RESTRICTED  
  
G/TFA/M/8  
 
2 October 2019  
(19-6373) Page: 1/22 
Committee on Trade Facilitation    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE FACILITATIO N 
25-26 JUNE  2019  
CHAIR: H .E. MR. MOHAMAD QURBAN HAQJO  (AFGHANISTAN ) 
Contents  
 
I. ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON ................................ ................................ ..................  1 
II. MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION A ND ADMINISTRATION OF  THE 
TRADE FACILITATION  AGREEMENT  ................................ ................................ .................  2 
1   NOTIFICATIONS BY  MEMBERS  ................................ ................................ ...................  2 
A. Notifications under Articles 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  .......................  2 
B. Notifications under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  7 
C. Notifications under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation  Agreement  ................................ .... 9 
2   STATUS OF RATIFI CATION AND NOTIFICAT ION PROCESS  ................................ ....... 11 
III. EXPERIENCE SHARING/T HEMATIC  DISCUSSIONS  ................................ ................  15 
A. Developing the Article 1:4 Notification: Experience of the United States (G/TFA/W/13)  .... 15 
Presentation by the United States  ................................ ................................ ......................  15 
B. National Trade Facilitation Committees  ................................ ................................ ...... 16 
Presentation by Sri Lanka  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 16 
IV. RULES OF PROCEDURE F OR THE TRADE FACILIT ATION COMMITTEE  ....................  16 
V. RECENT AND UPCOMING ACTIVITIES  ................................ ................................ ... 17 
Update on activities of the Global Alliance on Trade Facilitation  ................................ ..............  17 
Update by the WTO Secretariat on activities of the TFAF  ................................ .......................  19 
VI. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 22 
 
I. ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON 
1.1.  The outgoing Chair welcomed delegations to the meeting of the Trade Facilitation Committee 
(TF Committee, Committee, or TFC). She recalled that the proposed agenda had been circulated in 
WTO/AIR/TFA/8 and that it contained five main items to be discussed , beginning with  election of the 
new Chairperson . The next item consisted of  matters  relating  to the implementation  and administration  
of the Trade  Facilitation  Agreement (TF Agreement, Agreement, or TFA), starting with notifications 
received  since the last meeting, followed by an updat e by the WTO Secretariat on the state of the 
ratification and notification processes. The third item referred to experience sharing and thematic 
discussions, where delegations were invited to share t heir experiences with a  focus on (i) developing 
the article 1:4 notification ; and (ii) National Trade Facilitation Committees (NTFC) . The fourth  item 
related to rules of procedure for the TF Committee. Following that, Members would be updated on recent 
and upcoming  activities. The final item on the agenda was "Other Business" where the Chair planned 
to raise the issue of the date of the subsequent Committ ee meeting.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.2.  The agenda was  adopted . 
1.3.  The outgoing Chair announced that representatives from the Organization  for Economic Co -
operation and Development ( OECD ) were present at the meeting and  would be available  to respond 
to any questions regarding the new country datasheets for their Trade Facilitation indicators. Such 
files had been previously emailed to delegations by the OECD for factchecking. She also recalled 
that there would be an information session on the o peration and administrative structure of the 
Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) following the TFC, to which all delegations were 
invited.  This session had been organized  in response to a request from the United States at the last 
meeting and would inform delegations about origins, structure and membership of the STDF . It 
would also touch upon  how it was being managed and how it related to the WTO Secretariat . 
1.4.  Turning to the first item in the agenda, the outgoing Chair recalled that, at its meeting on 4 
June, the Goods Council approved a list of chairs for its subsidiary bodies , where Ambassador 
Mohamad Qurban Haqjo from Afghanistan was chosen for the TFC. She invite d Members to formally 
elect him, by acclamation, as the new Chair.  
1.5.  It was so agreed .  
1.6.  Before handing over to the incoming  Chair, the outgoing Chair thanked Members for having 
worked  collectively and constr uctively to achieve tangible, concrete results, which  had allowed the 
TFC to make considerable progress on multiple fronts. WTO agreements, including the TFA, created 
real value added and brought together concrete results on the ground, especially for small and 
medium -sized enterprises (SME s). In concluding, the outgoing Chair  wished her successor good 
fortune in steering the Committee over the course of the year to come.  
1.7.  The incoming  Chair thanked the membership for having elected him as the new chairperson. 
He appreciated their vote of confidence and affirmed his intentions to ensure that the Committee 
continued its successfu l journey in support of the effective implementation of the T FA. Coming from 
a least-developed country  (LDC) and a land -locked country, he was very familiar with  how important 
it was for traders, governments and consumers to have secure and non -discriminatory access to 
markets and not to be held back by hampering red tape. It was therefore a particular pleasure to 
assume his new responsibility and he looked forward to working with Members towards these 
important goals over the months to come. He was aware of the inclusive, Member -driven manner in 
which the Committee ha d been conducting its business and would  be happy to continue the tradition . 
He highlighted the outgoing Chair 's excell ent job in steering the Committee through a challenging 
period and invited Members to express  appreciation  for her great work.  
1.8.  The Chair then drew Members ' attention to the subsequent items on the agenda, starting with 
matters relating to the implementatio n and administration of the Trade Facilitation Agreement.  
II. MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION A ND ADMINISTRATION OF  THE TRADE 
FACILITATION  AGREEMENT  
1  NOTIFICATIONS BY MEM BERS  
A. Notifications under Articles 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.9.  The Chair recalled that, since the last meeting, sixteen  new notifications had been submitted 
under Articles 15 and 16 of the TFA. All submissions had been issued as documents in the G/TFA/N 
series and listed in the airgram. An additional notific ation from Egypt was submitted after the airgram 
had been circulated , and it would therefore be reviewed at the next TFC . The notifications  originated 
from the following Members:  Armenia (G/TFA/N/ARM/1/A dd.1); Ecuador (G/TFA/N/ECU/1) ; 
Bangladesh ( G/TFA/N/B GD/1/A dd.1); Madagascar ( G/TFA/N/MDG/1/A dd.1); Moldova , Republic of  
(G/TFA/N/MDA/1/A dd.1); Barbados ( G/TFA/N/BRB/1 ); Dominica ( G/TFA/N/DMA/1 ); Uruguay 
(G/TFA/N/URY/1 ); Oman ( G/TFA/N/OMN/1 ); Mozambique ( G/TFA/N/MOZ /3 and 
G/TFA/N/MOZ/1/A dd.1); Mauritius ( G/TFA/N/MUS/1/A dd.1); Mauritania ( G/TFA/N/MRT/1 ); Panama 
(G/TFA/N/PAN/1 ); Papua New Guinea ( G/TFA/N/PNG/1 ); Senegal ( G/TFA/N/SEN/1 ); and the Central 
African Republic ( G/TFA/N/CAF/1/A dd.1). G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.10.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to the notification from Armenia  
(G/TFA/N/ ARM/1/Add.1). 
1.11.   The representative  of the United States  congratulated the Chair on his new appointment. She 
noted that Armenia had yet to submit its definitive dates for Category C provisions and  urged them 
to submit the relevant information to the Secretariat by the 22 August 2019 deadline , to fully take 
advantage of the flexibilities of Section II  of the TFA.  
1.12.   The representative  of the European Union  referred to the upcoming deadline of 22 August, 
where the definitive  dates for implementation for category C provisions should be presented by 
developing country Members wishing to take advantage of the flexibilities available in Section II of 
the TFA. In general terms, notifications submitted thus far were appreciated, though a number of 
them were incomplete. T he EU would refer to this issue in the next agenda item, under the revision 
of the notification matrix  prepared by the Secretariat.  
1.13.   The Chair turned  the Committee's attention to a notification received from Ecuador 
(G/TFA/N/ECU/1/) , which complemented an earlier notification and provided category B and C 
designations as well as related implementation dates . 
1.14.   The representative  of Ecuador  congratulated the Chair on his new appointmen t. Ecuador had 
ratified the TFA in January 2019 and t he presentation of this notification was the result of national 
entities  working towards full implementation of  the agreement . On 17 June, Ecuador  had also notified 
the framework relating to customs officials under document G/TFA/N /ECU/2 , published on the 
website on 22 June. Additional  efforts had included  the establishment of a National Trade Facilitation 
Committee, which contributed to internal coordination and the development of a roadmap to procure  
implementation of the Agreement. The adequate identification of domestic needs and receiving 
assistance and support for capacity  building had been vital  elements  to fulfil the commitments  under 
the Agreement. Ecuador had enjoyed active involvement of the public  and private sector s, as well 
as representatives of academia and civil societ y. 
1.15.   The representative  thank ed the Trade Faci litation Agreement Facility  (the Facility or TFAF)  for 
the assistance provided. As part of this initiative, an activity had recently taken  place in Quito and 
Guayaquil, in April and May 2019, where  a workshop had been held on the benefits of the TFA  and 
strengthening the capacity of Ecuador 's NTFC. Ecuador was currently undertaking work on the 
determination and due notification of the definitive dates for provisions under Category C.  
1.16.   The representative  of the European Union  congratulated the Chair on his nomination. Ecuador 
had ratified the Agreement and notified the final dates for the implementation of category B 
commitments.  The EU was  pleased that Ecuador was working on the final dates to notify by August 
and that the NTFC was operational . They had been informed that the set ting up of the NTFC  had 
started last February , and would look forward to receiving further information on how this process 
took place, as well as how the workshop held with WTO experts last April could help them to define  
the final dates for the implementation of Category C provisions. This could  be of interest for 
experience sharing with other Members. The EU co nsidered the report from Ecuador to be positive 
and would look forward to future notifications and possible experience sharing initiatives. The 
representative  of the United States  expressed her appreciation for the ratification and two 
notifications  from Ecuador , including the information under article 10.6.2,  which was a testimony to 
the work conducted the past six months. She urged Ecuador to provide the definitive dates for 
Category C provisions by the 22 August deadline.  
1.17.   The Chair  turned the Committee's attention to a notification submitted by Bangladesh  
(G/TFA/N/ BGD/1/Add.1). 
1.18.   The representative  of the European Union  reported that in conversations between their 
delegation in Bangladesh and the domestic authorities, they understood that the Commerce Ministry 
planned to create a forum to ensure coordination between development partners and the 
government to avoid duplication and overlapping of donor engagement in the TFA implementation 
process.  In this regard, the EU consulted i f Bangladesh could update the Committee on the donor 
coordination process.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.19.   The representative  of the United States  thanked Bangladesh for the notification  and noted 
that article 10.6.2 of the TFA had been included in Category A . The US  looked forward to the 
corresponding information being submitted to the WTO Secretariat promptly.  
1.20.   The US Agency for International Development (USAID) under the Bangladesh Trade 
Facilitation Activity Program  had supported the Government of Bangladesh's efforts, i n partnership 
with the National Board of Revenue and Customs, to fulfil its TFA obligations.  The activities had 
achieved a number of milestones, including: the development of a customs website, a national 
enquiry point, pre -arrival processing, risk managem ent, post clearance audit, and a new pilot for 
the Authorized Economic Operator ( AEO) program with the accreditation of three pharmaceutical 
companies. Phase I of this program had finished in 2018, and Phase II  had finished in May 2019. 
USAID was in the pr ocess of procuring a follow -up activity to continue this work in the near future.  
1.21.   The representative  of Bangladesh  congratulated  Ambassador Haqjo on his new Chairmanship 
and thanked the European Union and the United States for their support. Bangladesh was still in the 
process of reviewing categories B and C, which would be informed soon. The representative  
acknowledged contribution s from its development partners.  
1.22.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification originating from Madagascar 
(G/TFA/N/MDG/1/A dd.1). 
1.23.   The representative  of Madagascar  congratulated the Chair on his appointment  and wished 
him every success. The notification contained the requirements of technical assistance and capacity 
building under Category C, according  to the timeline included in the TF A.  
1.24.   The roadmap for trade facilitation in Madagascar and its communication plan had already 
been drawn up by the ir NTFC  in October 2018  with the support of donors , who validated it wit h the 
domestic authorit ies. Priorities on this roadmap  included cost studies and formalities for tariffs, the 
implementation of a trade information portal and regulations on imports and exports , to ensure that 
these were compliant with international standar ds and practices. Other items  being examined  
included  to revitali ze the customs clearance observatory  and a  border control system.  
1.25.   A round table had been held the previous  week, with the  participation of technical partners  
including  the European Union, th e World Bank Group, the International Monetary Fund  (IMF) , GIZ, 
USAID and the United Nations Development Programme ( UNDP ) alongside members of the  NTFC. 
During this  meeting , the NTFC  had presented the roadmap for implementation, main challenges and 
goals. Donors had requested  details on the priority activities, as well as the estimated costs. 
Madagascar thanked  donors for the ir assistance to the NTFC and hope d that open communication 
would  continue , since it contribute d to creatin g the right dynamic for an effective and efficient 
implementation of the Agreement.  
1.26.   The representative  of the European Union  welcomed the efforts by Madagascar  to define its 
requirements and needs, as well as assessing the related costs  and coordinating th e different actors 
from the development arena. The EU had contributed to finance a number of activities and would 
welcome experience sharing  from Madagasca r on coordination of aid and assistance, as well as the 
needs assessment which allowed them to define and notify the Category C provisions . Madagascar 
had notified approx imately 88% of commitments in Category C  indicating a large space for 
assistance. The EU would look forward to continuing  their engagement  with Madagascar in the 
implementation exercise.  
1.27.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Moldova 
(G/TFA/N/MDA/1/A dd.1). 
1.28.   The representative  of the United States  thanked the notification and urged Moldova  to submit 
the definitive dates for Category C provisions by the 22 August deadline. USAID, in cooperation with 
the Government of Moldova , had undertak en several activities to improve trade facilitation, 
including: a Trade Corridor Assessment; installing TIR -Electronic Pre -Declaration software; creating  
a Trade Information Portal planned to go live in September 2019; creating an electronic authorization 
system for trucks and truckers; and the development of a Border Queuing System to improve waiting 
times for trucks and truckers, which was very important for landlocked countries.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.29.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Barbados 
(G/TFA/N/BRB/1).  
1.30.   The representative  of the United States  thanked Barbados for the notification and urged them 
to submit the definitive dates for Category C, as well as the respective technical assistance required, 
by the 22 August deadline.  
1.31.   The representative  of the European Union  joined the United States in emphasizing the 
importance of technical assistance needs  and enquired if Barbados could share the reasons fo r this 
delay and any possible obstacles.  
1.32.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Dominica 
(G/TFA/N/DMA/1) . 
1.33.   The representative  of the United States  thanked Dominica for the notification and urged them 
to submit the definitive dates for Category C provisions by the 22 Augu st deadline. In addition, she 
encouraged Dominica to make available the information concerning articles 1.4 and 10.6.2 to the 
Secretariat, since they had been included in Category A.  
1.34.   The representative  of the European Union  supported the intervention made  by the United 
Sates and noted  that information  was due in relation to articles 1.4 and 10.6.2  of the TFA . The EU 
hoped that the experience sharing by the US on article 1.4 would encourage  an exchange on 
Members ' experiences on this article .  
1.35.   The Chair  turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Uruguay 
(G/TFA/N/URY/1) . Without comments from the floor, the Chair proceeded to the next notification by 
Oman (G/TFA/N/OMN/1) . 
1.36.   The representative  of the European Union  recognized that the majority of provisions were in 
Category A  and that 1 January 2020 had been notified as the implementation date for the three 
provisions in Category B. In relation to the measure on the opportunity to comment, it was the EU 's 
understanding that Oman was  preparing the relevant legislation  and enquired if an update on this 
front was possible, given that the legislation should be in place by January 2020. Information on the 
situation and goals of the said legislation were of particular interest.  
1.37.   The represe ntative  of the United States  thanked  Oman for  the notification and encouraged 
them to promptly make available  to the Secretariat  the information related to articles 1.4, 10.4.3, 
10.6.2, and 12.2.2  of the TFA , as they had been included in category A.  
1.38.   The Chair  turned the Committee's attention to two notification s received from Mozambique  
(G/TFA/N/MOZ/3 and G/TFA/N/MOZ/1/A dd.1). 
1.39.   The representative  of the European Union  welcomed the efforts undertaken by Mozambique 
and recalled that together with USAID, they were co-presidents of the Trade S ub-Committee for aid 
coordination.  The EU was interested in receiving information on Mozambique 's needs for 
implementation and the coordination of aid.  
1.40.   The representative  of the United States  thanked Mozambique for the notification and 
highlighted the work of USAID with the government of Mozambique to improve trade facilitation 
activity through the USAID Program to Support the Policy Environment for Economic Development, 
also known as SPEED +. This program  had supported the Government of Mozambique to establish 
its NTFC and was now assisting it in implementing Category B and C provisions. The US looked 
forward to more coordinated implementation cooperation.  
1.41.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Mauritius 
(G/TFA/N/MUS/1/A dd.1). 
1.42.   The representative  of the United States  thanked Mauritius for the notification and 
congratulated them on the implementation of article 10.9.2  of the TFA .  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.43.   The representative  of the European Union  supported the intervention by the US and 
congratulated Mauritius for its good efforts to implement the TFA.  
1.44.   The Chair  turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Mauritania 
(G/TFA /N/MRT/1) . 
1.45.   The representative  of the United States  thanked Mauritania  for its notification  and noted that 
they had yet to ratify the TFA  and were interested in updates regarding its timeframe for ratification. 
The US reminded Members in the same situation that the deadlines for utilizing the flexibilities set 
out in Section II of the Agreement applied to all Members, regardless of the status of its domestic 
ratification process. The timelines ran from entry into force of the Agreement itself  and thus t here 
would be no benefit to holding back a notification in an untimely manner because of the dat e of 
ratification . The US  also noted that Mauritania ha d designated  articles 10.6.2 and 12.2.2 of the TFA 
as category A provisions but ha d yet to provide the in formation . They looked forward to  seeing 
Mauritania's notification submitted to the Secretariat promptly.  
1.46.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Panama 
(G/TFA/N/PAN/1/) . 
1.47.   The representative  of the United States  thanked Pa nama for the notification and encouraged 
them to promptly make available to the Secretariat the information for articles 10.6.2 and 12.2.2  of 
the TFA  as they had been included in category A.  
1.48.   The representative  of Panama  thanked the US for their comments and would revert to capital 
to provide the appropriate information. Panama was committed to complying with its obligations 
under the TFA. In the past, they had experienced misunderstandings regarding the content and 
implem entation of the Agreement , due to the multiplicity of institutions that were involved . In this 
regard, Cabinet Degree 83 established their NTFC  on April 19, which would  facilitate internal 
coordination. In order to strengthen the work of the national commi ttee and with the support of the 
Secretariat , Panama  was organizing  a national seminar on trade facilitation that would  help new 
authorities to implement the agreement and to make  the best use of it.  
1.49.   The representative of the European Union  welcomed the in tervention from Panama and 
inquired about the date for the mentioned national seminar and if potential donors would be invited.  
1.50.   The representative of Panama  indicated that preparations were still ongoing, but contact had 
already been established with the WTO Secretariat. The workshop could take place in 2019, but 
there would be a new government taking office in the next two weeks. Therefore, the new authorities 
would need time to settle in and a date for the seminar would be set then. Donors would be welcome 
to attend, and they would be approached once a date had been finalized.  
1.51.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Papua New Guinea 
(G/TFA/N/PNG/1) . 
1.52.   The representative of the United States  thanked Papua New Guinea for the notification but 
noted that the date for notifying indic ative dates for Category B had passed.  In this case, the United 
States would not be in a position to accept the C ategory  B notification with indicative dates , but 
would accept definitive dates.  The date for definitive dates had not yet passed, and the US urged 
Papua New Guinea to submit the relevant information to the Secretariat on definitive dates for 
Category C by  the August 22 deadline. Finally, the representative noted that a rticle 10.6.2 of the 
TFA had been included as Category A  and encourage d Papua New Guinea  to make the relevant 
information available to the Secretariat promptly.  
1.53.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from Senegal 
(G/TFA/N/SEN/1) . 
1.54.   The representative of Senegal  congratulated the Chair on his appointment and wished him 
success. In line with articles  15.2 and 16.2 of the TFA, they had  notified their category A, B and C 
provisions. With regard to category A, Senegal had submitted a notification dated 27 October 2014, 
under WT/PCTF/N/SEN/1 , redistributed on 3 June under G/TFA/N/SEN/1 , replacing the document 
from 2014.  In summary , 21 measures had been notified under category A (52.5%),  two measures G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 7 - 
 
