The European Union also thank s Timor -Leste f or its announcement, and we very much 
welcome Timor -Leste's intention to join the ITA and ITA  II. We were recently delighted to welcome 
Lao PDR as a new ITA  Participant , and we are very pleased to see an increased interest in ITA and 
ITA II. The EU conclud ed and signed a bilateral market access agreement with Timor -Leste earlier 
this week, and we look forward to continuing  to work with Timor -Leste on ITA  issues.  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 10 - 
 
  7.16.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
8  SECRETARIAT PRESENTATION ON RECENT TRENDS IN ITA  TRADE  
8.1.  The Chairperson , in response to Members' requests at previous Committee meetings regarding 
the updating of trade statistics on ITA  products, invited Mr Florian Eberth  of the Secretariat 's 
Economic Research and Statistics Division to give a presentation on recent trends in ITA  trade, based 
on the latest trade data.  
8.2.  The Secretariat  (Mr Florian Eberth ) gave a presentation on recent trends in ITA  trade, based 
on the latest trade data .2 
8.3.  The del egate of China  indicated the following:  
8.4.  We would like to thank the Secretariat for presenting this very useful report. This report has 
facilitated and enhanced ITA Participants ' understanding of the general situation and recent trends 
in ITA and ITA  Expans ion products.  So we highly appreciate the great efforts made by the Secretariat 
in this regard, and we would like to encourage the Secretariat to continue this analysis , based on 
the factual data , and to update the report regularly, if possible.  
8.5.  The delega te of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
8.6.  To echo China's comments , I thought that this was an incredibly helpful and thoughtful 
presentation . I am really grateful to the Secretariat for bringing it to this Committee. I think it really 
underlines t he importance of the work that we do here, and the importance of the ITA. It really 
covers a very substantial part of global trade, and an increasing part of global trade, which just 
underlines the importance of the work of this Committee and the commitmen t of Members to the 
Agreement.  
8.7.  I think  that this kind of report really helps us to remain informed about  global developments . 
It has certainly given us food for thought on how to take the work of this Committee forward. And, 
like China, we would very much welcome discussions of this nature to be facilitated at this Committee 
going forward.  
8.8.  The delegate of Australia  indicated the following:  
8.9.  Australia  thanks the Secretariat for this very interesting presentation. I  would  like to echo the 
comments of coll eagues concerning its value.  
8.10.  Just one additional  point, although I should  not speak for my colleague  from the Philippines;  
I wanted just to make a link to a previous experience -sharing  session,  from the Philippines,  on the 
impact on the Services sector of their participation to the ITA. And I think that it would be useful in 
future iterations of this presentation also to consider  that, although the ITA is about goods, there is 
a spin -off in IT  Services that is quite significant, particularly in the case of the Philippines.  
8.11.  The delegate of the Republic of Korea  indicated the following:  
8.12.  The Republic of Korea very much t hanks the Secretariat for its informative presentation.  I 
recall that, at the Committee's previous meeting, I had asked the Secretariat to give a presentation 
on recent ITA  trade statistics.  Might it also be possible to receive the recent trade statistics of t hose 
countries that are participants to ITA I, but not  participants to the ITA Expansion?  
8.13.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
8.14.  I thought  that it was a really interesting presentation, especially, to echo Australia, in that it  
shows that ICT  products really underpin almost everything that we do in our economies. And looking 
at the chart indicating  trade in ICT  products, where  you also have the trade in mining, agriculture , 
textiles, and so forth, well, you cannot  do any of that  other stuff without ICT  products. I also noted  
the slide that shows trade going up 6% per year on average , followed by a huge jump in demand 
 
