RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/74  
 
14 December  2021 
(21-9319) Page: 1/14 
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 17 SEPTEMBER  2021  
CHAIRPERSON: MS  KATARZYNA STECZ  
The Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products held 
its 74th formal meeting on 17  September  2021. The airgram of the meeting was circulated in 
document  WTO/AIR/IT/13, and an annotated agenda for the meeting was circulated in 
document  JOB/IT/ 29. 
 
1   REVIEW OF STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON 
TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS: DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE  
LAST COMMITTEE MEETING (G/IT/1/REV.58)  ................................ ................................  2 
1.1   Morocco's ITA  Schedule  ................................ ................................ ...............................  2 
1.2   United Kingdom's Participation in the ITA (G/IT/W/52)  ................................ ....................  2 
1.3   Pending ITA  Participation  ................................ ................................ .............................  4 
2   TRADE CONCERNS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS  ................................ ...........................  4 
2.1   Request by the European Union, Japan, and the United States Regarding an  
Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  ................................ ................................ .........  4 
3   REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE  ................................ ................................ ...............  5 
4   NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  ................................ .............................  5 
5   EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA  PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.28)  ..........  6 
6   DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12, G/IT/29, G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -G/IT/W/40/ADD.21,  
G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4, AND JOB/IT/25)  ................................ ................................ .........  7 
6.1   Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of 18  "Attachment  B" Products 
(G/IT/27)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  7 
6.2   Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of 15  Additional  
"Attachment  B" Products (G/IT/29)  ................................ ................................ ......................  7 
6.3   Possible HS  Classification for the Remaining "Attachment  B" Items: Note by the  
Secretariat (G/IT/W/40 and its Supplements and Addenda) ................................ .....................  7 
7   NEW PARTICIPANTS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 8 
7.1   Lao PDR's Participation to the ITA  ................................ ................................ .................  8 
8   FEEDBACK ON THE ITA  SYMPOSIUM: 25  YEARS OF THE INFORMATI ON  
TECHNOLOGY AGREEMENT  ................................ ................................ ............................  10 
9   DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT (2021) OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR  
TRADE IN GOODS (G/IT/W/53)  ................................ ................................ ...................  14 
10   DATE OF NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING  ................................ ................................ ..... 14 
 G/IT/M/74  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1  REVIEW OF STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON 
TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS: DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE LAST 
COMMITTEE MEETING (G/IT/1/REV.58)  
1.1.  The Chairperson , following the Committee's practice, gave an overview of the Status  of 
Implementation and report ed on any update or new developments since the Committee 's previous  
meeting.  
1.1  Morocco's ITA  Schedule  
1.2.  The Chairperson  first flagged an outstanding issue concerning Morocco and its pending  
submission under the 1980  Procedures for the rectification and modification of schedules . She noted 
that this issue was not new to the Committee, and that, at its meeting held on 15  April, the 
Committee had agreed to revert to it . 
1.3.  The Chairperson recalled that Morocco had become  a participant to the ITA on 
14 November  2003. However, Morocco ha d not yet submitted its final ITA  Schedule of commitments. 
Despite the outreach to Morocco on several occasions by her predecessors, including 
communications in 2011, and 2014, as well as a letter sent to the  Minister of Economy and Finance 
of Morocco in 2017, no formal response had yet been received from Morocco.  
1.4.  The Chairperson  urged Morocco to submit its ITA  Schedule of commitments for formal 
rectification and modification , as required by the 1980  Decision , as soon as possible . 
1.5.  The Committee took note  of the Chairperson's statement and agreed  to discuss this issue again 
at the Committee's next meeting.  
1.2  United Kingdom's Participation in the ITA (G/IT/W/52)  
1.6.  The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to document  G/IT/W/52, which had been  
circulated on 4  January  2021 at the request of the delegation of the United Kingdom.  She recalled 
that, at the Committee's previous meeting , on 15  April, the delegate of the United Kingdom had 
introduced the document, and a number of delegations had commented on the subject.  Her 
predecessor had asked the United Kingdom and interested delegations to hold bilateral discussions 
on the issue, and the Committee had agreed to revert to this agenda item. 
1.7.  The Chairperson also noted that document  G/IT/1 and its past revisions had been prepared by 
the Secretariat to update the "Status of Implementation" of the 1996  ITA Agreement. The most 
recent version of this document, document  G/IT/1/Rev.58 , had been  circulated on 10  October  2018. 
Therefore, the  document needed to be further updated  to take into account the United Kingdom 's 
withdrawal from the European Union, and its continued participation in its own right.  
1.8.  She invited the delegations concerned to update the Committee on any progress  made  in their 
bilateral discussions on this issue.  
1.9.  The delegate of the  United Kingdom  indicated that, a s set out during the Committee 's previous  
meeting, and as detailed in document  G/IT/W/52, the UK had replicated all ITA and ITA  Expansion 
Tariff liberalization commitments in the UK  Goods Schedule, Schedule  XIX, which could be found in 
document  G/MA/TAR/RS/570, as preparation for its departure from the European U nion. The United 
Kingdom continue d to abide by these commitments.  
1.10.   As a participant to the ITA, the United Kingdom recognize d the importance of transparency in 
ensuring that all ITA  Participants properly implement ed their commitments under the Agreements, 
as well as providing certainty and clarity for traders.  
1.11.   To this end, in July  2021, the United Kingdom had shared with interested Members its 
Attachment  B product codes , following technical queries that had been raised in the Committee 's 
April meeting.  The U nited Kingdom's intention was to circulate these formally  in a future addendum 
to the UK  Goods Schedule.  G/IT/M/74  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.12.   The United Kingdom welcome d further discussions with any interested Members that sought  
further clarifications on its Attachment  B codes or had any oth er additional technical questions.  
1.13.   In the meantime, the United Kingdom look ed forward to the timely update of document  G/IT/1 
to reflect its departure from the European Union.  
1.14.   The delegate of China  stated that, as it had clearly indicated at the Committee 's previous  
meeting , held on 15  April, it noted and appreciate d the United Kingdom's confirmation that it would  
continue to implement all trade liberalization commitments under the ITA and ITA  Expansion after 
its exit from the European Union.  
1.15.   The ITA and ITA Expansion Agreement s had clearly  established document requirements and 
procedures. Every ITA  participant ha d provided its own ITA  Schedule, unfortunately with 
one exception, Morocco, which had become a participant with an ITA Schedule  that was pending . 
1.16.   The document to which the United Kingdom  referred , document  G/IT/W/52 , was not the 
United Kingdom's ITA Schedule. Thus far, Participants had not yet seen the United Kingdom's 
complete ITA  Schedule. Similarly, China was not sure whether the United Kingdom had submitted 
its complete ITA  Schedule to the Secretariat, but if it ha d done so , China requested  the Secretariat 
to circulate the documents in question as soon as possible.  
1.17.   He noted that i t was not China 's intention to renegotiate with the United Kingdom  regarding 
its commitments under the ITA and the ITA Expansion. China did not question the United Kingdom's 
participation to the ITA and the ITA Expansion. China's request was very clear, namely that the 
United Kingdom provide its own ITA  Schedule, including Attachment  A, Attachment  B, staging 
matrix, and other standard elements , in a standard format , to ensure that transparent, complete , 
and equal procedures were followed faithfully by all ITA  participants.  
1.18.   It was the right of each ITA  participant t o verify the UK 's ITA  Schedule to ensure the 
consistency and accuracy of its commitments under the ITA and the ITA  Expansion. By doing so, 
participants  could  reduce the future risk of potential disputes to a minimum. Unfortunately, 
participants  had witness ed a number of trade cases among them due to a lack of clarity in a 
participant's commitments or else different interpretations of what a participant had included in its 
Schedule.  
1.19.   China thank ed the United Kingdom for sending it the Attachment  B files with specific HS  codes 
bilaterally , and look ed forward to receiving the United Kingdom's complete ITA  Schedule. China was 
not against updating document  G/IT/1, but before the necessary procedure was completed, China 
request ed that additio nal information be added to the file, indicating that the United Kingdom  had 
not submitted its complete ITA  Schedule, which it had been requested to submit, including 
Attachment  A, Attachment  B, staging matrix, and other standard elements , in standard form at, as 
soon as possible, for participants ' verification.  
1.20.   Finally, China  would continue to engage with the United Kingdom on this issue and hope d to 
work together  with the UK  to complete the process , and remove the item from the Committee's 
agenda , as soon as possible . The United Kingdom had been a strong advocate for the multilateral 
trading system, and China  believe d that the United Kingdom would  lead by example in this important 
procedural issue.  
1.21.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated that, w hilst a member of the European Union, 
it had been covered by the ITA participation of the EU, and the European Union , including the UK, 
had submitted a document containing a list of detailed HS  headings involved for products specified 
in Attachment  A and A ttachment  B. These commitments were reflected in the schedules.  The United 
Kingdom had replicated all ITA and ITA  Expansion tariff liberalization commitments in Schedule  XIX, 
as preparation for its departure from the European Union. The United Kingdom would continue to 
engage bilaterally with Members in this regard . 
1.22.   The Chairperson  thanked the United Kingdom for its clarification s and additional information.  
Based on the discussion, she noted that there remained some outstanding questions from 
ITA participa nts, including the question on the need for a separate UK  ITA Schedule . For this reason, 
she asked the UK to hold further bilateral consultations and discussions with the interested parties. G/IT/M/74  
 