  under category B (10.5%) and 13 measures in category C (37%). They  thank ed supporting partners , 
particularly USAID for providing support to the units involved in trade facilitation since 201 7, as well 
as the Enhanced I ntegrated Framework and the European Union.  
1.55.   The representative of the European Union  thanked Senegal for the status update and indicated 
that the EU stood ready to assist Senegal through their local delegation.  
1.56.   The representat ive of the United States  thanked Senegal for their intervention  and noted that 
articles 10.4.3, 10.6.2 and 12.2.2 of the TFA had been included as category A provisions . The US  
looked forward to receiving the corresponding information soon. The US Department of Agriculture 
Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), in 
partnership with USAID, would host a workshop on electronic phytosanita ry certification system with 
15 countries in ECOWAS, including Senegal  in July.  The workshop would focus on keys tools and 
steps for development, implementation and management of an E -Phyto Certification system for 
import and export of plants and plant pro ducts. The workshop  would be addressed to directors of 
national plant protection organizations of ECOWAS countries and would work on establishing a 
regional E -Phyto consultation group. A successful E -Phyto Certification System would allow for a 
more rapid exchange of the necessary phytosanitary certificates for the trade of plant and plant 
products.  
1.57.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification received from the Central African 
Republic  (G/TFA/N/CAF/1/A dd.1).  
1.58.   The representative of the Europe an Union  welcomed the notification and enquired  about the 
current status regarding the determination of  assistance needs, in case that information could be 
shared during the meeting.  
1.59.   The representative of the United States  thanked the Central African Republic for the 
notification and noted that Articles 10.4.3 and 10.6.2 of the TFA  had been included in category A. 
The US looked forward to the relevant information being promptly provided to the WTO Secretariat.  
1.60.   The representative of  China  congratulated the Chair on his appointment , which they fully 
support ed, and thank ed the 15 Members who notified their new regulations. There were 115 
Members who had notified category A measures , 93 Members who had notified category B, and 72 
Members who had notified category C  commitments . Nevertheless,  ten Members had not yet made 
any notification. China  encouraged  the relevant Members to conclude  their category designation s 
and to make the corresponding  notificat ion in accord ance with Articles 15 and 16 of the TFA as soon 
as possible . China  suggested discuss ing the reasons which impeded the submission of notifications  
in the TFC  in order to find a collective solution.  
B. Notifications under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  
1.61.   The Chair  turned the Committee 's attention to the next group of notifications. They were often 
referred to as "transparency notifications" and consisted of notifications mandated by Articles 1:4 , 
10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the TFA. He recalled that all notifications had transparency objectives, 
either in a broader context – such as by calling for information on publication sources – or in relation 
to particular areas, such as the operation of a  Member's single window, the use of customs brokers 
and customs cooperation. A total of nineteen  new notifications had been issued since the last 
meeting with respect to the second category, the specific transparency requirements. All of them 
had been issu ed as documents under the G/TFA/N series.  
1.62.   The particular notifications had  originated from the following Members: Armenia 
(G/TFA/N/ARM/2) ; China (G/TFA/N/CHN/2/Rev.2) ; the Russian Federation (G/TFA/N/RUS/1) ; 
Bahrain , Kingdom of (G/TFA/N/BHR/3) ; Ukraine (G /TFA/N/UKR/3) ; Hong Kong, China 
(G/TFA/N/HKG/1/Rev.1) ; Guatemala ( G/TFA/N/GTM/2 ); Saint Kitts and Nevis (G/TFA/N/KNA/3) ; 
Mozambique (G/TFA/N/MOZ/2) ; Mauritius (G/TFA/N/MUS/2) ; India (G/TFA/N/IND/2) ; Thailand 
(G/TFA/N/THA/2) ; Turkey (G/TFA/N/TUR/2) ; Australia (G/TFA/N/AUS/1/Rev.1) ; Eswatini 
(G/TFA/N/SWZ/2) ; Chile (G/TFA/N/CHL/2/Add.1) ; El Salvador ( G/TFA/N/SLV/2 ); Uruguay 
(G/TFA/N/URY/2 ); and Montenegro ( G/TFA/N/MNE/2 ). G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 8 - 
 
  1.63.   Members were invited to take the floor on those notifications sequentially, starting with the 
notification s submitted by Armenia (G/TFA/N/ARM/2) ; China (G/TFA/N/CHN/2/Rev.2) ; the Russian 
Federation (G/TFA/N/RUS/1) ; Bahrain , Kingdom of  (G/TFA/N/BHR/3) ; Ukraine (G/TFA/N/UKR/3) ; 
and Hong Kong, China (G/TFA/N/HKG/1/Rev.1 ). Without any comments from the floor, the Chair 
proceeded to the notification from Guatemala (G/TFA/N/GTM/2).  
1.64.   The representative of the United States  indicated that r ecently, the US Department of 
Commerce's Commercial Law Development Program (CLDP), along with US Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP), ha d worked with Guatemala to improve trade facilitation through the Central 
America Customs, Border Management and Supply Chain Program. Through this program, the US 
provided technical assistance t o improve border agency coordination and publication of information 
to support the submi ssion of  the article 1.4 notification.  USAID  had also contribut ed through the 
Regional Trade Facilitation and Integrated Border Management Program , which had also held 
activities in El Salvador and Honduras. Some of the projects included: improving integrated risk 
management and information sharing across border agencies; installing RFID technology at key 
border crossings to facilitate information sharing and pre -arrival  processing; and implementing 
critical improvements to meet requirements of the TFA.  
1.65.   The US Department of Agriculture (USDA), in partnership with the USAID, work ed regionally 
and bilaterally within the Central America Customs Union, of which Guatemala was a member, on 
the rapid release and clearance of goods at ports; improving product registration ease and 
transparency; and removing unnecessary and redundant fees and penalties. In implementing the 
project, USDA partners had worked closely with the Central America Customs Union (CACU), the US 
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), USDA/Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), 
USDA/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), and DHS/Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP).  
1.66.   The representative of Guatemala  appreciated the opportunity to present their notification and 
thanked the United States for their intervention. They had received support from the US through 
the programs previously described and were working towards improving their processes at cus toms, 
especially those under joint implementation with El Salvador and Honduras, which were of great 
interest  due to the potential improvement in intraregional tr ade. They welcomed the support 
received so far  and hope d to continue to receive it in the futu re in relation to further implementation 
of the Agreement.  
1.67.   The Chair drew the Committee's attention to the notification s received from Saint Kitts and 
Nevis  (G/TFA/N/KNA/3), Mozambique (G/TFA/N/MOZ/2), Mauritius (G/TFA/N/MUS/2) , India 
(G/TFA/N/IND/2), Thailand (G/TFA/N/THA/2), Turkey (G/TFA/N/TUR/2), Australia 
(G/TFA/N/AUS/1/Rev.1),  Eswatini (G/TFA/N/SWZ/2) , and Chile (G/TFA/N/CHL/2/Add.1) . Without 
any comments from the floor, the Chair proceeded to a notification from El Salvad or 
(G/TFA/N/SLV/2).  
1.68.   The representative of the United States  thanked El Salvador for the notification and 
highlighted the contributions that the US Department of Commerce's Commercial Law Development 
Program had made to improve trade facilitation in El Salvador through the Central America Customs, 
Border Management and Supply Chain Program. In May 2019, CLDP had conduct ed a workshop in 
El Salvador to improve public consultation, specifically formal notice and comment procedures for 
draft regulations. CLDP also held a subsequent training for representatives from the Salvadoran 
Regulatory Improvement Agency on performing reg ulatory impact analysis, specifically encouraging 
evidence -based decision -making and using relevant international standards as a basis in their 
regulatory procedures. In addition, CLDP had conducted a technical workshop regarding best 
practices in implemen ting a 60 -day notice and comment process for representatives of the 
Salvadoran Customs Administration, who ha d demonstrated a concerted interest in implementing a 
mandatory 60 -day public consultation process for all customs regulations. This workshop had b een 
part of a multiphase effort to promote transparency, cooperation, and coordination for the 
Salvadoran government and to improve interregional trade in Central America.  
1.69.   The representative of El Salvador  congratulated the Chair on his appointment and tha nked 
the United States for their intervention , as well as the information provided on the various projects 
that were being offered to the Salvadoran authorities, in an effort to implement the various 
commitments contained in the TFA.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 9 - 
 
