RESTRICTED  
  
G/TFA/M/17  
 
24 November 2021  
(21-8878) Page: 1/33 
Committee on Trade Facilitation  Original: English  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE FACILITATION  
22-23 JUNE 2021  
CHAIRPERSON: MR. CHRISTOPHER O'TOOLE (CANADA)  
Table of Contents  
1   MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT  ................................ ................................ .................  2 
1.1   Notifications by Members ................................ ................................ .............................  2 
A. Notifications under Articles 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ............................  3 
B. Notifications under Article 17 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ................................ ........  5 
C. Notification under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation  
Agreement  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  6 
D. Notifications under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ................................ ........  8 
1.2   Status of Ratification and Notification Process  ................................ ..............................  11 
- Update by the Secretariat ................................ ................................ .........................  11 
- Trade Facilitation Agreement's Definitive Implementation Dates Covering the Period 
1 May 2021 to 31 December 2022 (G/TFA/INF/1)  ................................ ................................  12 
2   SUPPORTING THE TIMELY AND EFFICIENT RELEASE OF GLOBAL GOODS THROUGH 
ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WTO TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT - 
COMMUNICATION FROM AUSTRALIA; BRAZIL; CANADA; COLOMBIA; EUROPEAN UNION; 
ICELAND; JAPAN; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; MEXICO; NEW ZE ALAND; NORTH MACEDONIA; 
NORWAY; SINGAPORE; SWITZERLAND; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF 
TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU; THAILAND; TURKEY; THE UNITED KINGDOM 
AND THE UNITED STATES (G/TFA/W/25/REV.6) ................................ ..........................  13 
3   REVISITING THE NEED FOR GLOBAL ACTION TO ELIMINATE CONSULARIZATION 
REQUIREMENTS - COMMUNICATION FROM COSTA RICA, NORWAY AND THE UNITED 
STATES (G/TFA/W/38/REV.1) ................................ ................................ ......................  15 
4   BRIEFING FROM THE UNITED STATES ON THE 26 MAY WEBINAR – "A 
CONVERSATION WITH THE US PRIVATE SECTOR AND WHY  ACCELERATING 
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WTO TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT IS A GAME 
CHANGER"  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................  18 
5   EXPERIENCE SHARING/THEMATIC DISCUSSION  ................................ ......................  19 
A. Experiences Sharing: Accelerate Implementation of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement 
Through China Customs' Smart Governanc e – Presentation by China  ................................ ...... 19 
B. Implementing the WTO TFA: Shifting 11 Provisions from Category C to Category B – 
Presentation by Nepal  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 19 
C. Implementation of the TFA Measures – Presentation by Tajikistan  ................................ ...... 19 
D. Implementation of Article 7.4 Of the Trade Facilitation Agreement; and National Trade 
Facilitation Committee - Developments Since 2017 – Presentation by Turkey  ..........................  19 G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 2 - 
 
  E. Vanuatu's Experience with Implementation of Customs Automation and Single Window – 
Presentation by Vanuatu and UNCTAD  ................................ ................................ ................  20 
F. Compendium Sharing Experiences Related to the COVID -19 Crisis – G/TFA/W/40  ................  20 
G. From Bali To Borders: ITC Support to WTO Members for Implementing TFA – Presentation 
by the ITC  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  20 
6   REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT IN 
ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 23.1.6 OF THE TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT  .........  20 
- Informal Discussion on the Review – Report by the Chairperson  ................................ .... 20 
- First Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement - 
Factual Report (G/TFA/W/41)  ................................ ................................ ............................  24 
- WTO Trade Facilitation Committee: Proposal to Formalize Engagement with the Private 
Sector - Communication from Brazil and the United States (G/TFA/W/42)  ...............................  24 
- Additional Opportunity for Discussion  ................................ ................................ .........  25 
7   RECENT AND UPCOMING ACTIVITIES  ................................ ................................ ....... 28 
- Report by the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility (TFAF) (G/TFA/W/43)  ...............  28 
8   TFAF CONSULTATIONS – REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ........  31 
9   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 32 
 
 
1  MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE TRADE 
FACILITATION AGREEMENT  
1.1.  The Chair welcomed delegations and recalled that the agenda for the meeting had been 
circulat ed in documents WTO/AIR/TFA/17, WTO/AIR/TFA/17/Rev.1 and 
WTO/AIR/TFA/17/Rev.1/Corr.1.  