- 4 - 
 
  She also indicated that she remained available to assist in these  consultations and discussions , as 
appropriate.  She proposed that the Committee take note of the statements made and revert to this 
issue at its next regular formal meeting.  
1.23.   The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this issue at its 
next regular formal meeting.  
1.3  Pending ITA  Participation  
1.24.   The Chairperson  recalled that, since the Committee 's previous  meeting, the Government of 
Lao People's Democratic Republic had officially requested to join the ITA and ITA  Expansion 
Agreeme nts. The Committee would deliberate on this issue under agenda item  7. 
1.25.   She also  recall ed that , at that same Committee meeting, the then Chairperson had also drawn 
the Committee's attention to three  pending ITA  participation cases, namely those of the Repub lic of 
Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. All three  draft ITA  Schedules had been 
electronically verified by the Secretariat and distributed to all ITA  Participants for their consideration 
and approval. They had also been reviewed at previous meetings, in 2014 and 2019, respectively , 
although their final participation to the ITA was linked to their accession process to the WTO. For 
transparency, she wished  to inform the Committee that there had been no further update in the 
intervening period . 
1.26.   The Committee took note of the statement made.  
2  TRADE CONCERNS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS  
2.1  Request by the European Union, Japan, and the United States Regarding an 
Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  
2.1.  The Chairperson  indicated that this issue had been included in the agenda at the request of the 
European Union, Japan, and United States.  
2.2.  The delegate of the United States  indicated that the US continue d to be disappointed that 
Indonesia had not responded to, or addresse d, its concerns with respect to applying tariffs at the 
border on a category of ICT  products that had appear ed to exceed its WTO  bound tariff 
commitments.  
2.3.  The United States ha d been raising this issue repeatedly with Indonesia for almost two  years, 
along with other Members, including in the Council for Trade in Goods , the Market Access Committee, 
the ITA Committee, and bilaterally.  
2.4.  The United States ha d been patient and construc tive; on multiple occasions , it had provided  
concrete examples that clearly illustrate d US concerns , as well as preparing several specific 
questions that had been  circulated to this Committee in document  G/IT/Q/1 , dated  14 April 2021. 
Unfortunately, Indone sia ha d yet to provide a substantive response to those repeated attempts at 
engagement.  
2.5.  In addition, the costs of Indonesia's policies in this space were not insignificant , practically 
speaking. Indonesia's tariffs had not only impose d an unfair financial burden on foreign firms, but 
they had also limit ed access for Indonesian consumers and firms to important high -tech products. 
US traders had also been actively noting the d isincentives to investment in Indonesia that result ed 
from these tariffs.  
2.6.  Participants  had heard from stakeholders yesterday , during the ITA  Symposium,  about the 
importance of addressing implementation issues for the integrity of the Agreement going forwar d. 
This Committee provide d the forum to do so; however, it also require d the cooperation of each 
participant to be proactive in not only identifying, but also addressing , the concerns that were raised.  
2.7.  The delegate of the European Union  indicated that, d espite EU requests and calls for aligning 
the tariff treatment of certain ICT  products classified under subheading  8517.62 with Indonesia's G/IT/M/74  
 