  1.70.   The Chair  turned the Committee's attention to the notification from Uruguay 
(G/TFA/N/URY/2) . Without any comments from the floor, the Chair proceeded to the notification 
from Montenegro (G/TFA/N/MNE/2) . 
1.71.   The representative of the European Union  thanked  Members who had put in  the effort to 
present the relevant information. The EU a cknowledged that the notification under article 1.4 of the 
TFA could be difficult and the experience sharing from the US on the topic  welcomed later during 
the meeting . In a ge neral sense, they identified that more than ten Members, including several 
major developing economies, had not notified the full transparency measures . The EU stressed the 
importance of notifications relating to customs brokers, counterparts and enquiry points for 
cooperation between countries' customs authorities. They encouraged committed Members to 
submit their notifications by October 2019 to contribute to  a clean and satisfactory state of play.   
1.72.   The represent ative of Senegal  stated that they had submitted the notification related to article 
1.4, yet the format employed  did not correspond perfectly to the suggested template, which had 
been provided by the Secretariat . On this basis, c ommunication had been estab lished with the 
relevant capital authorities  for them to provide  the necessary informatio n. Senegal Commerce had 
informed there was an email address that could be shared with the Membership, upon request to 
the delegation, and that their website helped provide the information on the article 1.4 notification.  
1.73.   The representative of China  said that China  had concluded the notification under articles 1.4 
and 10.6.2 of the T FA. Articles 10.4.3 and 12.2.2 had been included as category B measures and 
the notification would be made after implementation. He also thanked Members for the transparency 
notifications reviewed during the  meeting and encouraged the pr esentation of outstanding 
submissions.  
1.74.   The representative of Turkey  welcomed the increasing number of transparency notifications. 
As one of the Members who had provided all transparency notifications, Turkey perceived  enhancing 
transparency as an integral part of th e Agreement. Transparency requirements benefit ted all traders, 
especially SMEs who lack ed necessary resources and capacity to obtain that information.  Through 
their notification, amongst other, they had provided the direct and most updated links for several 
items required by the TFA , including single window.  They hoped their notification serve d as a useful 
and practical tool for the interested business community , as it provid ed a comprehensive road map  
to acc ess primary rules and document records by Turkey in trade.  
C. Notifications under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation  Agreement  
1.75.   The Chair  drew the Committee's attention to notifications under Article 22 of the TFA. As 
Members recalled, there were two different kinds of notifications covered by this article. The first 
consisted of input by donor Members on the assistance provided (paragraphs 1 an d 2). The second 
required  developing and least -developed Members to notify their contact points of the offices 
responsible for coordinating and prioritizing the assistance they wish ed to receive.  Since the last 
meeting, input from five delegations had been  received concerning the first point , starting with 
notification s from Japan (G/TFA/N/JPN/4)  and Switzerland (G/TFA/N/CHE/3) .  
1.76.   The representative of Switzerland  congratulated the Chair on his election. He mentioned 
that the notification was an update on th e most recent financial support given to different  
programs. The first program was from the World Bank – the Trade Facilitation Support Programme, 
where Switzerland's contribution for the period  2017-2023 would  be of CHF 2 million, and every 
country was eligible for assistance. The second program was the Global Trade Facilitation 
Programme which was also a multi -donor initiative  of the World Customs Organization  (WCO) , 
where their contribution for 2018 -2022 would be  CHF 5.5 million. Eligible countries include d many 
partners of the Swiss Development Cooperation. For further information or questions, contact 
information and an enquiry point for TF , the notification includ ed phone numbers and email 
addresses . This information wa s also available on the TFAF website.  
1.77.   The Chair drew the Committee's attention to a notification from the United States 
(G/TFA/N/USA/3) . 
1.78.   The representative of the United States  appreciated the opportunity to introduce their 
notification regarding support for technical assistance and capacity building projects that would  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 10 - 
 
  continue to strengthen the global ability to implement the TFA.  In Reporting Year 2017, the US 
notified more th an USD 97.7 million in support for technical assistance and capacity building  and 
supported 124 projects in 50 individual countries and 7 regions . The US looks forward to continuing 
to support full implementation of the TFA through capacity building and te chnical assistance.  The US 
placed great importance on TFA provisions that improve d transparency for all WTO Members. For 
this reason, they urged all donor Members to fulfil their Article 22 obligations and notify the WTO of 
technical assistance and support  provided towards improving trade facilitation.  
1.79.   This transparency obligation was not limited to developed  country Members but to all WTO 
Members, regardless of development status, wh o funded technical assistance and capacity building 
(TACB) activities. The TACB provided could  be through direct financial and technical assistance, 
funds provided to other development providers such as the World Bank, International Trade Centre 
(ITC), or WCO, or in-kind support such as personnel training and equipment. As Members  continue d 
to implement the Agreement, they could only understand the success of the negotiated approach in 
the text if they had a full understanding of the collective efforts in implement ation.  
1.80.   The Chair drew the Committee's attention to a notification presented by Australia 
(G/TFA/N/AUS/3).  
1.81.   The representative of Australia  indicated they were committed to assisting developing 
countries to implement the TF Agreement and to undertake reforms that reduce d the costs of trade.  
In their latest notification under Article 22, Australia  had highlighted a range of assistance activities 
for the 2017 -2018 financial year, totaling  approximately AU D 160 million.  Most of  this assistance 
had been  focused at the bilateral and regional level, in particular with partners in South -East Asia, 
through ASEAN, and in the Pacific Islands.  In addition, Australia  had also provided support to a 
number of multilateral initiatives such as the World Bank' s Trade Facilitation Support Program and 
the Global Alliance on Trade Facilitation.  Although not reflected in this notification, they had also 
provided AUD 1 million to the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility to assist developing and 
LDC Members to implement the TFA.  Australia looked forward to continuing to provide strong support 
for implementation of the TF Agreement.  
1.82.   Lastly on this item, the Chair proceeded to a notification from the European Union  
(G/TFA/N/EU/2/A dd.2).  
1.83.   The representat ive of the European Union  recalled that there were two different assistance 
program s in the EU: the first one provided by the EU, and the second by member States. The 
notification that had been  published on the agenda mainly deal t with an update of the bil ateral 
program s of member States, especially Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United 
Kingdom.  
1.84.   The EU programs were multi -annual and framework programs. In consequence , the first 
notification from the EU was most important , because aid span ned during a number of years. In this 
document, they had  provided an update of the status of the framework programs regarding 
decisions , i.e. when funds  had been  disbursed. Most of the notification had been  drawn up by the 
Directorate -General for International Cooperation and Development  in the European Commission, 
therefore any questions or comments would be reverted to them.  
1.85.   The representative  echoed  the statement made by China, especially the fact that there were 
about ten countries who ha d not categorized their obligations under the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement. I t was timely to highlight China's remarks, and also  China's call for there to be 
cooperation by donors and by the countries concerned in order to resolve the problem as soon as 
possible . This was important  because if the country did not have the capacity to identify its needs, 
it was going to find it diffi cult to l aunch an appeal for aid , and if the aid was not notified in detail , 
donors could not  identify the starting point . 
1.86.   It was imperative  to stress  these points so that before the specific committee meeting in 
October , which w ould look at aid and the im plementation of category C, Members could evaluate 
how to resolve the issue of Members  which ha d not notified a category designation  or their needs 
for donor assistance , most of which were LDC Members.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 11 - 
 
  1.87.   The representative of Cote d'Ivo ire congratulated the Chair and welcomed his appointment. 
Regarding  Members which had not  submitted a category designation, he was  surprised that there 
had been no mentioning of input from Cote d'Ivoire  as he believed that Cote d 'Ivoire had notified its 
categ ory B and C provisions. He thought that a  note had been submitted from capital and their 
Minister had provided a note verba le. He enquired  if it was possible to obtain the list of the ten 
countries who had not yet notified their category designation.  
1.88.   The representative from Cote d'Ivoire said  that the Secretariat had  recently receive d a draft 
notification, but a significant amount of  the required information had been missing and in several 
areas, references had been made to work still being in progress . As a result, it had not been possible 
to proceed with it to the next stage. The Secretariat had  reverted to the Geneva -based delegation  
for clarification and  submission of the missing details  and was awaiting a response. The draft 
notification th erefore remained in the pipeline , for the time being. The Secretariat remained at Cote 
d'Ivoire's disposal for any assistance they might require.  
1.89.   The representative of China  supported  the in tervention of the EU, and appreciated the 
notifications submitted under article s 22.1 and 22.2  of the TFA. He said that China had donated US D 
1 million to the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility fund and encouraged Members that 
needed capacity building assistance and support to make  the relevant notifications.  He introduced a 
representative of China Customs who would provide more details on their technical assistance 
support and activities.  
1.90.   The representative of China Customs  congratulated the Chair on his appointment . In 2014, 
on behalf of the Chinese government, China Customs had established a customs cooperation fund 
at the World Customs Organization, called  CCF China. CCF China was a five -year program, with a 
funding of €600,000  each year . CCF China mainly provided  capacity building activities for developing 
and LDC Members  in the areas of trade facilitation, customs law enforcement, customs technologies, 
as well as other areas.  
1.91.   Since its operation, CCF China ha d supported more than 60 capacity building activities, with 
more than 1 ,000 customs trainees from WTO Member s. China Customs ha d contributed to the WCO 
accreditation of more than 20 experts in the areas of TFA implementation, intellectual property 
rights , time -release study, customs modernization, customs valu ation, country of origin and other 
areas.  Each year China Customs would  send experts to carry out WCO capacity building missions 
and give lectures. Recent activities include d a post -clearance audit workshop in Sri Lanka in 
December of 2018; a customs labor atory workshop for customs administrations in the Middle East 
and North Africa held in Oman in February 2019; a workshop on customs valuation and transfer 
pricing for customs administration in Asia Pacific held in China of March 2019. A workshop on 
customs valuation and HS clarification would  be held in Kazakhstan 24 -28 June 2019 . Recently at 
the WCO Asia Pacific trading centers  in Shanghai and Xiamen, China Customs ha d successfully 
organized  workshops on the single window; fellowship as signments, non -intrusive inspection and 
artificial intelligence  image screening; WCO experts accreditation ; time release study, as well as 
other activities.  
1.92.   In the absence of further requests for the floor, t he Chair proceed ed to the notifications under 
article 22.3  of the TFA , where input had been received from seven Members since the last Committee 
meeting : Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (G/TFA/N/VCT/2) ; Tonga (G/TFA/N/TON/2/R ev.1); 
Bahrain , Kingdom of  (G/TFA/N/BHR/2) ; Peru (G/TFA/N/PER/2/R ev.1); Saint Kitts (G/TFA/N/KNA/2) ; 
Belize (G/TFA/N/BLZ/3) ; and Trinidad and Tobago (G/TFA/N/TTO/3) . Given that those notifications 
were limited to information on contact points, he propose d to take them up as a group.  
1.93.   The Chair thank ed Members for their interventions and recalled  that the next opportunity to 
look at notifications would be given at the subsequent session of the TFC in October . 
1.94.   The Committee took note  of the notifications addressed under items A, B and C and of the 
information contained therein.  
2  STATUS OF RATIFICATIO N AND NOTIFICATION  PROCESS  
2.1.  The Chair recalled that the WTO Secretariat had received a request to update Members on 
the latest state -of-play regarding the ratification and notification process.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 12 - 
 