2 Circulated in document  RD/IT/54 . G/IT/M/78  
 
- 11 - 
 
  around the beginning of the pandemic , with merchandise trade increasing at around 20 %. On a 
personal note, at  the beginning of the pandemic , I had to go out and buy an iPad for my then 
three -year old child; I had to stay at home , become a schoolteacher,  and do zoom  classes  with my 
son's school. So there is a real-life impact  from the ITA . To turn now to Australia's  example of the 
Philippines, I think it would be really interesting if we could collectively explore a little bit better and 
connect the dots of the different workstreams here in the WTO . The example that comes to mind is 
last year at the Public Forum , when t he Semiconductor Industry Association , and some other 
industry stakeholders , were here giving a presentation on medical products , and the interaction and 
nexus with the pandemic  response . And so I think that  there are ways that we can connect the dots 
between the work that we are doing here, some of the products, and work being done elsewhere in 
the WTO , including in the context of medical  products and devices, pandemic response, future 
pandemics, health more broad ly, and disaster preparedness ; all these are areas that could 
potentially be explore d. There may also be possibilities to look at digitization and trade facilitation , 
as well as technologies used in agriculture and their ties to food security. These are al l important 
issues that we are discussing in other WTO  bodies . The point I wish to make is that we could explore 
the nexus with the actual ITA  Agreement , the benefits flowing from that Agreement, or the 
ITA Expansion . In addition , there may be trends that are outside the scope of the current Agreement , 
but which could be interesting to reflect upon here in th is Committee . It is really about trying to 
connect the dots better , and making the work that we do in this Committee more relevant to some 
of the work that is being done  elsewhere.  
8.15.  The delegate of the Philippines  indicated the following:  
8.16.  I would like to acknowledge  Australia and the United States for recognizing how the Philippines 
has somehow managed to jump from the manufacturing of IT products to IT services. In fact, 
IT Services is now one of our biggest exports. We do everything from accounting, and HR, to digital 
creation  services.  Therefore,  I completely agree with the proposal to reflect upon how IT  Services 
could also benefit other ITA  participants , especially, for example, Timor -Leste and Lao PDR. I think 
it is a good model , and we would be willing to work with the Secretariat on this effo rt. 
8.17.  The delegate of Canada  indicated the following:  
8.18.  Two comments. First , to pick up from some of the US  comments,  I think that  it is a great idea  
to consider ways in which we can have a cross -cutting  conversation about the work in this 
Committee . In this r egard, I  thank Mr Eberth for his presentation, information, and analysis; I think 
that it has  pointed out a number of different things . On the connection to work in other Committees, 
the US  mentioned disaster preparedness . Indeed, there was a half -day workshop last week in the 
Trade Facilitation Committee, and presentations from a number of representatives from different 
organizations work ing to get disaster relief goods  to natural disaster areas . The context to the 
workshop was  how provisions in the Trade Facilitation Agreement have helped Members prepare to 
smooth ly transit goods to disaster zones, to get needed supplies to where they are most needed, 
and to address a catastrophe . One aspect of the Trade Facilitation  Agreement concerns digitalizati on 
and smoothing customs procedures . And how have they done that? By using ICT  products. And what 
this Agreement ha s done, and this is my second  point, with reference to the chart that I believe was 
on slide  4, is to show that there was  not a huge increase  in the amount of trade (only a couple of 
percentage points ), but the dollar value, the curve downwards in terms of the costs, was 
considerable, and steep. And if you were  going downhill on a toboggan , that would be a great hill to 
be going down ! And so wh at this points to , is that the goods that we discuss here in this Committee 
are goods used for many different things , such that any reduction in the cost of these goods assists 
Members to access a greater variety of products , at lower cost , as well as assisting them  to 
implement other changes, such as the smoothing of border transit for goods so as to get those goods 
to where they are needed most, in particular in the case of a disaster, as per the earlier example. 
So I do  not know what that would look like in terms of a collaboration between committees, but I 
do think that there are a number of work areas in other committee s where this Committee could 
also make a contribution , especially in terms of understanding how the digitalization aspect has 
helped  in the implementation of a particular committee's work. In this regard, I would be remiss if 
I did not also mention China, and specifically their presentation on digitalization that they delivered 
at the most recent meeting of the Trade Facilitation Commi ttee. In sum, I think that this is an area 
to be further explore d, and I hope that the incoming ITA  Chairperson  will be able to put that in 
motion.  
8.19.  The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 12 - 
 