- 5 - 
 
  WTO commitments, it appear ed that Indonesia continue d to charge a significant tariff (10%) on 
products classified unde r tariff line  8517.62.49.  
2.8.  In this particular category of products (tariff item  8517.62.49), the EU ha d recorded a 
significant drop in exports to Indonesia. The EU ha d observed a 60% drop in value of EU  exports in 
2020 compared to 2019, and a 21% drop in 20 20 compared to 2018.  
2.9.  As the EU ha d raised this issue on several occasions in various WTO  Council s and Committees, 
the EU  would welcome receiving a substantive reply from Indonesia.  
2.10.   The EU  reiterate d its calls for Indonesia to bring the tariffs in tariff su bheading  8517.62 down 
to zero. The EU  sought  further clarification from Indonesia as to why it continue d to apply tariffs 
that were not in line with its WTO bound commitments.  
2.11.   The delegate of Japan  reiterate d Japan's concern over the issue of Indonesia's continued 
application of tariffs of 10% on certain ICT  products that f ell under HS  8517.62, on which zero -tariff 
commitments had been  made. Indonesia had explained at the Market Access Committee , in 
June 2020, that this had been  a result of the integration of a number of items by HS  conversion. 
Indonesia had also mentioned , at both the Market Access Committee in October  2020, and the 
ITA Committee in April  2021, that it did not intend to violate its obligations.  However, Japan's  
concern was not yet resolved. In order to examine the facts further, Japan  request ed Indonesia to 
provide it with more detailed information , and to explain to Japan its plan to address this issue.  
2.12.   In the absence of Indonesia, the Chairperson  observed  that th e United States, the European 
Union, and Japan, had all requested Indonesia to clarify this issue; for this reason, she urged 
Indonesia to respond to these queries in bilatera l consultations with the participants concerned . 
2.13.   The Committee took note of the s tatements made.  
3  REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE  
3.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, s ince the Committee's meeting of 15  May 2012, and as 
requested by some delegations, the "review of product coverage" had been included as a regular 
item on the Committee's agenda . This agenda item provide d an opportunity for the Committee to 
receive reports and updates from those participants th at were engaged in bilateral and plurilateral 
consultations relating to the review of product coverage pursuant to paragraph  3 of the Annex to 
the ITA.  
3.2.  The delegate  of Canada , in his capacity as Chairperson of the Participants to the 
2015 ITA Expansion Agr eement, reported on the work of the participants to the ITA  Expansion 
Agreement.  He informed the Committee  that almost  all participants to that Agreement had  
implemented, on an MFN  basis, their tariff reduction s and elimination  commitments under their 
national ITA  Expansion schedules.  He reiterated that  the ITA  Expansion Agreement was open to all 
WTO Members, and that all WTO  Members were strongly encouraged to consider  participation in this 
initiative , the importance of which had been underscored by a numb er of the speakers at that week's 
ITA Symposium . In that regard, the Group of 2015 ITA Expansion participants  would continue to 
reach out to other Members and provide them with  information on the ITA  Expansion Agreement 
and its benefits.  
3.3.  The delegate of the United Kingdom  echoed Canada's comments in encourag ing other Members 
to engage and participate in the ITA Expansion Agreement . That week's ITA  Symposium had 
certainly  reflected the importance of new technology and its contribution  to greater international 
trade.  
3.4.  The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter, as 
appropriate, at the ITA  Committee's next meeting.  
4  NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  
4.1.  The Chairperson  referred to paragraph  3 of the Annex to t he 1996  Ministerial Declaration , 
which  require d that "Participants […] meet periodically … to consult on non -tariff barriers to trade in G/IT/M/74  
 
- 6 - 
 
  information technology products."  She reiterated that the Committee had attached great importance 
to Non -Tariff Barrier s (NTBs) and that, since 2000, NTBs had become an essential part of the regular 
work of the Committee.  
4.2.  On 7 May 2015, an industry -driven workshop dedicated to NTBs affecting trade in ICT  products 
had been  organized. The main issues that had been raised at that workshop by industry 
representatives were: (i)  transparency; (ii)  standards for recognition of test results; (iii)  e-labelling; 
and (iv)  energy efficiency. A factual report by the Chair person  had bee n circulated in 
document  G/IT/28. At subsequent meetings of the Committee, the Chairperson  had been tasked to 
continue consultations on the follow -up to the ITA  NTB Workshop. She recalled that NTBs had also 
been extensively discussed during that week's 25th Anniversary ITA  Symposium.  
4.3.  She recalled that, a t the Committee 's previous meeting , Switzerland, as coordinator of the 
informal consultations on NTBs among a small group of participants , consisting of 15  Members, had 
reported to the Committee on the work that the group had carried out.  She invited the delegation 
of Switzerland to update Participants  on any developments since the Committee 's previous  meeting.  
4.4.  The delegate of Switzerland  indicated that, s ince the Committee's previous meeting, in 
April 2020, it had nothing new to report regarding NTB issues. However, Switzerland remain ed open 
for discussions with interested participants should they wish to re -start those discussions.  
4.5.  The delegate of the European Union  stated that t he ITA and ITA Expansion had brought 
considerable benefits in eliminating tariffs. It was crucial that this was followed  up with progress to 
remove non -tariff barriers with a view to further facilitating trade in IT  products.  The EU remain ed 
committed to that objective , even if it was aware of the challenges involved in moving towards 
commitment s in regulatory areas under the umbrella of the ITA.  
4.6.  The EU stood ready to play its part in the context of the small group discussions when those  
resume d. Indeed, the EU was convinced that makin g progress in the work on non -tariff measures 
could bring tangible benefits to companies.  Therefore, the EU looked forward to any further work 
that might be carried out in this area.  
4.7.  The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated that the UK was  supportive of multilateral efforts 
to address non -tariff barriers and look ed forward to engaging with Switzerland and others within the 
auspices of the informal group on those  issues.  
4.8.  The United Kingdom was keen to explore how this forum could  offer further clarity to traders 
and work towards removing NTBs. This was important for advancing ICT  trade, as Participants ha d 
also learned from the recent Symposium, and so the UK  looked forward to engaging on this front as 
well. 
4.9.  The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter, as 
appropriate, at the Committee's next meeting.  
5  EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA  PART ICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.28)  
5.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that one of the outcomes of the NTM  Work Programme had been  the 
completion of a pilot project that had led to the adoption of the "Guidelines for Electromagnetic 
Compatibility (EMC) and Electromagnetic I nterference (EMI) Conformity Assessment Procedures". 
Upon adoption of these "Guidelines", the Secretariat had prepared a note on the "Draft List of Types 
of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used by ITA  Participants", as contained in 
document  G/IT/W/17 and its revisions. The note contain ed the responses to the survey and other 
notifications received from Participants on the type of assessment procedures for EMC  and EMI that 
they use d. ITA Participants had indicated on several occasions that they had found the information 
contained in this document very useful and wished to have it completed.  She also recalled that, at 
the request of several p articipants, the Secretariat had made a presentation on the background to 
the survey at the Committee's mee ting on 30  October  2020. 
5.2.  The latest update of the Secretariat's note had been circulated on 26 April 2021, as 
document  G/IT/W/17/Rev.2 8, which included the new submission from the United Kingdom . This G/IT/M/74  
 