  2.2.  The representative of the WTO Secretariat  updated Members on the latest developments with 
respect to notifications and ratifications since the Committee had last met in February 2019 . 
2.3.  With Egypt's recent deposit , there were now 144 completed ratifications , which corresponded 
to 88% of the total number of expected acceptance instruments . There were 19 pending ratifications , 
a few of which seemed  to be in the ir final stages . All outstanding ratifications pertained to developing  
countries  or LDCs. Taken together, those groups of Members showed a ratification rate of 83% . 
When analyzed  separately , developing  country Members  had a 90% rate of ratification  whereas LDC 
Members stood at  67%.  
2.4.  A total of 51 additional implementation notifications  had been received . At the time of 
reporting,  115 Members  had provided input on Category A, 83 Members on category B and 72 on 
Category C  designations . 
2.5.  There was an  upcoming deadline of 22 August 2 019 for the submission of definitive 
implementation dates for Category C provisions by developing  country Members . LDCs had more 
time. Their definitive dates for the implementation of Category B provisions had to be provided no 
later than 22 Febr uary 2020 , indicative dates for the implement ation of Category C provisions no 
later than 22 February 2021  and definitive dates for implementation of Category C provisions  no 
later than 22 August 2022 . 
2.6.  Data collected  from the submitted notifications showed that close to 49% of designations had 
been made in category A, 13% in category B , and around 20% for category C, with a remaining 
18% of designations  yet to be provided.  
2.7.  The average implementation timeframe requested by  developing country and LDC Members  
showed that developing count ry Members  had a shorter average implementation timeframe than 
LDC Members. A focus on categories B and C indicated that the average implementa tion date was  
October 2021, with small variations between developing country and LDC Members. There were no 
considerable difference s between the average implementation dates for category B  but one could 
see that LDC Members had a shorter average implementa tion date than developing country 
Members. The average date for Category C implementation reflected a slight increase  since the last 
report , which was very likely the result of having  received more input, particularly from LDC 
Members.  
2.8.  As far as technical assistance and support for capacity building was concerned, requests for 
human resources and training still topped the list , followed by support for work on regulatory and 
legislation frameworks and ass istance relating to  information technologies. The TACB requirement 
"to be determined" continue d to decrease  as a result of receiving more notifications , allowing for a 
much more complete picture of Members' implementation needs . The dead line for submitting  
technical assistance needs had passed for both develo ping country and LDC Members. At the time 
of reporting,  96% of developing country Members had submitted the relevant information, 2% had 
provided some  information  and 2% were yet to submit dat a. With regard to  LDC Membe rs: 71% of 
notifications had not yet been received . Only a quarter of LDC Members had provided a complete 
notifica tion and 4% had provided a partial notification .  
2.9.  In this context, it was interesting to look at the provisions tha t were least frequently notified 
for immediate implementation . These provisions  also had the highest corresponding share of 
technical assistance needs and category C designations . Single window remained at the top of the 
list, followed by  advanced rulings, average release times, test procedures and authorized operators.  
2.10.   With regard to  transparency notifications , 41 notifications  had been  received since February 
2019, making it  the largest group of new notifications. Broken down to the four  different categories , 
76 Members had provided information on article 1.4  of the TFA , 62 on article 10.4.3, 75 on article 
10.6. 2 and 68 on article 12.2.2.  
2.11.   When looking at the notifications relating to technical assistan ce and capacity building , 15 
Members had provided reports under  article 22.1 of the TFA, which applied to donor Members and 
asked them to indicate  the assistance they ha d been providing since the last 12 months . This figure 
counted the EU as one Member . Additionally, eight Members  had submitted information  under article 
22.2 of the TFA , informing about  procedures to access  donor aid . As far as a rticle 22.3  of the TFA G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 13 - 
 
  was concerned , which applied to developing countries and LDCs wishing to  avail of techn ical 
assistance, ten Members had informed of their relevant  contact points.  
2.12.   As Members would recall , the WTO Secretariat was  obliged under  the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement to remind delegations of certain upcoming deadlines at clearly defined intervals. The 
latest such reminder took effect in May 2019 in response to  the mandate set out in  Article 16.4 of 
the Agreement , requesting  the Secretariat to "remind  a Member if that Memb er has not notified a 
definitive date for implementation of provisions that it has designated in Category B or C ". To 
respond to this mandate, individual letters signed by the WTO Directo r-General had been sent to 29 
delegations on 20 May , alerting them of  the fact that the deadline for submitting the definitive dates 
for category C was approaching on 22 August 2019 . 
2.13.   Members were reminded that the notification matrix was available on the Trade Facilitation 
Database website ( http://www.tfadatabase.org/notifications -matrix ), and that it was updated every 
time new input was received. The matrix provided information on Members who had notified, those 
who had not yet  notified, the notifications that had been provided , those and which had not yet been 
provided. The matrix allowed for searches by group and by individual country. The information could 
also be downloaded on several file formats and printed as a hard copy .  
2.14.   The representative of Egypt  congratulated the Chair on his appointment and thanked the 
Secretariat for the presentation. He announced that Egypt had presented its instrument of 
acceptance for the Trade Facilit ation Agreement to the WTO Director -General the day before the 
meeting. In addition, Egypt had submitted, on 18 June 2019, a notification of additional 
commitments in category A, as well as category B and C commitments, in accordance with articles 
15 and  16 of the TFA. This notification had been circulated in document G/TFA/N/EGY/1. Egypt  was 
commit ted to the implementation of th e Agreement and hoped  to fully reap its benefits. He thank ed 
donors  with whom they were working closely to build the required ca pacity to achieve these 
objectives. Egypt thanked  the United States for the fruitful cooperation  in organi zing events in Cairo 
in July 2019 under  the Commercial Law Development Program  of the US Department of Commerce 
funded by USAID, to discuss in detail with all relevant stakeholders, Egypt 's trade facilitation 
technical assistance needs in light of the recent notification.  Egypt  thanked the  WTO Secretariat for 
its assistance and support.  
2.15.   The representative of Mali reported that they had received support from the International 
Organization  of La Francophonie  and GIZ , which ha d allowed the implementation of  the Mali trade 
portal , launched on 27 May 2019, also with the assistance of UNCTAD.  Additionally, they had 
benefited from fina ncing by the Danish Cooperation , which had helped Burkina Faso, Mali, Nigeria, 
and Viet Nam and had provided  a significant amount to implement the TFA. The  launch of the trade 
portal had been  followed by a three -day workshop , which had allowed members of the National 
Trade Facilitation Committee to analyze  Mali's technical assistance needs and to produce a 
notification that would be completed  soon. The National Commission had issued Ministerial Decree 
of 5 April , which would  put into place the National Committee, led by the Secretary General of the 
Ministry of Trade, trade director -general s, transport and customs, the public and the private sector 
and representatives of consumer associations.  Mali appreciated  the support rece ived. 
2.16.   The representative  of the United States  was g rateful for the interventions by Egypt and Mali 
and looked forward to working with them in the future. She drew attention to the 22 August 
notification deadline and reminded Members  of how the TFA had been  hailed as an historic 
achievement  since it had been agreed upon  in Bali, Indonesia in December 2013 . Many studies had 
been published about the possible achievements and outcomes that could be realized  from the full 
implementation of the Agreement. Other i nternational organizations had hailed it for the benefits it 
would produce  for all WTO Members and traders around the world and its flexibility in the approach 
to implementation. Members in the WTO had touted its unique and ground -breaking approach to 
technical assistance and capacity building  and flexibility implementation and ha d raised it as a model 
to be followed in all new negotiations.  
2.17.   The United States agree d that the TFA was a historic Agreement  which  provide d a clear path 
for reducing the burdens and costs for traders and w ould result in real on -the-ground improvements 
at the border. They were  very proud of the approach taken and achieved in the Agreement . To date , 
six and a half years  had passe d since the negotiations had ended, five and a half years since the 
Amendment Protocol had been  agreed upon and some Members started depositing their ratification 
instruments , almost two and a half years  since the entry into force of the Agreement. The G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 14 - 
 
  approaching deadline of 22 August 2019 was of monumental importance to the United States . It 
represented  the final deadline for developing  country Members to fully utilize  the flexibilities provided 
for in Section II and to notify definitive  dates for Category C commitments.  The US  wished t o raise 
awareness of the significance of this date , as a last  resort  effort to reach Members who might  have 
not considered  the urgency of the looming deadline.  
2.18.   Article 16.4 of the TFA provide d a hard and definitive repercussion for develo ping countries 
who failed to meet  the deadline of 22 August 2019 : a one -year implementation date, counting  from 
the notified indicative date s for all commitments in Section I  of the TFA . This deadline would 
represent  the final opportunity  for developing countries to avail themselves of the flexibilities in 
Section II and to define  their own timelines for implementation and capacity building needs. 
Nevertheless, the US  had identified  24 developing countries that ha d not notified their B and C 
categories, 25 developing countries that ha d not provided definitive dates for category C  
commitments , and 2 developing countries that ha d not notified definitive  dates for category  B. The 
options left for this large group of countries were diminishing over the next two months, and there 
were less than 60 days to that final deadline.  As the Secr etariat had noted, the DG had  followed up 
with the commitments in the Agreement and had provided formal written notice to those Members 
whose rights to utilize Section II would  be over in August . The WTO  had shared its notification matrix 
with information  available online in different  formats for different users  to reach.  
2.19.   Due to their  commitment to transparency and to the success of th e Agreement, the US had 
reached out to 24 developing countries ov er the spring to raise awareness in capitals ab out the 
upcoming  deadlines and the repercussions of  failure to utilize the flexibilities in Section II.  They had 
addressed the TFA, its notifications and corresponding deadlines with dozens of developing countries 
in every bilateral forum  over the past yea r. The US  would  remain committed to doing so until the 
last moment before 22 August 2019.  
2.20.   Now it was  in the hands of developing  country Members. The US hoped that over 50 
developing countries would  not miss the deadline and lose the ability  to fully utilize the full flexibilities 
of Section II  of the TFA . They w ould be disappointed  to consider  what it would  mean f or the future 
of negotiations of  any future agreement in the WTO when a large share  of developing countries 
chose not to participate in an Agreement that had provided unparalleled flexibilities . Where 
notifications had been made over the last few years, there ha d been over a billion US dollars of aid 
for implementation made available. As studies and discussions among peers had shown, t his was an 
opportunity  for governments, citizens and traders across the globe to find new economic opportunity 
and standards of living.  
2.21.   Section II also gave them the possibility  of identify ing those Members who were committed 
to the functioning of the WTO and this  Agreement, those who embrace d reform and opportunity to 
modernize and to increase the wealth and status of its people. The United States warmly welcome d 
them and their efforts and would  continue to work with those Members to ensure the functioni ng 
and operation of the TFA, they would continue to provide technical assistance and capacity building  
support , engage  in experience sharing and delivery on transparency.  
2.22.   The representative of the  WTO Secretariat  reminded Members that the notifications matrix 
was also available in French and Spanish.  
2.23.   The representative of the European Union  was taken aback by the figures presented by the 
United States in its intervention. The TFA was  innovative and  somehow a test for the WTO and its 
Members on the high level of flexibility and aid that had been adapted to the needs of developing 
country and LDC Members . From the EU 's perspective, the number of Members that had not a ccessed 
the flexibilities of Section II was too high. In previous interventions, the EU had described how,  in 
the absence of initial aid, it would be  difficult to provide definitive dates for implementation . At the 
present stage  of the process, with only two months before the deadline of 22 August, the EU 
launch ed a collective appeal for every Member who had made a notification under Article 22  to 
approach the capitals of Members to which they could provide assistance in order to repeat the 
message sent out by the WTO Secretariat. The United States, China and others  had recalled  that 
time was of the essence . Members could find a way to assist with  notifications, as had been done in 
the past , to avoid reaching  the August deadline with an even greater number of outstanding 
notifications . That would represent a missed opportunity  and a damaging event for the system itself 
and the capacity of the Organization, of donors  and beneficiary countries or potential beneficiary 
countries to come together . Perhaps this message would also appeal to delegates who had not yet G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 15 - 
 