1.2.  He informed the Committee that the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) 
continued to hold consultations with Members on the list of names to chair the subsid iary bodies of 
the CTG, and that there had been no developments regarding the appointment of officers to this 
Committee. Therefore, he would continue to chair the Committee until the election of the new Chair.  
1.3.  The Trade Facilitation Committee (TFC, the Com mittee) agreed  to continue the practice of 
holding Item 2 of the agenda "Experience sharing/thematic discussions" in informal mode, to allow 
for frank and interactive exchanges.  
1.4.  The Committee also agreed  that observers to the meeting could remain throughout the informal 
session.  
1.5.  The United States  requested to add an item under "Other Business" to update the committee 
on a report that had discussed in a prior Committee meeting on Micro, Small and Medium -sized 
Enterprises ( MSME s). 
1.6.  The Chair added two items: (1) the dates for the Committee's meetings in 2021;  and 
(2) inviting Annex D partners and the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation to the next meeting of 
the Committee.  
1.7.  The agenda was adopted  with the proposed changes.  
1.1  Notifications by Members  
1.8.  The Chair  drew the Committee's attention to the first group of notifications, namely those under 
Article s 15 and 16 of the  Trade Facilitation  Agreement  (TFA, the Agreement) . Subsequent to the 
circulation  of the agenda, notifications had been received from Brazil and Burundi. These notifications 
would be included in the agenda for the next meeting.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 3 - 
 
  A. Notifications under Articles 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.9.  The Chair  drew the Committee's  attention to the notification from Eswatini (G/TFA/N/SWZ/5 ) 
which provided information on arrangements and progress on technical assistance and capacity 
building.  
1.10.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.11.   We are encouraged to see the var iety of technical assistance providers already working with 
Eswatini to support implementation on a range of provisions. We hope that this document helps 
Eswatini identify partners for those remaining provisions where it seeks additional assistance. 
We have donors here in the room today and we hope they are open to further discussions to address 
Eswatini 's outstanding technical assistance needs.  
1.12.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.13.   The EU commends Eswatini for its comprehensive notification that has the great merit of detail 
for each provision of the TFA that was put in category  C, the state of assistance received, and the 
gaps regarding capacity building that remain.  
1.14.   Additional sup port appears necessary, and the EU invites Eswatini authorities to contact the 
EU delegation in their capitals in order to access to what extent their needs can be covered by 
cooperation programmes that are still being developed.  
1.15.   Coordination meetings with  other donors certainly would help Eswatini to ensure that all of 
its category C commitments with remaining gaps in assistance could be assisted. We hope that by 
the Dedicated Session on Aid in October we will have an improved situation.  
1.16.   The delegate of th e United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.17.   The United Kingdom would like to thank Eswatini for its detailed notification s under Article 15 
and 16 of the TFA. We recognise Eswatini's commitment and progress in implementing the TFA which 
the UK is currently supporting through the WCO and UNCTAD, as set out in its notification in regard 
to the WCO's assistance with authorized economic operators in customs cooperation.  
1.18.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the statements made.  
1.19.   The Chair drew the comm ittee's attention to a notification from the Gambia 
(G/TFA/N/GMB/1/Add.2. ) which provided information on arrangements and progress on technical 
assistance and capacity building.  
1.20.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.21.   We thank the Gambi a for your notification. This level of detail is extremely helpful for the 
donor community and demonstrates a level of self -review that is testament to your strong 
commitment to implement the TFA. We look forward to reviewing the Gambia's notification of i ts 
category C definitive dates.  
1.22.   We are particularly interested in hearing more regarding assistance needed to implement 
Article 5.3 regarding Test Procedures. The United States is now finalizing a communication for this 
Committee regarding our position on the role of second test procedures in trade facilitation. We are 
looking forward to hearing more about the Gambia's and other Member's efforts towards 
implementing Article 5.3 after we circulate our communication on this topic.  