- 7 - 
 
  updated Secretariat note showed that there were still 10  participants that had not yet provided any 
information on their conformity assessment procedures , namely Afghanistan; Iceland; Israel; the 
State of Kuwait; the Kyrgyz Republic; Morocco; Nicaragua; Tajikistan; the United Arab Emirates; 
and Viet Nam . The Chairperson encouraged these 10  delegations to provide their information to the 
Secretariat as soon as possible so as to enable the Committee to complete this work.  
5.3.  In addition, as the Committee was drawing nearer to finalizing this pilot project, th e 
Chairperson asked Participants to reflect upon how to maximize the usefulness of the information 
on the EMC/EMI  conformity assessment procedures that ha d been provided. Participants were 
invited to share their insights in this regard with the Chairperson , and with the Secretariat, at any 
time, or with the full Committee.  
5.4.  The Committee took note of the statement made.  
6  DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12, G /IT/29, G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -G/IT/W/40/ADD.21, G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4, 
AND JOB/IT/25)  
6.1  Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of 18 "Attachment  B" Products 
(G/IT/27)  
6.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 20 July 2013, the Committee had adopted a Decision f or the 
HS 1996 classification of 18  Attachment  B items, which had been circulated in document  G/IT/27. 
As required by that Decision, each participant must reflect the agreed classifications in its 
WTO Schedule of concessions, as appropriate, following the 1980 Decision on the Procedures for 
Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25).  
6.2.  So far, the Secretariat had been approached by five  ITA participants, namely: Guatemala; the 
Philippines; Japan; El Salvador; and Macao, Ch ina, to assist them with the modification of their 
schedules. In this regard, the Secretariat had completed its work on the requests of the delegations 
of Macao, China and the Philippines.  
6.3.  Since the Committee's previous meeting, no additional participant h ad approached the 
Secretariat for technical assistance with the modification of their schedules. She reminded the 
Committee that the technical work involved in this exercise was time -consuming and thus could only 
be undertaken on a gradual basis. Therefore , she encouraged developing -country participants to 
contact the Secretariat if they required technical assistance in this area.  
6.4.  The Committee took note of the statement made.  
6.2  Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of 15 Additional 
"Attachment  B" Products (G/ IT/29)  
6.5.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 18  April 2016, the Committee had adopted the "Decision for 
HS2007  Classification of 15  Additional 'Attachment  B' Products", which had been circulated in 
document  G/IT/29. Mos t of the items covered by this Decision related to HS2007  heading  8486 
(Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor boules or wafers) and one  item 
related to heading  8471 (automatic data processing machines and units thereof).  
6.6.  Regarding the  implementation of this 2016  Decision, only one  participant (Macao, China) had 
asked for the Secretariat's support to conduct a review of its Schedule. No new Member had 
approached the Secretariat for assistance since the Committee's previous meeting.  
6.3  Poss ible HS Classification for the Remaining "Attachment  B" Items: Note by the 
Secretariat (G/ IT/W/40 and its Supplements and Addenda)  
6.7.  The Chairperson  indicated that the Note by the Secretariat on "Divergence of Classification: 
Possible HS2007  Classification f or the Remaining 37  'Attachment  B' Items" had been originally 
circulated as document  G/IT/W/40, based on the Swiss proposal for a three -step procedure 
(document  JOB/IT/12).  G/IT/M/74  
 