  approach ed develo ping country or LDC Members  that had not presented  their notifications. All 
Members needed to get to work on this topic. Members looking for assistance were invited to contact 
the EU delegations bilaterally . This would hopefully  contribute to the presentat ion of notifications. A 
session with multilateral donors would be held later to discuss their programs . Looking at the list of 
aid available, it would be very disappointing if Members could not identify their implementation  
needs . This was a call for solid arity amongst the donor nations. It was not possible to work without 
a clear roadmap and an identification of key stakeholders and their responsibilities. This was a 
colossal task to be performed in a very tight timeframe. She trusted that the Chair and Me mbers 
would do everything  at their disposal  in light of the urgency of the matter.  
2.24.   The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
III. EXPERIENCE SHARING/T HEMATIC  DISCUSSIONS  
2.25.   This segment of the  meeting  was conducted in informal  mode , with the understanding  that 
information  Members were willing to share would be made available on a dedicated website 
(https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_tradfa_e.htm ) with related links also being 
included in the minutes of the  meeting.  It also remained possible  for a Member  to explicitly request 
the full recording of a particular segment if necessary.  
2.26.   Members addressed the following  issues:  
A. Developing the Article 1:4 Notification: Experience of the United States 
(G/TFA/W/13)  
Presentation by the United States   
2.27.   The representative of the United States  made this presentation upon Members' request, as 
they considered their next approach and continued to conduct reforms based on the available options 
to publish regulations online, as well as to transfer regulatory processes to online versions, moving 
away from paper -based alternatives.  
2.28.   The United States'  transparency notification had been submitted on 23 June 2017 , with 
information relevant to Articles 1.4, 10.4, 10.6, and 12.2  of the TFA . The notification had been 
prepared by the National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC), under the leadership of the United 
States Trade Representative (USTR).  Exactly two years l ater, on 13 June 2019, the Secretariat 
circulated the experience sharing paper titled, "Developing the Article 1.4 Notification" 
(G/TFA/W/13). The paper elaborated on the US NTFC's process of drafting the Article 1.4 notification 
and outlined the US legal framework for federal agencies to publish government regulatory and 
rulemaking information, and three good practices for drafting the 1.4 notification.  
2.29.   Transparency notifications were important, as article 1.4 was a critical tool for traders seeking 
easily accessible trade-related information that was non-discriminatory and comprehensive. 
Difficult -to-find, complex, and overly burdensome trade regulations  impair ed trade and increase d 
compliance costs both for governments and traders. According to the OECD Trade Facilitation 
Indicators, ensuring availability of trade -related information (TFA Articles 1 and 2) ha d the potential 
to reduce trade costs between 2.4 – 2.8 percentage points.  
2.30.   As of 13 June 2019, 75 WTO Members had submitted article 1.4 notifications and many 
Members had requested capacity building assistance related to the development of this notification. 
The United States  hoped the experience sharing paper was timely and useful, as capacity building 
requests c ame in and providers look ed at how to put together a 1.4 noti fication or implement the 
actual provisions.  
2.31.   Transparency was essential to full implementation of the TFA, the function of the Committee 
on Trade Facilitation, and the WTO at large. Members were therefore encouraged to submit their 
transparency notificatio ns to the WTO Secretariat, and if needed, continue to seek technical 
assistance to support the development of these notifications. The United States  remain ed committed 
to reviewing Members' notifications to ensure they met the terms of the TFA and provide d benefits 
to the trade community. It hoped  that the  experience sharing paper contribute d to the understanding 
and the development of those 1.4 transparency notifications.   G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 16 - 
 
  2.32.   Information on the presentation can be found under the following  link: 
https://www.tfadatabase.org/uploads/thematicdiscussiondocument/W13.pdf .  
B. National Trade Facilitation Committees  
Presentation by Sri Lanka  
2.33.   Sri Lanka made a presentation on its National Trade Facilitation Committee.  
2.34.   Information on the presentation can be found under the following  link: 
https://www.tfada tabase.org/uploads/thematicdiscussiondocument/Sri_Lanka_presentation_on_N
TFC_25.06.2019_web.pdf . 
2.35.   The Chair  recalled the meeting to formal mode. He enquired if there were already issues that 
Members would like to cover , to allow for proper preparation and t o make sure Members were aware 
of the topics to be addressed in the future . He also reminded Members that the Secretariat would 
be preparing a summary of the experience sharing sessions , which would be available on the 
Committee's WTO website (https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_tradfa_e.htm ) 
2.36.   The representative of China  indicated they would like to  consider sharing  experiences on 
single window for the next meeting.  
2.37.   The Committee took note  of the statements made under agenda item 3. 
IV. RULES OF PROCEDURE F OR THE TRADE FACILIT ATION COMMITTEE  
2.38.   The Chair recalled that work on the Committee 's rules of procedure (ROP) had al ready started 
in 2017, shortly  after the establishment of the TFC. At that time, Members had received the first 
version of a proposal initially tabled by Argentina and Norway. Japan had subsequently become a co -
sponsor followed  by Paraguay.  Together, the y had prepared a revised version of their proposal , last 
discussed at the Committee's meeting in February 2019  (G/TFA/W/14). It reflect ed changes that had 
resulted from exchanges with delegations . Further work had been carried out since then. He invited 
the sponsors of the proposal to inform the Committee of this work.  
2.39.   The representative of Norway  recalled that a few questions had been raised during the 
previous committee meeting in February and reported that the proponents had consulted with the 
concerned Members. Some minor simplifications and clarifications had been  suggested, and 
proponents had taken them on board. Hence, a footnote had been included explaining the non -
application of rule 5 of the General Council Rules of Procedure  which  did not involve any changes to 
the provisions. Original rules 6 and 16 of the General Council Rules of Procedure had been kept 
without any changes. These were simple adjustments presume d to be  tolerable for Member s and 
thus it was expected to  agree on thi s text in the course of the on going meeting. He thanked Members 
that had been consulted through out the process and considered the progress to have been very 
constructive.  
2.40.   The representative of Argentina  thanked Members for their comments, and particularly 
appreciated those Members who engaged in constructive consultations with the proponents. He 
was pleased to have witnessed how dialogue and patience could  contribute to a mutual and 
meaningful understanding. He recalled that the representative from Japan wou ld be leaving 
Geneva soon, therefore he also hoped that the proposal could be agreed upon by Members during 
this meeting.  
2.41.   The Chair asked if there were any requests for the floor  on the proposed rules of procedure . 
In the absence of  such requests, he observed that it seemed that Members had come to a common 
understanding on the Trade Facilitation Committee 's rules of procedure. He therefore proposed 
that Members consider the TFC 's work on its rules of p rocedure to be finalized and that the TFC 
would forward its draft ROP – corresponding to the proposal by Argentina, Norway, Japan and 
Paraguay  (G/TFA/ W/14) – to the Council for Trade in Goods for approval, as req uired by the  rules. 
2.42.   It was so agreed . G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 17 - 
 
  V. RECENT AND UPCOMING ACTIVITIES  
Update on activities of  the Global Alliance on Trade Facilitation  
2.43.   The representative of The Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation  (Mr. Philippe Isler)  gave an 
overview of the initiative  to familiarize Members with their initiatives, to then proceed to an 
advancement of their projects.  
2.44.   The Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation (Global Alliance or Alliance) was an initiative 
launched in Nairobi, in 2015. It was a public -private partnership , established for the exclusive 
purpose of assisting countries in implementing  the Trade Facilitation Agreement. It was funded by 
six donor countries – the United States,  Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany and 
Denmark. He thank ed these six donor countries  for their support in the past three and a half years, 
and for their continuing support.  Importantly,  this initiative was also supported by a wide variety 
of privat e sector companies , some of  which  sat on their board. The Alliance worked very closely 
with over 60 multinational companies around the world and over 200 local SME companies in the 
countries in which they operate d. 
2.45.   The Alliance was operationalized  by a con sortium of four organizations – the Centre for 
International  Private Enterprise, the International Chamber of Commerce, the World Economic 
Forum and GIZ. It was no t a very large initiative,  but it was supported by key stakeholders with 
whom they worked  hand in hand to overcome supply chain obstacles.  
2.46.   The Alliance's work was based on three pillars.  The first pillar was about establishing public -
private partnerships and inclusive multi -stakeholder dialog ues on trade facilitation in -country. The 
second was about designing and implementing practical , focused , result -oriented projects linked to 
TFA provisions. The third pillar was  about two things : measuring the impact quantitative ly and 
secondly, the  ability to capture knowledge and best practice  to apply in future  projects.  Converging 
these three pillars, the idea was to move, enhancing implementation of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement, reduce time and costs of cross -border  trade, increase trade and invest ments and 
economic growth and poverty reduction.  
2.47.   One particularit y of the Alliance was the  cocreation in terms of setting up projects , which 
relied on a  bottoms -up approach . They started by working with countries that had shown interest in 
partnering with the Global Alliance. The first task was to establish public -private dialogue to identify 
the issues, obstacles  and difficulties that were faced in the country. From that, ideas of projects 
were merge d and together, they decide d on one proje ct for which they would  establish a concept 
and a proposal. This proposal was submitted to the Alliance's  board and the funds were allocated for 
implementation immediately.  The advantage of this approach was that by having all stakeholders 
around the table at the design time of the project, it was possible to  ensure  and guarantee the 
support and buy -in from stakeholders for implementation. This allowed them to implement the 
projects successfully . 
2.48.   The Allianc e's mission was to enhance trade facilitation implementation by bringing together 
the public and private sectors as equal partners to identify  and deliver commercially meaningful 
reforms in developing and least developed countries. In practi ce, they worked with governments 
that ha d a genuine commitment to implementing TFA and trade facilitation. They involve d the private 
sector in all stages . That meant the private sector identif ied the blockages  and the Alliance  leverage d 
the knowledge and expertise within  the private sector to implement projects . The private sector was 
also asked to assess whether projects were  successful because ultimately , the private sector was 
moving cargo across the borders. The Alliance  aimed at remain ing practical, pragmatic, focused and 
would continuingly search for impact.  
2.49.   The Alliance had  nine projects that were operational and being implemented in eight 
countries : Colombia (two projects), Brazil,  Morocco, Ghana, Kenya, Zambia, Sri Lanka and Viet Nam 
In addition,  they we re in a pre-scoping or scoping stage in the following countries: Costa Rica, 
Tunisia, Malawi, Nigeria, Senegal, India, Vanuatu and Bangladesh.  The scoping process lasted  
between nine and twelve months and the implementation  ranged betwee n twelve month s and three 
and a half years.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 18 - 
 