1.23.   The delegate of the United K ingdom  indicated the following:  
1.24.   The United Kingdom would like to thank the Gambia for notifying the Committee on its 
requirements under Article  16. The Gambia has recently joined the HMRC -WCO-UNCTAD capacity 
building programme, and we look forward to work ing together to support implementation of the 
commitments.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.25.   The delegate of the European Union  thanked the Gambia for its notification.   
1.26.   The delegate of The Gambia  indicated the following:  
1.27.   My delegation would like to thank the EU, UK and US for their comm ents. These are certainly 
welcomed. We look forward to reaching out to donors in the near future to access the implementation 
of our category C commitments.  
1.28.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the statements made.  
1.29.   The Chair drew the committee' s attention to a notification from Paraguay 
(G/TFA/N/PRY/1/Add.2 ) which provided information that Paraguay had implemented a provision 
ahead of its notified definitive date.  
1.30.   The delegate of Paraguay  indicated the following:  
1.31.   The delegation of Paraguay wishes to inform that through the notification circulated last May, 
our country communicated the full implementation of Article 7.6 on "Establishment and Publication 
of Average Release Times". This commitment was fully implemented on 9 April 2021,  before the 
originally communicated deadline of 1 September 2021.  
1.32.   We would like to highlight that Paraguay has reached a level of implementation of 81.5% of 
the Trade Facilitation Agreement commitments. As of 2021, our National Committee on Trade 
Facilitat ion (NTFC) composed of 40 member institutions from the public and private sector was 
restructured by establishing three working groups to prioritise compliance with the category B and 
C measures listed by Paraguay, as well as to address other issues that c an be addressed in the 
framework of a strategic agenda on trade facilitation. In all cases, the coordination of the working 
groups is shared between the public and private sectors.  
1.33.   In this regard, the implementation of Article 7.6 was the responsibility of  the Working Group 
on Simplification and Streamlining of Clearance and Release Procedures of the National Trade 
Facilitation Committee, which is coordinated by the National Customs Directorate and the 
Paraguayan Industrial Union. This measure was notified as category C by Paraguay and is currently 
considered compliant by the working group.  
1.34.   On the other hand, Paraguay is developing projects with the valuable support of international 
organizations such as UNCTAD, the International Trade Centre  (ITC), and fund ing from the World 
Bank, the European Union and the United States Department of Agriculture. We reiterate our thanks 
to the cooperating partners, with whom we hope to continue working closely to successfully conclude 
the four ongoing projects : (1) Empowerm ent Programme; (2) Global Trade Helpdesk , Paraguay; 
(3) Support for the Improvement of the Competitiveness of MSMEs and the Business Climate in 
Paraguay; and (4) Agricultural Systems and Technology to Facilitate Trade in Paraguay (T -FAST).  
1.35.   The delegate of  the European Union  said th at the EU  warmly thanked Paraguay for having 
presented its notification in such a timely way, as well as for the information on the pending projects 
currently being implemented.  
1.36.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the fol lowing:  
1.37.   We thank Paraguay for your notification and appreciate your commitment to accelerate 
implementation of the TFA, specifically Article 7.6. The United States believes that full 
implementation of the TFA by all Members is critical for an effective gl obal response to the persistent 
trade disruptions caused by the pandemic. We hope to see more notifications of this kind from 
Committee Members in the future.  
1.38.   Does Paraguay have plans to accelerate implementation of other TFA obligations? We invite 
Paragua y to join communication G/TFA/W/25/Rev.7 as a co -sponsor.  
1.39.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.40.   Japan appreciates Paraguay's notification and the fact that Paraguay has implemented 
Article  7.6 of the TFA before its notified definitive date of implementation. As stated in the informal 
meeting, we place importance on establishing a mechanism to follow up on each Member's status of 
implementation. In this regard, we would like to encourage all Members to notify the Committee of 
their actual implem entation dates as Paraguay did, to enhance transparency in the implementation 
status of the TFA.  
1.41.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the statements made.  
