RESTRICTED  
  
TCA/M/38  
 
7 December 2021  
(21-9192) Page: 1/3 
Committee on Trade in Civil Aircraft    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING  
HELD ON 5 NOVEMBER 2021  
CHAIRPERSON: MS. DAMARIS CARNAL (SWITZERLAND)  
1. At the outset of the meeting, the Chair  explained that the meeting was held both in -person 
as well as remotely.  
 
2. No request was made by Signatories for any item to be taken up under "Other business", and 
so the Committee adopted the agenda contained in document WTO/AIR/TCA/8.  
 
1  TRANSPOSITION EXE RCISE OF THE PRODUCT COVERAGE ANNEX  
3. The Chair  recalled that she held two informal meetings regarding this subject of transposition 
exercise of the Product Coverage Annex of the Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft ("Product 
Annex"): on 26 July and on 27 Se ptember of this year. She further recalled that this transposition 
exercise had been suggested by some Participants at previous regular meetings. She explained that 
the points that emerged from the discussions in the two informal meetings were: (i) Partici pants see 
value in undertaking a transposition exercise in this Committee, although up to now, there have 
been few Participants that submitted letters of acceptance of past Protocols that transposed the 
Product Annex, and (ii) that Participants are interes ted in pursuing discussions on how to strengthen 
transparency and a possible complementary means to achieve that end. In this context, she asked 
Participants whether they could agree to initiate a transposition exercise of the Product Annex to 
reflect the changes introduced in HS2012, HS2017 and HS2022. Unless Participants state otherwise, 
her understanding was that the end result of that exercise was to produce a Protocol, as the 
Committee did in 2001 and 2015.  
 
4. The United States  strongly endorsed initiati ng the transposition exercise. It believed there was 
significant value in undertaking the work to transpose the Product Annex into more recent 
Harmonized System (HS) nomenclatures and welcomed signals of support for this endeavor from 
other Participants. T he United States clarified that it supports transposing the Product Annex into 
HS2012, HS2017, and HS2022 nomenclature.  
 
5. Switzerland  supported the initiation of the transposition exercise of the Product Annex to 
reflect the changes introduced in HS2012, HS2017 and HS2022. Switzerland observed that for 
HS2012 and HS2017, only few changes were relevant to the Product Annex. Thus, the tra nsposition 
would not create a lot of work. For HS2012, two new subheadings were created, and one subheading 
merged. For HS2017, three subheadings were renumbered.  
 
6. The European Union  saw benefit in undertaking the work to transpose the Product Annex, 
since keeping this Annex up to date in terms of nomenclature ensured transparency. In its view, the 
most efficiency approach would be to carry out a neutral transposition to HS2012, H2017 and 
HS2022 in one single exercise. The European Union hoped that this mig ht enable a simplified 
approach for dealing with this technical update.  
 
7. Canada  supported the initiation of the transposition exercise of the Product Annex to reflect 
the changes introduced in HS2012 and HS2017. Canada was open to reflecting the changes 
introduced in HS2022.  
 TCA/M/38  
 
- 2 - 
 
8. Chinese Taipei  supported the initiation of the transposition exercise of the Product Annex to 
reflect the changes introduced in the latest HS. Chinese Taipei found it useful if the transposition 
exercise also reflected the changes intr oduced in HS2022, but it was open to this issue.  
 
9. Japan  believed that the process of conducting the HS conversion work on the Annex had value 
from the perspective of transparency. Therefore, Japan could support undertaking such work, 
provided that it did n ot presuppose the acceptance of the revised Protocol. On that basis, Japan was 
ready to agree to begin work on the conversion to HS2012, HS2017 and HS2022.  
 
10. The Chair  stated that she heard no opposition, and so she proposed that the Committee decide 
to initiate such a transposition exercise: that is, the transposition exercise of the Product Annex to 
reflect the changes introduced in HS2012, HS2017 and HS2022 with the aim to produce a Protocol, 
as the Committee did in 2001 and 2015.  
 