  2.50.   In Brazil , the Alliance  had partner ed with INMETRO , the local standards agency , to optimi ze 
the internal processing of the agency and assist in interfacing  it with the upcoming single window.  
In Colombia, they had worked on the implementation of a risk management system for the food and 
drugs administration , INVIMA.  The second project in Colombia had established  a customs unit 
dedicated to managing advanced rul ings, with t he idea of providing  consistency of treatment to 
goods coming in for the automotive industry initially , at all the ports of entry in Colombia.  In Ghana 
and Kenya, the projects were very similar  and related the  implement ation of  prearrival proce ssing.  
In Morocco , the project had two components : the automation of the weigh bridge operations for 
bulk agri -cargo  and the  automati on of phytosanitary certificates.  In Sri Lanka they we re establishing 
a process to implement multi -country consolidation (M CC), which meant  bringing in full container 
loads (FCLs)  from the region and consolidating them in Colombo, packing those into FCLs to be able 
to export them  to Europe and the United States.  Viet Nam was the ir largest project, which consisted 
of the implementation of  a customs bond system to apply  a conditional release regime covered by 
insurance companies through a final premium.  In Zambia, the most  recent project, the Alliance had 
been working with the government and the private sector to train, lic ense and overall organize  the 
whole community of customs brokers. The projects were different from one another as a result of 
the cocreation process. By building these projects from the ground up, the priorities and needs were 
different from one country to  another.  Once these projects c ame about  and became successful, the 
Alliance would be able to cross poll inate these projects from one country to the next and learn about 
the projects, establish best practice  and ideally, work with past beneficiaries to assist other countries.  
2.51.   In relation to the project in Colombia with the food and drug administration , the Alliance  had 
worked with the agency to establish a risk management system to reduce the number of physical 
inspections on import s of agri -food, pharmaceuticals and medical devices. The first results were 
showing a reduction in inspection of 28%, which equate d to over 20,000 declarations. At the 
moment, they were working to determine  the dollar amount equivalent of inefficiencies it had been 
possible  to extract from the supply chain and make it more effective.  The project would be finalized 
in the next 6 -8 weeks  and the Alliance was  already looking at the next stage with INVIMA , to identify 
other efficiencies to approach . 
2.52.   The project  in Viet Nam was unique in that region. Currently, ports were congested,  and the 
initiative  was trying to find innovative ways to unblock  them. It had been  found that often, the ports 
were congested  because goods ha d customs clearance but were waiting for licenses and clearances 
from other government agencies that were taking time. By establishing a bond system covered by 
a guarantee from insurance companies, the project had been  able to release these containers and 
the government got a financial security i n return. This project ha d been under implementation  the 
past year and a half , and the expectation was that by the end of this year , the Alliance wo uld be 
able to start a practical pilot to scale up during  2020. This ha d been a story of successful  cooperation 
between the government of Viet Nam, donors, private sector and the companies that operated  the 
Global Alliance.  
2.53.   The Alliance had calculated  that the in-kind participation  of the private sector in dollar terms 
was about 20% of their overall efforts. The private sector had been  asked to act as ambassadors  
and connect the Alliance to  networks to be more effective. They not only worked with multinationals  
but also with the local private sector companies to understand that SMEs and local companies d id 
not always have the same amount of bandwidth as multinationals to help the Alliance in their  efforts.  
It was important to recognize that the private sector ha d a responsibility in the implementation of 
the TFA. They were very quick to flag delays, therefore through this mechanism  they had  the 
opportunity to help and work together with the Alliance to accomplish their objectives . 
2.54.   The Alliance was reachable at http:///www.tradefacilitation. org, their e -mail would be 
available after the Committee meeting.  
2.55.   The representative of Mali indicated that together with Burkina Faso and Niger , as landlocked 
countries, wished to contact the Global Alliance. She enquired if this was to be done t hrough th e 
mission in Geneva or capital.  
2.56.   The representative of the Global Alliance  responded that it would only take a written 
communication, through the website or the Secretariat. He would also be available to be contacted 
directly after the session.  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 19 - 
 
  2.57.   The representative of Canada  thanked the Global Alliance for its presentation , which together 
with the annual report, contained interesting information on the ongoing projects and their results. 
It was positive to learn about the design of measurement prot ocols or modalities  to analyze  the real 
benefits stemming from aid being provided through the Alliance. He encourage d in future meetings 
to have more information on the projects and perhaps go more into  the specifics, how they were 
helping and how it would  be possible to continue to support the work of the Alliance in these 
countries. It was also requested that the Secretariat circulated the electronic version of the 
presentation.  
2.58.   The Chair  reassured Members that all presentations would be made available af ter the 
meeting.  
Update by the WTO Secretariat on activities of the TFAF  
2.59.   The representative of the Secretariat  provided an update on the activities of the TFA Facility  
(TFAF)  since the last Committee meeting. A  link to the Global Alliance's website and their contact 
information was a vailable on the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility website 
(http://www.tfafacility.org ). 
2.60.   The annual report for 2018 would be issued soon  and posted on the Facility 's website . In 
2018, 22 activities had been conducted and most of the participants had stated  in the evaluation 
forms that their expectations had been met or exceed ed. Several of the participating delegations 
had notified later in that year. The Facility  had spent a total of around 690,588.82 CHF, recruited 
two new staff members and officially launched the grant program during the October 2018 TF 
Committee meeting.  These  outcomes demonstrated that the Facility had support ed Members to 
meet their implementation commitments, taking a lead from instructions received in this 
Committee.  
2.61.   This momentum from 2018 was being built on for the 2019 events.  At the last Committee 
meeti ng, it had been mentioned that the Facility was  in the latest stages of the process to select  
the last representative of the 6 -member selection committee , which had now been completed. The 
selection committee was the decision -making body for the project implementation grants and was 
composed by  representatives from donors, developing and LDC Members, one Annex D 
organization and of the WTO Secretariat. Consequently , the grant program was now fully 
operational and ready to receive applications.  Information  had been received  that one Member was 
planning  to apply for a grant in the near future  and the facility  looked forward to receiving that 
application.  If a Member was interested in applying, but hesitat ed because the program was  new 
and unknown, it could  contact the Facility . The team could  present the process in further detail and 
answer any questions. Information was also available on the Facility's website, under "TFA 
Assistance and Grants ". 
2.62.   In terms of activities  organized by the Facility , it had been reported a t the last meeting that 
a national workshop in Saint Kitts had just been completed, followed immediately by a regional 
workshop in Saint Lucia for CARICOM countries.  Six countries had later presented notifications. This 
include d 3 transparency notification s and 1 donor notification from Saint Kitts.  Also, as a result of 
this regional workshop, Barbados had requested technical assistance to help with its notification on 
technical assistance and support for capacity building. They also had requested assistanc e on the 
functioning of their NTFC. This national workshop had been  held the previous week.  
2.63.   In March , a needs assessment had been  conducted in Mauritania , facilitated by WTO officials 
and a customs official from Cote d 'Ivoire. Mauritania had later provided  its ABC notification, including 
some indicative dates, and their technical assistance and support for capacity building needs. They 
also informed the Secretariat  that they were actively looking for donors . In case donor Members 
were interested , the Secretariat would be available to contact them with the appropriate authorities 
in capital . 
2.64.   In April, the WTO jointly with  the World Bank Group had conducted a national workshop in 
Ecuador , which had already been presented in detail during this meeti ng by the representative of 
that country . The latest event had been a retreat in Lausanne on 14 -15 June 2019 for Geneva -based 
delegates from least -developed countries. It had been  organized in cooperation with the LDC focal 
point from Nepal and Summit Alli ances International as advisors to the LDC group. The event had G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 20 - 
 