1.42.   The Chair turned to the notification from Madagascar circulated in documents 
G/TFA/N/MDG/ 3, plus G/TFA/N/MDG/3 /Corr.1; and G/TFA/N/MDG/3 /Corr. 2. Madagascar's 
notification provided information on arrangements and progress in the provision of technical 
assistance.  
1.43.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the statements made.  
B. Notificat ions under Article 17 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.44.   Article 17 cover ed the Early Warning Mechanism and the extension of implementation dates 
for provisions in categories B and C.  
1.45.   The Chair  drew the Committee's attention to a notification Maldives ci rculated in document 
G/TFA/N/MDV/3/Add.1. The notification regarded a shift between categories, as well as a request 
for an extension to the definitive implementation dates for a number of provisions.  
1.46.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the followi ng:  
1.47.   We thank the Maldives for your notification. The united states supports Maldives' shifting of 
categories for Article  7.8 and timely extension requests to delay implementation of Article s 7.8 and 
10.4.  
1.48.   We do have one question. Is Maldives currently wo rking with a donor to implement Article  7.8, 
which has now shifted from category B to category C? 
1.49.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.50.   We thank the Maldives for their notification which refers to commitments on expedited 
shipments . We note that expedited shipments that were put in category B are now shifted to 
category C, and that assistance needed has been notified , as required in Article  19 of the TFA. 
We note that the date for implemented changes is extended by less than 18 months  from the initially 
notified definitive date of implementation. We would welcome the Maldives to give additional 
background to justify this change of categorization and detail the current situation.  
1.51.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following  
1.52.   Japan welc omes the fact that the Maldives made a notification on its request for the extension 
of its definitive implementation dates in a timely manner. The implementation of Article  7.8 
"Expedited Shipments" and Article  10.4 "Single Window" will simplify customs procedures, and thus 
facilitate trade. We hope that Maldives can implement these articles at the earliest possible date.  
1.53.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.54.   The United Kingdom thanks the  Maldives for its timely notification under Article 17 of the TFA. 
The UK appreciates that the Maldives requires more time to implement its expedited shipment and 
single window obligations and have provided clear and measured actions required to achieve th ese 
implementation dates.  
1.55.   The Chair  drew the Committee's attention to a notification from the United Arab Emirates 
(G/TFA/N/ARE/1/Add.1 ) regarding the extension of its definitive implementation dates for two 
provisions.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.56.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.57.   The EU takes note of the notification of the extension of the deadline for the implementation 
by the UAE of advance rulings and single window. We would appreciate receiving further background 
justifying this notification under Article s 17.1 and 17.2. We no te that UAE failed to notify their 
transparency measures that were categorized as category A . We would like to know why this has 
not been possible and to get an explanation as to the request for extension of definitive dates for 
implementation.  
1.58.   The delegat e of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.59.   We thank the United Arab Emirates for your notification. The United States supports the 
United Arab Emirates' timely extension request to delay implementation of Article s 3.1 and 10.4 
from December 2021 to D ecember 2022.   
1.60.   We do have a question and would like to ask: can the United Arab Emirates elaborate in 
greater detail the reason why its cabinet of ministers has decided to delay implementation of these 
Article s? 
1.61.   We also note that the United Arab Emirates i ncluded Article s 1.4, 10.6.2, and 12.2.2 as 
category A. We encourage the United Arab Emirates to make this information available to the 
secretariat promptly.  
1.62.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
1.63.   Japan welcomes the fact that the United Arab Emira tes made a notification on its request for 
extension of its definitive implementation dates in a timely manner.  
1.64.   The implementation of Article 3 "Advance Rulings" and Article 10.4 "Single Window" will 
enhance predictability for traders and simplify and faci litate customs procedures. We hope that the 
United Arab Emirates can implement these articles at the earliest possible date.  
1.65.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.66.   The United Kingdom thank s the United Arab Emirates for its timely noti fication under Article 
17 of the TFA and informing this committee on the new proposed implementation date for advance 
rulings and single window.  
1.67.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.68.   Maybe in the future, just a proposal for Members t hat have notified extensions for the dates 
of implementation, to at least be present, so as to provide the basis for their requests. For us, that 
is a minimum. This is a proposal in the framework of the implementation of Article 23.1.6.  