- 8 - 
 
  6.8.  She recalled that, at the Committee's meeting of 31  October  2014, it had been agree d that: 
"Participants are expected to submit a communication to the Secretariat no later than 30  June 2015, 
indicating: (a)  the items that, in the participant's opinion, should be classified differently from the 
HS2007  codes listed in column  8 of the Annex  to this document; and (b)  the HS2007  subheading(s) 
that, in the participant's opinion, are relevant for the classification of the item in question." It was 
also agreed that "The Secretariat will compile communications received in a separate document. On 
that basis, participants would then be expected to assess the next steps that could be taken to 
reduce any remaining divergence in classification."  
6.9.  She reported that, so far, the Secretariat had received comments from 21  participants. These 
had been circula ted as addenda to document  G/IT/W/40. Comments had been received from the 
following participants: Norway (G/IT/W/40/Add.1); Chinese Taipei (G/IT/W/40/Add.2); Switzerland 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.3); the European Union (G/IT/W/40/Add.4); Hong Kong, China 
(G/IT/W/40/A dd.5); China (G/IT/W/40/Add.6); Japan (G/IT/W/40/Add.7); Canada 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.8); the United States (G/IT/W/40/Add.9); India (G/IT/W/40/Add.10); Macao, 
China (G/IT/W/40/Add.11); El Salvador (G/IT/W/40/Add.12); the Republic of Korea 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.13); Pan ama (G/IT/W/40/Add.14); Thailand (G/IT/W/40/Add.15); Guatemala 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.16); Mauritius (G/IT/W/40/Add.17); Montenegro (G/IT/W/40/Add.18); the Russian 
Federation (G/IT/W/40/Add.19); Seychelles (G/IT/W/40/Add.20); and New Zealand 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.21).  
6.10.   All these comments had been consolidated into document  G/IT/W/40/Suppl.4, which also 
took into account the 2016  Decision on the classification of the additional 15  items. Therefore, there 
remained 22  Attachment  B items for which Participants should provide t heir comments in order to 
arrive at a common HS  classification.  
6.11.   In this regard, the Chairperson  invited delegations that had not yet provided their comments 
on the possible HS2007  classification of these remaining 22  items to do so as soon as possible in 
order to arrive at a common classification for these products within existing HS  nomenclature and 
thereby also to fulfil the mandate of paragraph  5 of the Annex to the Ministerial Declaration on Trade 
in Information Technology Products.  
6.12.   The delegate of India wished  to place on record that, with respect to documents  G/IT/W/40 
and G/IT/W/40/Suppl.4, the matter was under discussion in Capital.  
6.13.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to discuss the matter, as 
appropriate, at the ITA  Committee's  next meeting.  
7  NEW PARTICIPANTS  
7.1  Lao PDR's  Participation to the ITA 
7.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 28  June 2021, the Mission of Lao  PDR had sent a Note 
Verbale  to the WTO, informing Members of its intention to join the ITA and ITA  Expansion 
Agreements. The electronic version of Lao PDR's  draft ITA and ITA  Expansion Schedules, as well as 
an Explanatory Note, had been submitted on the same day.  
7.2.  Upon receipt of Lao  PDR's draft ITA  Schedule, the Secretariat had followed established practice 
by carrying out a technical verification of the Schedule and preparing a verification sheet. The 
Secretariat's verification sheet, as well as Lao  PDR's draft ITA  Schedule, had bee n circulated to all 
ITA Participants on 13  July. 
7.3.  An informal ITA Committee meeting had been  held on 30  July to hear feedback from 
Participants on Lao  PDR's draft ITA  Schedule. At that meeting, the delegation of Lao PDR had 
introduced its ITA Schedule and p olicy considerations regarding its decision to join the ITA. Several  
participants had provided their preliminary comments and had expressed the ir intention to follow  up 
with the delegation of Lao PDR bilaterally regarding technical details.  
7.4.  For transparenc y, she wished to invite  the delegation of  Lao PDR, and those delegations that 
had consulted bilateral ly with Lao  PDR, to update the Committee on progress made and, if any, the 
time-frame that they had envisage d for concluding their bilateral negotiations.  G/IT/M/74  
 
- 9 - 
 
  7.5.  The delegate  of Lao People's Democratic Republic  indicated , first of all, that Lao PDR wishe d to 
thank all delegations, especially the WTO  Secretariat , for their encouraging remarks and support at 
the informal Committee meeting held on 30  July 2021. 
7.6.  Lao PDR appreciate d the support of ITA Participants in its effort to join the ITA and 
acknowledge d the great effort and commitment made by Lao  PDR to implement most of the 
commitments upon its participation . Lao PDR had especially appreciate d the understanding of 
Participants concerning its need , as an LDC, to safeguard government revenue from import tariff s, 
especially during this COVID -19 period.  
7.7.  Lao PDR ha d received and answered questions from the United States , Japan, and the 
European Union . The questions had concern ed the list of tariff lines proposed by Lao  PDR under the 
ITA, and Lao  PDR had consulted with the Secretariat in this regard , and the Secretariat had 
performed a technical verification , for wh ich Lao  PDR was highly appreciative.  Lao PDR's rationale 
for its choice of tariff lines for which it request ed a transition period of four  years, and why it chose 
to reduce those tariff lines only in the final year, was the only  flexibility that  it request ed. 
7.8.  Lao PDR request ed all Members that ha d questions to submit those questions as soon as 
possible , and/or to contact Lao PDR for bilateral meetings , in order for  Lao PDR to join the Agreement 
before MC12.  
7.9.  Through its ITA partic ipation, Lao  PDR wishe d to show the world that it was serious about 
opening its economy , and that it stood  ready to under take a commitment that was in line with its 
level of development and to make its trade policy more favourable with a view to implement ation of 
the ITA, and the development  of its ICT sector.  
7.10.   As Participants knew, joining the ITA  was not the only purpose ; it was also a matter of 
ensuring that Lao PDR's ICT sector was attractive and open to investment.  
7.11.   Lao PDR also believe d that it was of benefit to the WTO to demonstrate that LDCs were willing 
to be full participants in WTO  sectoral agreement s, in this case through  broaden ing ITA participation 
and strengthening the WTO's role as the central rule-making institution in that area of global trade . 
7.12.   The delegate of China  welcomed  and support ed Lao PDR's intention to join  the ITA and 
ITA Expansion. China thank ed Lao PDR for its great efforts in preparing and submitting its draft ITA 
and ITA  Expansion schedules for review.  
7.13.   As the fi rst LDC Member to participate in both the ITA and the ITA Expansion, Lao  PDR's 
participation was very encouraging, in particular in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic. It would  
not only create a better policy environment for attract ing foreign investment  in Lao  PDR, but also 
have a positive impact in encouraging more WTO  Members to participate in the ITA and the 
ITA Expansion.  
7.14.   As for Lao  PDR's draft schedules, China appreciate d Lao PDR's willingness to reduce related 
tariffs to zero, and fully understood  Lao PDR's special situation as an LDC. China could  accept 
Lao PDR's proposal on both the transition period regarding the 41  ITA and 48  ITA Expansion tariff 
lines, and the tariff reductio n methodology on a number of those tariff lines. China ha d no further 
questions concerning Lao PDR's draft schedules.  
7.15.   Finally, China  hoped that Lao PDR could  conclude its participation process as soon as possible  
so as to become the first  LDC WTO Member to  join both the ITA and the ITA Expansion.  
7.16.   The delegate of the United States  thank ed Lao PDR for its participation in the ITA  Symposium,  
and for its willingness to highlight the benefits that it saw, in joining the ITA  Agreements , for its 
economy, its consumers, its businesses , as well as its integration into global supply chains. As the 
first least developed country to actively pursue participation in both ITA  Agreements, Lao  PDR was 
a great example that the United States hoped other economies would  follow.  
7.17.   Having reviewed Lao  PDR's draft ITA and ITA  Expansion schedules, the United States had 
been impressed with the draft tariff commitments and the substantial immediate duty -free access.  
Indeed, the United States had engaged in constructive discussions with Lao PDR, including at a G/IT/M/74  
 