  been attended by 28 delegates from 26 countries. It had focused on the notification requirements 
and current status of Members as well as on the process to find donors.  
2.65.   Facility  events had been designed to take account of the specific implementation status of the 
Member involved. The information delivered was targeted to this status and participants were 
encouraged to make informal and formal commitments to make progress wherever possible. 
Evaluations and follow -ups of each event had been  similarly designed to identify the progress made 
and to identify best practices to replicate in the future.  
2.66.   One of the roles of the Facility was to enhance coordination and cooperation of partner 
organizatio ns and to avoid duplication  of efforts . For this reason, the Facility  frequently participate d 
in trade facilitation events organized by  implementation  partners. This a lso allow ed them to reach 
out to WTO Members and private sector , rather than duplicating similar workshops.  In the last four 
months , the Facility  participated in several  events organized  by its partners.  
2.67.   In March , the Facility had participated in a symposium on "Promoting Economic Connectivity" 
organized by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE ), with participants from 
Central Asia and land locked countries in the wider region.  The symposium, held at the OSCE  office 
in Vienna, had provided an opportunity for participants from government agencies and business 
associations to exchange experiences and best practices on the functioning of National Trade 
Facilitation Committees. The WTO made a presentation on the s tate of play and notification 
requirements and moderated panels of speakers from OSCE, World Bank Group, USAID and 
participating countries. The one -day symposium  had resulted in a short list of main conclusions that 
was endorsed by the participants.  
2.68.   The Fa cility had also participated in an ICC/Global Alliance event in Colombia for around 200 
private sector participants. The WTO focused on the importance of private sector participation in 
national committees and emphasized transparency notifications.  A prese ntation had also been made, 
regarding the current TFA state of play and on certain provisions of the TFA at the UN/CEFACT 
Plenary session.  In addition, t he Facility had presented to a multi -year Expert Meeting on Transport, 
Trade Logistics and Trade Facili tation at UNCTAD: under the title of "Trade Facilitation and Transit 
in Support of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development".  The Facility had also participated in a 
World Bank workshop in Vienna on Performance Measurement in Border Agencies for around 35 
participants from CEFTA countries.  At this occasion, the WTO had made a presentation on the 
benefits of the TFA overall and benefits that could be realized from implementation of certain 
provisions of the TFA. Most of the examples had been  taken from Me mber's case studies and 
guidelines that were posted on the TFAF website under TFA resources.  
2.69.   The previous  week, a presentation had been given  on the TFA transparency provisions for 
approximately  50 capital -based officials at a TBT workshop organized  at the WTO by the Trade and 
Environment Division and the Institute for Technical Training and Cooperation ( ITTC), which  
coincided with the TBT Committee meeting. It had been  a very interactive session with participants 
making linkages between the two agreements and sharing how they had implement ed some of the 
provisions in their countries.  
2.70.   The Facility had also prepare d materials to be presented by other experts when the team was 
unable to participate themselves or considered it made more sense economically for another trade 
facilitation expert to present on their behalf. A concrete example of such case had occurred when 
the Facility had provided slides for a colleague working at the  STDF to present at a  side event on 
the TFA at the International Plant Protection Convention 's annual conference  and had prepared slides 
on the current status of the TFA that had been  presented by a World Bank Group official at an event 
for Pacific Islands that was organized by the Oceania Customs Organization.  
2.71.   In May, the United Nations Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed 
Countries, Landlocked Developing Countrie s and Small Island Developing States  had held a retreat 
for LDC and landlocked countries in New York. The Facility  had prepared a 20 -minute video 
presentation on the notification requirements and state of play shown at the retreat. This retreat 
had been  attended by 71 participants, including 21 Ambassadors.  
2.72.   Several Members ha d requested  technical assistance with various parts of the notifications 
and the Facility was  had been working  as quickly as possible to conduct these events . Some would  G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 21 - 
 
  be conducted by  the Facility and in other cases, if there  was a partner that ha d projects in the 
country , they would be asked to assist.  
2.73.   At the request of the US delegation, WTO officials working for the Standards Trade 
Development Facility (STDF) would  provide an overvi ew of their grant mechanism . They had been 
an important partner in developing the operational rules for the TFA F and the rules for the Facility 
grant program , which learned from the experience of the STDF . 
2.74.   As soon as the October meeting dates were confirmed later during the meeting, the Facility 
would start plans to bring capital -based officials to Geneva for the October TFC meeting.  The 
invitations w ould be sent through the missions in early July. Sufficient  time had been allocated to 
the process, since it required sometimes the processing of visas.  
2.75.   There would be at least 10 trade facilitation sessions at the upcoming  Aid for Trade Global 
Review week . For the Facility , the week w ould start with a joint 1 -day event with the World Bank 
Group at the beginning of the week.  The 45 participants at this workshop would  come from 16 
countries that currently ha d World Bank trade facilitation implementation projects. It would  feature 
sessions on the TFA and legislative requirements, monitoring implementation, and enquiry points. 
In order to keep a workshop atmosphere , this event would be  limited to the invited participants. The 
World Bank Group would be  funding their participation on  this Peer to Peer event, as well as t heir 
participation at  the Aid -for-Trade events as well.  The Facility would also set up an information booth 
during the event. D onors and partners had been invited to provide brochures for distribut ion at the 
table.  This year, the booth would feature 3D virtual reality provided by the World Bank Group, which 
would transport users to the border between Guatemala and Honduras and to the Port of Freetown, 
Sierra Leone . The Representative reminded Members of the event on 4 July at 5 o'clock in the atrium , 
where a trade facilitation game would  be played.  
2.76.   The Facility had been requested to address how it worked in line with the Paris and Busan 
principles , which would be outlined in five principles: (i) Ownership: The Agreem ent allow ed 
Members to decide when they would  implement each provision and what their technical assistance 
needs were. Through needs assessments and these updates , the Facility assisted Members to make 
these decisions , particularly developing country and L DC Members ; (ii) Alignment: The Facility 
actively work ed with local and regional representatives when conducting workshops such as host 
governments, CARICOM, and OIE regional representative , etc. One of the aims in working with them 
was to strengthen their  capacity so they could  continue the work in their region ; (iii) H armonization 
the Facility  worked closely with and frequently met with the Annex D plus organizations to coordinate 
its activities. They disseminate d information on their programs, activities and publications on the 
TFAF website  and participate d in each other's activities to reach the wider membership rather than 
duplicating activities ; (iv) Results: The Facility  evaluate d results from activities both from participant 
evaluations and from notifications received. An annual workplan was prepared , as well as an annual 
report and report s were presented at every Trade Facilitation Committee meeting. Tools on  reporting 
and project management had been updated  to better measure results. Hopefully this would be  
noticeable in the  annual report once it was posted on the website ; (v) M utual accountability : 
Participants ha d to apply for all activities and provide a brief CV to explain their qualifications. A 
careful selection process  was conducted  in accepting only those who were qualified and really 
interested in attending the event. During the activities , Members were invited to try to identify the 
steps that they w ould take to follow -up after the activity end ed. 
2.77.   The representative of Nepal  delivered a statement on behalf of the LDC group. The group 
congratulated the outgoing Chair  for successfully completing the chairmanship of the TF Committee 
and welcomed Ambassador Haqjo as the new Chair , while ensuring the sup port of the LDC group. 
The group thanked previous speakers for their interventions, including the Secretariat, the Global 
Alliance and the United States and Sri Lanka for their contributions on article 1.4. They also extend ed 
their gratitude to the TFAF for co-sponsoring and coordinating the LDC 2nd Retreat on Trade 
Facilitation, which had been held on 14 and 15 June  2019. Similarly, she thanked the Summit 
Alliances International (SAI), the Department for International Development ( DFID) of the United 
Kingdom 's Trade and Investment Advocacy Fund ( TAF 2 +) and the Department for Foreign Affairs 
and Trade ( DFAT ) through Australian Aid for co -funding and providing support to make the retreat 
successful.  During the retreat, presentations, discussions and exp erience sharing on the state of 
play of TFA implementation remained quite useful as the LDC Members h ad different issues in 
implementation of the TFA. The draft ' Workbook ' prepared by the WTO Secretariat  discussed at the 
retreat was a profile of LDC Member s which show ed the status of implementation for  each Member. G/TFA/M/ 8 
 
- 22 - 
 
  The 'Work book' would be a good resource for the LDC Members themselves as well as for 
development partners to boost the effective implementation of the Agreement. The presentations 
from World Customs Organization and UNCTAD had also been  useful  and the Group thanked them 
for their participation . 
2.78.   The implemen tation of the TFA could reduce time, cost, bureaucratic delays and red tape in 
cross border trade and enhance the efficiency of trade transaction. Since the TFA focuse d on 
simplification, standardization, modernization and harmonization of import /export pr ocedure s and 
expedite d the movement, release and clearance of goods including goods in transit, its effective 
implementation benefit ed consumers, traders, entrepreneurs and governments. Moreover, the TFA 
was significant to land locked developing countries,  as article 11 provide d facilitating procedures , 
including rationalization of fees and formalities during transit. Likewise, the TFA implementation was 
critical for regional integration.  
2.79.   Regarding implementation, LDC Members were at  diverse stages. Althoug h TFA 
implementation was important for LDC Members, they ha d to focus on other priority areas such as, 
poverty reduction, physical infrastructure development, invest in health and education, among 
others. It was highly significant to provide support by the  developed Members and other 
development partners as aimed in the TF agreement. Without external support, it was very difficult 
for LDC Members to implement the category C commitments.  The representative thank ed developed 
Members who notified under the Art icle 22 of the Agreement and encourage d them to provide 
dedicated support at an enhanced level to implement the category C notifications of the LDC 
Members.  
2.80.   Accordingly, ensuring ownership, harmonization, mutual accountability, predictability and 
transparency in mobilizing the external assistance was highly important to have the impact on the 
ground. It was imperative that the support should not be confined to  address the border level issue, 
as it should equally focus on behind the border issues. Likewise, the balance between hardware and 
software was equally important.  
2.81.   On behalf of the LDCs, the representative thank ed developed Members and development 
partners  for the support provided so far and encourage d them to provide additional support in line 
with TFA to address the need and priority of the LDC Members.  Particularly, she appreciated the help 
provided by Australia, Australia, China, EU, Finland, France, Ne w Zealand, Norway and the United 
Kingdom.  
2.82.   The Committee  took note of the statements made.  
VI. OTHER BUSINESS  
2.83.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to the subject of the next Committee meeting. 
He recalled that Members had already agreed in February  to hold the subsequent session of the 
TFC in October  and had agreed to schedule the annual dedicated session on technical assistance 
and support for capacity building back -to-back with the regular Committee session, as had been 
done in 2018. With this in mind, he proposed to schedule the regular  on 15 October and hold the 
dedicated sessio n on technical assistance on 16 October. Given that the Committee would benefit 
from the presence of additional experts from capital, the Secretariat had further secured a 
reservation for 14 October which could be used for side events . Details on those eve nts would be 
communicated in due course. He also asked Members if it was agreeable to them to invite 
representatives of the Annex D organizations to participate in the next Committee session , together 
with a representative from the Global Alliance . 
2.84.   It was so agreed . 
2.85.   The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
2.86.   The meeting was  adjourned . 
 
__________