  8.20.  The European Union also  thank s the Secretariat for its very informative presentation , and we 
agree that it would be useful to have this type of presentation more regularly. We do believe that 
such analytical work is really useful to inform our own work, especially in this Committee. For next 
time, and also by way of an encouragement , possibly the presentation could be circulated sufficiently 
in advance of our meeting , so that we could  have a look at it, and digest it a little bit, especially 
when th e presentation is very rich, as today, and so that we can have then a more informed 
conversation. In addition, c olleagues have made a number of very interesting remarks , such as 
Australia's comment about the nexus with Services  trade. Indeed, b ased on the examples that were 
mentioned, it could also be interesting to be presented with some case studies . I was very interested 
by the data on  Viet Nam, for example . So I think that it would be informative for all of us if we could 
dig deeper into such cases, and trajectories , and reflect upon the factors that go toward explain ing 
such developments.  
8.21.  The Chairperson  indicated the following:  
8.22.  I think that the Secretariat really welcomes your appreciation and feedback , including the 
suggestions on how we could rejuven ate the discussions here in the Committee , as well as the 
suggestions on more inter -Committee collaboration . I believe that we , including the current and 
incoming Committee chairpersons,  will certainly be looking into this. 
8.23.  The Committee took note  of the presentation and statements made.  
9  SECRETARIAT REPORT ON THE WTO  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WORKSHOP FOR 
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE ITA AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION OF 
14-17 MARCH  2023  
9.1.  The Chairperson  invited the Secretariat to   report on the recently conclu ded technical 
assistance workshop for developing countries.  
9.2.  The Secretariat  (Dr Xiaodong Wang) gave a presentation on the recently concluded technical 
assistance workshop for developing countries.3 
9.3.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following : 
9.4.  The United States thanks the Secretariat for its  presentation ; thank you, Xiaodong . It sounds 
like it was a successful workshop, and you had a good rate of return, as it were, so  thank you.  
One comment my delegation would like to make is that we would ve ry much look forward to working 
closely with the Committee and the Secretariat on any further additional workshops that you hold. 
As you know, I think, leading up to this workshop, we were not entirely aware that it was taking 
place; it would be good to wo rk a little bit more closely together in future . So thank you very much, 
and congratulations.  
9.5.  The delegate of Canada  indicated the following:  
9.6.  Just two things. First, thanks to Xiaodong for the presentation. The point you made, Xiaodong, 
about the workshop discussion around the value of the Agreement being not just limited to 
investments, to Foreign Direct Investment, but also access to more affordable and newer technology. 
In other words , the ITA brings benefits more generally in terms of access to goods that for many of 
us have become part of our regular day -to-day lives. Second , I support the comment that was made 
around organizing such workshops  back-to-back with the Committee meetings , especially if the 
Committee is held directly after the workshop, such  that workshop participants could  share some of 
their perspectives , and perhaps contribute to the Committee's own discussions in doing so . 
9.7.  The delegate of China  indicated the following:  
9.8.  China  would like to thank the Secretariat for organizing this workshop. I received  very positive 
feedback on it from my Capital -based colleagues who attended the workshop. And I have been 
informed that it was very comprehensive. Furthermore, it  provide d a very good opportunity for the 
participants to exchange views, share experiences, and in particular to identify the challenges 
 