- 10 - 
 
  technical level , with respect to its questions concerning Lao  PDR's schedules, and Lao  PDR had been 
very responsive to US requests.  
7.18.   The United States  understood  that the next step would be for Lao  PDR to work with the 
Secretariat to consolidate the comments received on its draft Schedule , after which  a revised draft 
Schedule  would be circulated  for final review. The United States stood  ready to expedite its review 
of the revised schedules in the hope that t he Committee could  approve them in advance of MC12.  
7.19.   The delegate of Japan  welcome d Lao PDR's intention to participate , as the first  LDC Member 
to do so, in both the ITA and the ITA  Expansion. Japan also appreciate d its exchanges with Lao  PDR 
of written questions and answers ; these ha d provided sufficient clarity for Japan . Japan expect ed 
that Lao  PDR's  ITA participation by MC12 would  further accelerate its trade in ICT  products , and 
demonstrate the  benefits of the ITA for developing Members, incl uding LDCs.  
7.20.   The delegate of the European Union  welcomed  Lao PDR's  commitment to join the ITA and 
ITA Expansion Agreements. The EU was very appreciative and supportive of La o PDR's efforts to 
move this process forward. The EU  also very much welcome d the ins ights that Lao  PDR had shared , 
around its own experience , in the context of the ITA Symposium ; furthermore, the EU believe d that, 
coming from an LDC , these insights were of particular interest.  
7.21.   The European Union wished  to thank Lao  PDR for the bilateral exchanges that they  had 
engaged in since the Committee 's previous  meeting. The EU had received useful feedback and had 
taken due note of the answers that Lao  PDR had provided. In addition, the EU ha d taken into account 
the specific const raints faced by Lao PDR as an LDC. The EU did not have any additional comments 
at this stage ; nevertheless, it would continue to engage in bilateral exchanges with Lao  PDR to 
request for the clarification of certain data, although those requests would have no impact on the 
process  itself, which the  EU continue d to follow with interest . Indeed, the EU hoped that this process 
might be concluded successfully before MC12.  
7.22.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  was pleased to welcome Lao  PDR's actions and efforts to 
seek to become a new participant to the ITA , and the UK thank ed them for their helpful update.  The 
UK looked forward to engaging bilaterally with Lao  PDR, as others had mentioned, as the 
first LDC Member that would be an ITA  participant.  The UK also hoped that Lao  PDR's 
ITA participation would serve as an inspiration for other Members to join and expand the 
geographic al coverage of the ITA.  The UK believe d that the ITA could greatly support the 
development objectives of countries , including by further helping them to integrate into global value 
chains and such critical sectors as ICT.  To this end, the UK looked forward to engaging with Lao  PDR 
and other Members towards achieving this critical objective.  
7.23.   The delegate of Lao PDR greatly welcome d and appreciate d the support of ITA  Participants as 
it work ed towards ITA participation in advance of MC12 . To that end, Lao  PDR invite d 
ITA Participants to contact them directly with any question or matter requiring clarification. Finally, 
Lao PDR wishe d to inform ITA  Participants that it was now the place for investment in the IT sector.  
7.24.   The Chairperson  observed  that there appeared to be a good chance of officially approving 
Lao PDR's ITA  Schedule ahead of MC12. To this end, she  encourage d all the parties concerned to 
speed up their efforts , and to inform her, and the Secretariat , once their bilateral discussions had 
been concluded, at which point the Secretariat would circulate Lao  PDR's final ITA  Schedule for 
participants' final verificat ion. She indicated that it was also her intention to hold a special formal 
Committee meeting in either October  or November to approve Lao  PDR's ITA  Schedule. A convening 
notice would be circulated to all ITA Participants in due course , possibly at short no tice. 
7.25.   The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed  to the Chair person 's proposal.  
8  FEEDBACK ON THE ITA  SYMPOSIUM: 25  YEARS OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 
AGREEMENT  
8.1.  The Chairperson  noted that, as Participants were aware, the ITA Symposium had been  
successfully concluded earlier that day, and that,  over the previous one and a half days, over 
20 guest speakers had shared their views on five  themes, namely : (i) the evolution of global 
IT trade; (ii) the role ICT played in the global response to the COVID -19 pandemic; (iii) the latest G/IT/M/74  
 