11. The Committee so decide d. 
 
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT - TRANSPARENCY AND POSSIBLE 
COMPLEMENTARY MEANS  
12. The Chair recalled that she had been reporting at every recent regular meeting that there 
were very few Participants that have submitted an instrument of acceptance of the 2015 Protocol. 
The situation was basically the same for the 2001 Protocol. In order to have a better understanding 
of the situation, she organized two informal meetings. The objectives were twofold. First, to hear 
the Participants' view on the usefulness o f embarking on another transposition exercise. Second, to 
discuss the idea of undertaking a transparency exercise in order to, for example, facilitate 
understanding of how Participants are reflecting the commitments provided in the Agreement on 
Trade in Ci vil Aircraft ("Agreement"), even absent the submission of a letter of acceptance. The Chair 
explained that this agenda item dealt with the latter issue of increasing transparency. At the two 
informal meetings, several interesting comments were made. For ex ample, several Participants 
indicated that even though they did not undertake the domestic procedure to ratify the Protocols, 
they still used them as a basis to modify their schedules accordingly. Some Participants also 
mentioned that the procedures used i n other Committees such as the ITA Committee (Committee 
of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products) or the Committee on 
Market Access could offer some ideas on how to improve transparency and how to devise possible 
complem entary means to the Protocol. The Chair understood that the Participants were interested 
in pursuing discussions on: (i) how to strengthen transparency and/or (ii) a possible complementary 
means to be devised through the Committee in light of the fact that  few Participants have submitted 
letters of acceptance.  
 
13. Canada  stated that it was open to such discussion. It explained that the reason why Canada 
did not find it necessary to accept the Protocols was because Canada would eventually incorporate 
the releva nt commitments into its tariff schedules.  
 
14.  The United States  stated that it supports a complementary approach to the Protocol. Such 
complementary approach could include taking a formal Committee decision on an updated product 
list. This would allow Participants to show support and consensus for the Agreement’s prod uct 
coverage in a more current nomenclature, and would provide needed clarity to the traders. The 
United States also welcomed an informal transparency exercise that helps Participants better 
understand how the commitments stipulated in the Agreement are re flected in their bound rate, per 
paragraph 2.1.3 of the Agreement, and how they applied schedules including any end -use systems, 
per paragraph 2.2 of the Agreement. The United States looked forward to engaging with other 
Participants on the format of a pot ential transparency exercise.  
 
15. Switzerland  agreed that increased transparency would benefit all Participants. Switzerland has 
not submitting an instrument of acceptance for the past Protocols. However, Switzerland has always 
transposed the HS changes when Switzerland updated its goods schedule. Sw itzerland suggested 
that when Participants have implemented the transposition, they could send a communication to the 
Committee indicating that the transposition has taken place.  
 
16. The European Union  considered a transparency exercise necessary, since it w as important 
that all Participants have the same understanding of the coverage in terms of HS codes and, when TCA/M/38  
 
- 3 - 
 
necessary, ex -outs. These were the most important issues in terms of legal certainty. Transparency 
was essential to ensure that the scope of the A greement would not change.  
 
17. The Chair thanked the Participants for the useful discussion and stated that the Chair would 
continue consultations on possible concrete ideas and on the way forward.  
 
18. The Committee took note  of the statements.  
 
3  ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON  
19. The Chair recalled that she informed Participants in her e -mail of 25 October that she would 
leave her current position towards the end of the year 2021. She explained that she was hoping to 
select the new chair at the end of the present meetin g, but in the extremely busy period, she did 
not have sufficient time to consult with Participants. She informed the Participants that she would 
continue the consultations with Participants to ensure that a new chair would be elected in a timely 
manner. In  the next weeks, when she believed that she found a candidate on whom Participants 
could agree, she would send a communication asking Participants for their views. She intended to 
proceed with the election via a paper process. That is, if no Participant ob jected by a certain date, 
the candidate would be deemed to be elected by the Committee. The Chair asked whether any 
Participant had views on this issue.  
 
20. No Participant asked for the floor.  
 
21. The Committee took note  of the Chair's statement1. 
 
4  DATE OF NEXT  REGULAR MEETING  
22. The Committee agreed  to hold its next regular meeting in the end of October or early 
November 2022, with the exact date to be confirmed in due course.  
5  ADOPTION OF THE ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2021  
23. The Chair suggested that with the help of the Secretariat, she would complete the draft of the 
annual report2 and send the updated final draft to all the Participants. She would leave 24 hours for 
Participants to make comments, and if no objection was received, th e final draft will be taken as 
final and circulated3. 
 
24. The meeting was adjourned . 
__________  
 
1 Ms Carnal sent a communication to all the Participants on 17 November 2021 suggesting 
Mr Jean-Marie Meraldi as a candidate for the Chair. There being no objection, Mr Jean -Marie Meraldi was 
elected as the new Chair as of 26 November 2021.  
2 Room Document RD/TCA/13.  
3 The final report, adopted on 9 November 2021, was circulated as WT/L/1120 -TCA/18.