3 Circulated in document  RD/IT/55 . G/IT/M/78  
 
- 13 - 
 
  regarding industry development and the trade in ICT products.  It is also worth highlighting that the 
dialogue with private sector  repre sentative s was extremely useful. It help ed the workshop 
participants to understand how the ITA  Agreement brought tangible benefit to private companies 
and ordinary people.  In conclusion, w e hope that the Secretariat will organize more such workshops 
and private sector dialogues.  
9.9.  The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
9.10.  I wish  to add the voice of the United Kingdom to those other delegations that have already 
spoken , and to thank you for organizing this workshop . We attende d the stakeholder open session , 
on 16  March, and found it extremely helpful . And we were encouraged by the range of themes that 
were raised, some of which have been mentioned this morning. And listening to the positive 
discussion in the session on that day , and also thinking back to our 2021  Symposium, it  is clear that 
the ITA is a strong example of how international trade cooperation can bring tangible benefits.  In 
addition, it underlined the important role that the ITA has to play in supporting LDCs. In this regard,  
we would be very interested in exploring how we can better communicate these benefits to LDCs 
who may be interested in joining the ITA, and to hear more of their experiences. We would welcome 
discussing this further with other ITA participants.  
9.11.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
10  FUNCTIONING OF THE ITA  COMMITTEE – INFORMATION FROM THE CHAIRPERSON  
10.1.  The Chairperson  noted that this agenda item had been included in response to a request from 
the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goo ds, Mr Etienne Oudot de Dainville . 
10.2.  He recall ed that the Chair person of the ITA  Committee , Mr Hazrul  Imran Azahar , at the 
request of the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods, had circulated , under his own 
responsibility, on 1 December  2022, in document  G/L/1461 -G/IT/W/55 , a report on  the current 
functioning of the ITA  Committee.  
10.3.  In a communication dated 9  March, subsequently circulated as document  JOB/CTG/24 , the 
Chairperson of the CTG had then requested the Chair person s of the CTG's subsidiary bodies to 
organize dedicated discussions in their respective bodies concerning the current and future 
functioning of the Committee they chaired. He had explained that such discussions w ould allow 
Members to identify possible areas for improvement in each Committee's work, taking into account 
the matrix prepared in document  G/C/W/ 824/Rev.1 . 
10.4.  For this reason, the Chairperson of the ITA  Committee wished to invite Participants to share 
their views, if any, on how to improve the functioning of the ITA  Committee . 
10.5.  The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
10.6.  Japan appreciates the effort s by the Chair person  and the Secretariat to improve the 
functioning of the ITA  Committee.  
10.7.  Firstly, the Secretariat 's presentation about the background and contents of the ITA at the 
Committee 's previous  meeting was very useful. We believe that this compreh ensive presentation 
would also be beneficial as introductory material for new delegates not only in Geneva , but also in 
capitals.  We also appreciate the Secretariat's presentation today about trade relationships . Such 
exercises are very beneficial to the Committee.  
10.8.  Second ly, we have recognized that the circulation of the Annotated Agenda for this meeting 
is another good improvement by the Secretariat. With this in mind, and although this is a very 
technical issue, we request that thi s Annotated Agenda and revised agenda be circulated by email. 
While we usually receive the initial convening notice by email, it has always been somewhat 
troublesome that we do not know when the agenda is finalized , and need to access to the 
WTO website in  order to find it. The introduction of eAgenda could also be a good solution for this  
issue. G/IT/M/78  
 
- 14 - 
 
  10.9.  Finally, it may be worth discussing how we can work together  on: (i)  substantive issues, 
including the relationships between the ITA and emerging global challenges , as discussed in the 
previous agenda item ; (ii) implementation issues horizontally, including with regard to 
HS conversions  and ITA  commitments ; and (iii) an expansion  in ITA  participation , including outreach 
activities. We believe that such substantial e lements may be necessary to improve the functioning 
of the ITA  Committee.  
10.10.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
10.11.   The United Kingdom has already submitted a wider compilation of UK  comments across all 
the CTG 's subcommittees , and some o f Japan's comments regarding annotated agendas and other 
issues  have been addressed in that document . We have additional specific ideas on how to do this 
within the ITA  Committee , and we will bring these ideas to the Committee in writing  shortly . We 
have encouraged increased thematic discussions and discussions with stakeholders at this 
Committee. The UK considers that these discussions strengthen our work by maintaining its 
relevance. We look forward to engaging further with ITA Participants on these ideas in due course.  
10.12.   The delegate of Canada  indicated the following:  
10.13.   Canada recognizes that this conversation is being held in all of the subsidiary bodies of the 
CTG; indeed, we will have another conversation in the CTG  itself later this week , so there is a lot of 
commonality across these conversations . I will limit myself here to the ITA  Committee , although I 
am building on the matrix document that was circulated in document  G/C/W/824/Rev.1 , which 
summarizes the responses of all of the CTG's subsidiary bodies in terms of the types of activities 
that those bodies undertake , including the ITA  Committee.  
10.14.   I assum e that you would like a list, but I am not sure how the process will proceed . I know 
that in some c ommittees Members have submitted their points to the Chair in written form , and then 
provided some commentary , all of which has then been compiled  and circulated to the Membership 
by the Chair and the Secretariat, and that informal meetings are being held, or have been held, to 
discuss these points . From Canada's perspective, we think that this Committee is pretty well 
represented in the CTG's matri x chart in document  G/C/W/824/Rev.1 . 
10.15.   Nevertheless, I would like to highlight a few areas , as follows. First, on  the eAgenda , as 
already mentioned by Japan,  I know this is something that is slowly rolling out across the 
Organization. Most of my experiences , as well as those of my colleagues , have been very good . And 
this is one area that I think that the Committee should be thinking about , potentiall y. There are also 
a number of committees that hold dedicated introductory sessions for delegates, just to help 
delegates to understand the committee 's work. The analysis that was presented today, and the 
Secretariat's presentation on the background to the ITA at our previous formal meeting,  have been  
very helpful . In a future presentation, I think that it would also be useful to receive a reference point 
of the documents used relative to the Committee 's twice-yearly meeting , explaining the Committee's 
main focus in the spring and autumn meeting s, and detailing the documents that keep track of 
everything that has been provided by the ITA Participants to the Committee. In addition, the 
Secretariat is currently building a trade c oncerns database  that draws for the moment on the work 
of three  committees . This might also be an area where it might be useful to link up the types of 
concerns addressed in the ITA  Committee . 
10.16.   Finally , recalling Japan's  comments on draft airgrams, just a c omment on the use of draft 
airgrams.  I think that other Committees are using draft Airgrams in advance of formal meetings , 
which is perhaps a practice that could also be followed in the ITA  Committee. Following the same 
approach would be especially helpful  to delegates who cover 10, 12, or indeed all WTO  bodies . And 
I think that it would be helpful for delegates in their preparations if our procedures were aligned to 
the extent possible . 
10.17.   The delegate of Australia  indicated the following:  
10.18.   Most of the points I wished to make have already been covered by my colleagues from Japan 
and Canada. On eAgenda , I think that there is also a linkage to the minutes , and the time taken to 
produce the minutes , most  obviously because, with eAgenda , we can encourage the upload ing of 
prepared statements . In this regard, I would like to add that , it could make all our lives easier , G/IT/M/78  
 