- 11 - 
 
  technology developments in the ICT  sector; (iv) the role of ICT as an economic development tool; 
and (v) the future of the ITA.  
8.2.  Her own personal impression  was that all of the presentations had been informative and 
enlightening. Indeed, the ITA  Symposium had provided a good opportunity for the Committee to 
hear voices from business communities, academic researchers, and parliamentarians.  
8.3.  She opened the floor  to hear Participants' feedback on the ITA Symposium, and in particular 
where things had gone well, and where things could be further improved . 
8.4.  The delegat e of the United Kingdom  thank ed the Secretariat and the Chair person  for all the 
preparation that had gone into hosting and preparing the ITA  Symposium. The UK had been 
extremely interested in all  of the sessions , and had appreciated hearing about latest developments 
in the ICT  sector , and explor ing how ICT  as a developmen t tool could also bring societal and 
economic gains.  
8.5.  The United Kingdom had been  pleased to hear interventions from two  UK speakers, one from 
Blancco  Technology Group UK , a company involved in the circular economy, and the other from the 
Right Honourable Philip Dunne MP, on the green , ecological , and environmental aspects of the ITA ; 
however,  the UK felt that all of the presentations had woven together in a very coherent, rich, and 
insightful manner.  
8.6.  In sum , the United Kingdom consider ed that the ITA  Symposium ha d given ITA  Participants 
much to think about in terms of how to further strengthen the ITA and really acknowledge the 
importance of the ICT  sector for the global economy.  
8.7.  The delegat e of the European Union  welcomed the fact that it had been possible for the 
ITA Symposium to take place  at all. Of course, the current circumstances had not permitted the 
event to take place in person , although the EU considered that the alternative  arrangements made 
had also been very positive , particu larly in the sense that they had allowed for an enhanced 
participation , which was an element , in terms of the hybrid format, that the EU considered  could 
perhaps be maintained also in future symposia.  
8.8.  While noting that it was perhaps  too early to provide any meaningful feedback on the substance  
of the event , the EU clearly recognized that the ITA  Symposium had provided ITA Participants with 
a lot of food for thought.  In this regard, the EU looked forward to further discussions on the  event's  
key takeaways.  
8.9.  In conclusion, the European Union congratulate d the current and former ITA  Committee 
Chairpersons, and the ITA  Secretariat  team, for their roles in organizing what  had clearly been a 
very successful  ITA Symposium . 
8.10.   The delegat e of the United States  thanked the Chair person  and the Secretariat for a successful 
and productive workshop to mark the 25th Anniversary of a landmark agreement. The United States  
had appreciate d all of their hard work , and it really showed. The United States had been impressed  
by the wide range of expert presentations virtually connecting from around the globe. There had 
been a lot of interesting economic evidence presented , as well as interesting case studies and 
anecdotal evidence on the benefits of participation.  
8.11.   In addition  to Lao PDR's presentation of its pursuit of ITA  participation  and the benefits it saw 
for attracting investment into its economy and integration into global supply chains, the United 
States wished to highlight several key messages that it thought were of particular importan ce. 
8.12.   First, ITA  participation was a catalyst for growth and innovation across a range of sectors, 
from agriculture to health to services, as well as development of small/medium -sized domestic 
IT industries and exports and facilitating int egration into global value chains.  
8.13.   Second, the economic benefits of these agreements alone had showcase d its incredible 
impact , that is, tariff elimination of USD 2 trillion in annual benefits from ITA , and USD 1.3 trillion 
from ITA  Expansion . The United States had also noted estimates from one presenter that possible 
additional product coverage could potentially boost global  GDP by hundreds of billions of dollars.  G/IT/M/74  
 
- 12 - 
 
  8.14.   Third, ITA  participation was more than its impressive numbers, because it was als o about 
"democratizing technology ", to quote US' keynote speaker, Mr  Michael Punke. ITA  participation also 
support ed the UN  Sustainable Development Goals, and was a potentially important step towards 
bridging the digital divide, lowering costs, and providi ng access to the basic IT  infrastructure for 
further integration into the digital economy.  
8.15.   Fourth, particularly striking in the first  day of the ITA  Symposium , was how current ITA and 
ITA Expansion covered products , as well new technologies , from 3D  printe rs to civil drones , had 
been powering solutions in response to the global pandemic.  
8.16.   Fifth, and finally, the United States  had noted with interest the forecast that the next 
generation of ICT  investment would be focused on "physical industries ", such as man ufacturing, 
healthcare, and energy sectors , thus highlighting some of the key areas driving the economic 
recovery.  
8.17.   In conclusion, given the economic and social benefits that could  be accrued with 
ITA participation, as cited by many experts during the Sympo sium, the United States consider ed 
that it was important that the Participants in  the Committee continue d their collective efforts to 
ensure the durability of the existing agreements in order to build upon the success that 
ITA Participants had achieved in the past 25  years and also advance the Agreements for the next 
25 years.  
8.18.   The delegate of Switzerland  thanked the Secretariat and all the speakers for an excellent 
ITA Symposium.  The event  had covered a broad range of issues  and had been very enlightening.  
8.19.   ITA Participants had seen that growth in the IT sector over the last 25  years ha d been 
impressive.  As many speakers had underscored , the ITC  industry was  a global industry, 
characterized by very fast technological evolution, and the digitaliz ation of our lives would continue.  
Indeed, s ince the last such event, in 2015, numerous new products had been developed.  
8.20.   Switzerland had also heard the industry call for participation in the ITA to be expanded, and 
also for an ITA  III to be negotiated . ITA Participants would now need to see if they share d this 
interest.  
8.21.   Based on its initial reaction to the ITA  Symposium, Switzerland saw two  key challenges that 
needed to be addressed , as follow ed: (i) the digital divide  and, in particular , the gender divide. If 
ITA Participants wished to empower women economically , this element needed to be address ed 
through the implement ation of efficient policies. In addition , gender -disaggregated data was 
required on which ITA Participants could base their decisions ; and (ii)  climate change , in a context 
where the ICT  industry could contribute to the mitigation of climate change. At the same time , the 
expansion of smart electric vehicles, for example , would not, by itself,  be enough. ITA Participants 
also needed to address the environmental footprint of the whole ICT  value chain, from primary inputs 
through to the recycling of electronic waste through the design and manufacture of sustainable 
IT products.  
8.22.   In conclusion , when participants were ready to begin ITA III negotiations , they would  need to 
consider a comprehensive approach and not only focus on the elimination of tariffs if they were 
serious about bringing the benefits of this technology to all , while at the same time taking care of 
the environment.  
8.23.   The delegat e of Canada  joined others in thanking the Secretariat, and the ITA  Committee's 
current and former  Chairpersons , for all their efforts in organizing th e ITA  Symposium , especially at 
the present time. As others had commented before him, he considered that one success of the  hybrid 
format had been  the participation of Capital -based colleagues in addition to delegates based in 
Geneva . 
8.24.   On the benefits of the ITA , he recalled  that Canad a had not been a major exporter of 
ITA products when it had joined  the Agreement , nor had it become one after wards; nevertheless , 
Canada had considered that the original ITA  had been a good agreement in terms of increasing 
access  to ICT  products  worldwide , which in turn had improve d the conditions of trade worldwide , 
which  in turn had stimulate d competition in the ICT  sector, resulting in the introduction of ever -more G/IT/M/74  
 