- 15 - 
 
  including also for our colleagues in capital s, and improve our engagement, and our ability to engage 
with colleagues from capital on the deliber ations of the Committee , if we could accelerate the 
production of the minutes . 
10.19.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
10.20.   The European Union very much welcome s this ongoing process where we look at the state 
of play, and at possible improvements. At the same time, we recognize that the ITA  Committee has 
its own specificities , which we should also take into account. I think that many good practices have 
been deve loped in this Committee. I n particular, I  think that there is a good level of engagement 
with stakeholders, which I think we all agree is very beneficial. And we have the practice of holding 
Symposia, which is also a very interesting  practice . 
10.21.   However , whe n it comes to our day -to-day work, there is indeed room for improve ment. To 
echo Canada , I think that we now have some sort of method in place in various other bodies that 
probably we could follow  in the ITA  Committee  as well . In particular, I reference the CTG's matrix  
document , document  G/C/W/824/Rev.1 . We have a well-structured  series of points to possibly look 
at, as established in the CTG , and which we will begin going through during the CTG's informal 
session later this week . In short, I think that these points could also help us to organize our own 
thinking and discussion, based on that, here in the ITA  Committee. Possibly we could also hold 
dedicated discussions , without overburdening the work of the Committee.  
10.22.   In terms of some EU ideas, and issues we  would like to discuss , I think that colleagues 
already mentioned the idea of extending a number of digital tools also to cover the ITA  Committee, 
including, typically, the eAgenda, and possibly also the trade concerns database  given that  we 
discuss some implementation issues that are also discussed in other WTO  bodies. The EU  can also 
echo the suggestions made by Japan regarding introductory material s, and making these more easily 
available via a repository on the website where they can e asily be found by Members , although 
under restricted access, as necessary . The website could also include more basic information about 
what the ITA  Committee does, and how it works, including really basic information about its 
functioning  and rules of proc edure . Such a resource could be particularly  helpful given that officials 
rotate  often in Geneva; in short, it would be useful to have a place where we can easily find such 
information. Finally , a number of committees are also developing the practice of th e Chair, with 
Secretariat  support , circulating some key takeaways after the meeting . We know that the minutes 
take time to prepare, so the Chair's  "key takeaways" would at least provide a basis on which Geneva 
delegates could  liaise with capitals to report  and follow up on meetings . This is also a practice that 
we would like to see developing in this Committee. But again, this is a non -exhaustive list , and we 
are happy to provide these inputs in writing for further discussions.  
10.23.   The delegate of China  indicated the following:  
10.24.   Firstly, we think that the Committee is work ing very  well. For example, if we look at today's  
agenda, we have seen a great presentation on recent trends in ITA  trade, we have heard very 
positive feedback about a workshop  that took  place a few weeks ago, and the Committee has also 
enjoyed , this year and last, two  Secretariat -organized dialogues with the private sector . 
10.25.   At the same time, w e believe that there is also potential to improve the functioning of th is 
Committee . To echo the  European Union, I think that the ITA-related content on the WTO website 
could be further improved.  And to echo  Canada, w e also need to look at , and learn from,  the practices 
of other CTG  subsidiary bodies . For example, the CTG has a preliminary list of is sues proposed for 
discussion. And we could also consider using this list as a reference tool in our own C ommittee 's 
discussion s; doing so may also help to avoid duplication and improve the efficiency of our discussion , 
which is the main purpose.  
10.26.   In conclusion, we look forward to constructive discussion s on this issue.  
10.27.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
10.28.   The United States agree s with China that the ITA Committee works well from an 
organizational and administrative perspective . Even so , there are probably a couple of areas in which 
we could improve.  G/IT/M/78  
 