- 13 - 
 
  efficient information technology products, which in turn had stimulate d productivity gains  in both 
industrial and business processes in Canada.  In other words, Canada believe d that the benefits of 
the ITA extend ed beyond the core businesses in the IT sector to cover such areas as basic and 
applied research, healthcare, and agriculture, to name but a few, thereby improving worldwide 
competitiveness, and improvements in standard s of living ; again, it was not a matter of ICT  products  
only, but one that also concern ed the sectors that use d those products . In sum, the great benefits 
that came from the work of the ITA  Committee , and that of the WTO , were the result of improving 
the supply and global value chains of these products.  
8.25.   The delegat e of India thank ed the ITA  Committee and the Secretariat for having organize d 
the ITA Symposium , and especially for having given an opportunity  to India's senior official, 
Mr S K Marwaha , to deliver a presentation to the Symposium  earlier that same day . India hoped 
that Mr Marwaha 's presentation of India's ITA initiatives, especially that concerning 
production -linked incentives, had helped ITA Participants better to understand India's potential and 
point of view.  
8.26.   The delegat e of China  thank ed the ITA  Committee and the Secretariat for having organized 
this import ant and successful ITA Symposium.  In China's view, it had provided a valuable 
opportunity for ITA  Participants, industry representatives, and government officials , to exchange 
their respective views on important issues relating to the ITA. 
8.27.   During the ITA Symposium, ITA Participants had heard a lot about the great contribution of 
ICT products towards combat ting COVID -19, in particular those innovative products created by the 
ICT industry, such as the TCL company, which  had made remote working, education , and health 
solution s possible in this challenging time.  ITA Participants had also heard calls from industry to 
expand the coverage  of the ITA . Indeed, many Symposium participants had mentioned that 
additional ITA  coverage could help to address such global challenges as climate change. 
ITA Participants had also heard a lot of discussion about the digital divide , and the fact that  half of 
the world 's population did not have internet access. In that context, the  ITA could significantly reduce 
the cost o f ICT products and help to address the digital divide to ensure that no one was left behind 
in this era of digital transmission.  
8.28.   In conclusion, China consider ed that the information that had been transmitted in the 
ITA Symposium could provide useful ideas and guidance for the ITA  Committee's future work, and 
once again  thank ed the Secretariat and all participants for the ir excellent work.  
8.29.   The delegat e of Japan  thanked the Chairperson, the Secretariat , and other relevant persons , 
for their efforts in realizing this excellent ITA Symposium , which had demonstrated the ITA 's growing 
significance not only for global trade , but also for various industries, societies, and people around 
the world. Japan considered that it  was particularly meaningful that Symposium participants could 
present the new opportunities and solutions that ICT  products could  provide in meeting the social 
challenges brought about by the COVID -19 pandemic.  Japan would  continue to contribute to the 
development of the ITA, while giving due consideration to the real needs of industries and other 
stakeholders.  
8.30.   The delegat e of Chinese Taipei  joined other colleagues in expressing its congratulations and 
appreciation to the current and former ITA Committee Chairpersons , the Secretariat team, as well 
as those Members that had recommended speakers , for making that week's ITA Symposium such a 
success.  
8.31.   Chinese Taipei also noted that the presentations had been very informative and insightful. 
Speakers from public and private sectors had highlighted the contribution s of the ITA and the 
ITA Expansion, presenting the advanced applications of ICT  products, technologies, and registered 
solutions that had been helping  to combat the COVID -19 pandemic, and also how they support ed 
the goal of sustainability.  ITA Participants had also heard about areas of challenges and opportunities 
for ICT  industries. Most importantly, Symposium participants had outlined their expectatio ns for the 
future development of the ITA and ITA  Expansion at the WTO.  Overall, the delegation of Chinese 
Taipei, including Capital -based  colleagues , had definitely benefited from this useful event. Chinese 
Taipei would reflect on all of the various views expressed to see how these could interest the 
Committee in its work going forward.  G/IT/M/74  
 
- 14 - 
 
  8.32.   The Chairperson  thanked all those ITA  participants  that had taken the floor to share their  
initial reflections on that week's ITA  Symposium , and the plenty of food for thought  that it had given 
them in the context of their work in the Committee.  
8.33.   The Chairperson also joined others in thank ing delegations and the Secretariat for all of their 
hard work  in preparing the ITA  Symposium , and in partic ular she thanked the moderators of the 
various sessions of the Symposium, namely her predecessor  as Chairperson of the ITA  Committee , 
Ms Uma Muniandy , as well as Mrs Suja Rishikesh Mavroidis , Director of the WTO's Market Access 
Division.  
8.34.   By way of follow -up, she propose d to consult with delegations regarding the topics  and 
suggestions emerging from the Symposium that could be taken forward in the context of the 
Committee 's future work and discussions.  
8.35.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and of the Chair person 's proposal.  
9  DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT (2021) OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN 
GOODS (G/IT/W/53)  
9.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that the Committee's draft annual report (202 1) to 
the Council for T rade in Goods  had been circulated in document  G/IT/W/5 3. 
9.2.  The Committee adopted  the draft report on the understanding that it would be modified to 
reflect the discussions at that day's meeting .1 
10  DATE OF NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING  
10.1.   The Chairperson  informed the C ommittee that the Secretariat had tentatively reserved Friday, 
6 April 2022 as the date of the Committee's next formal meeting, on the understanding that this 
date would be confirmed in an email well before the meeting itself, and that any additional meeti ngs 
might  also be convened , as required.  
10.2.   The Committee so agreed . 
__________  
 
 
1 The Committee's final report was circulated in document  G/L/1412.