- 16 - 
 
  10.29.   I will focus on one  comment that Australia provided concerning  the meeting minutes , in 
recognizing that, as I believe was indicated in the Secretariat's report, those meeting minute s take , 
on average , about 90  days to prepare . It would be helpful to work out ways to reduce the time it 
takes to circulate the minutes  of the Committee's meetings . In the case of the CTG, I think that the 
United States has proposed that minutes should be circulated within 30  days.  
10.30.   Two final comments . We would be interested to learn more about  the "key takeaways" that 
the European Union mentioned, and whether or not these could be of value to Members. And we 
would be interested in exploring more informal, targeted , topic-specific thematic sessions , in terms 
both of further collaboration with industry stakeholders , and in connecting the dots with other 
relevant WTO committees  and bodies . 
10.31.   The Chairperson  noted t hat the Committee had heard many good suggestions concerning  
several aspects of its work, including on its deliberations on the use of digital tools . He also noted 
that some delegations had expressed their intention  to submit written proposals. He would co nsult 
with the ITA Committee's incoming Chairperson,  who would certainly revert to the Committee , in 
due course,  on how best to proceed concerning this discussion on improving the Committee's  
functioning.  
10.32.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter, as 
appropriate, at the ITA  Committee's next meeting.  
11  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  
11.1.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
11.2.  The Chairperson  recalled that, as standard practice, the Committee elected a new chairperson 
from among the representatives of Participants on an annual basis, and that the election took place 
at the first  meeting of the year and took effect at the end of the meeting.  
11.3.  He informed the Committee that the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG ) had 
been consulting with Members regarding chairpersons for the CTG's subsidiary bodies, including the 
ITA Committee, and that the consultations were still ongoing . 
11.4.  As a result, he proposed that, as soon as the CTG had adopted a proposed list of chairper sons 
for its subsidiary bodies, the Secretariat would send an email to all Participants indicating the name 
of the person nominated to be chairperson of the ITA  Committee. If no objection were received 
within the time -frame indicated in the email, the cand idate would be deemed to have been elected 
by the Committee by acclamation.  
11.5.  The Committee so agreed . 
12  DATE OF NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING  
12.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that the Secretariat had tentatively reserved 
Tuesday, 26  September  2023 a s the date of the Committee's next formal meeting, on the 
understanding that this date would be confirmed in an email well before the meeting; additional 
meetings might also be convened, as required.  
12.2.  The delegate of Canada  indicated the following:  
12.3.  Just picking up on the earlier comment from Japan, if the date of the next meeting is the 
26 September, is there a date when the agenda closes?  
12.4.  The Secretariat  (Dr Xiaodong Wang)  indicated the following:  
12.5.  Basically, the Secretariat is requested to select a tentative date for the Committee's next 
meeting , in autumn. So we normally see if there is any conflict with other committee meetings , and 
we will also be consult ing with the incoming chair person.  We will announce  any change in date to all 
ITA Participants well in advance of the meeting itself . In theory, we provide a convening notice to 
all ITA Participants one  month before the date of the meeting . The meeting's agenda closes 11  days G/IT/M/78  
 
- 17 - 
 
  before the meeting, and the Airgram is issued the following working day, 10 days before the 
meeting. This is the current practice. However, we are open to discuss any new approach that may 
further facilitate Participants ' preparations.  
12.6.  The Committee took note  of this information.  
__________