1.69.   The Committee took note of the notifications and the statements made.  
C. Notification under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  
1.70.   Transparency notifications are mandated by Articles  1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the 
TFA. They all ha ve the objective of providing transparency, either in a broader context – providing 
information on publication sources – or providing information on the specific items, such as a single 
window operatio n, the use of customs brokers, and customs cooperation.  
1.71.   Since the Committee 's last meeting, six transparency notifications were received from five 
Members.  
1.72.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to two notifications from the European Union 
(G/TFA/N/EU/ 1/Add.1/Rev.2 and G/TFA/N/EU/1/Rev.7) . G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 7 - 
 
  1.73.   The delegate of the United States  thanked the European Union for its notification s. 
1.74.   The Chair  moved to a notification from Japan ( G/TFA/N/JPN/2/Rev.1).  
1.75.   The delegate of Japan  stated that the notification circulated on  28 May included updated links 
and descriptions pursuant to Article s 1.4 and 10.6.2 of the TFA. Japan would continue its efforts to 
provide up -to-date notifications, which were important for securing transparency in Members' trade 
related information.  
1.76.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.77.   We thank Japan for its notification and seize the opportunity to clarify that notifications  of the 
European Union were basically modification of the links to websites that were no longer up to date. 
We believe it is critical for notifications in terms of regulations and procedures on imports, exports 
and transit, but also legislation on customs brokers, enquiry points for cooperation among customs 
authorities of different WTO Members, to be updated ve ry regularly. Again, we thank Japan for its 
efforts.  
1.78.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Japan for its notification.  
1.79.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification from Kenya ( G/TFA/N/KEN/3) . 
1.80.   The delegate of the United States  indicated  the following:  
1.81.   We thank Kenya for your notification. The United States finds the information contained in 
the notification is useful in directing traders and interested parties to understand the rules and 
regulations for import, export and transit in Ken ya. 
1.82.   We did notice that the online locations for information required by several sub -articles only 
list a Kenya government homepage or database and does not include the specific web address for 
the required information in sub -articles (a) -(j). For example, a trader looking for specific information 
regarding fees and charges would still have to search through Kenya's single window or customs 
website. Does Kenya have plans to revise this notification to include the specific webpages for each 
sub-article required of Article 1.1?  
1.83.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.84.   We thank Kenya for its notification. That is a very useful first step and we understand the 
difficulty involved in notifying. We echo the United States in asking whether Kenya can give further 
detail in regard to the exact internet pages so that economic o perators can access the different 
forms of necessary information more easily, such as customs requirements, charges, information on 
brokers, etc. All this is very important  to have the most accurate and up to date information possible. 
Thank you in advance  to Kenya for any further information that it may provide.  
1.85.   The Chair drew the Committee 's attention to the notification from Mongolia 
(G/TFA/N/MNG/2/Rev.1) . 
1.86.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Mongolia for its notification.  
1.87.   The delegate of the Europe an Union  echoed the United States and thanked Mongolia for its 
update.  
1.88.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification from Rwanda ( G/TFA/N/RWA/3) . 
1.89.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.90.   We thank Rwanda for the notificatio n. With this document, traders and other parties will have 
ease of access to the information on how to import, export and transit into the Rwandan market. 
We note that Rwanda has yet to notify its indicative category C dates to the Secretariat. What are 
Rwanda's plans for providing that information?  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 8 - 
 
  1.91.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.92.   We extend warm thanks to Rwanda for its notification. We have taken note that Rwanda has 
not provided information on the indicative implementation date  for Article 10.6.2, which is in 
category C. Is Rwanda working on this issue?  
1.93.   The Committee took note  of the notifications and statements made.  
D. Notifications under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
- Articles 22:1 and 22:2  
1.94.   Notifications und er Article 22 are of two types —Article 22:1 cover s notifications by donor 
Members on their recent capacity building activities; Article s 22:2 and 22:3 provide information on 
contact points.  
1.95.   Since the Committee 's last meeting on 3 –4 March 2021, two notific ations were received.  
1.96.    The Chair drew the Committee 's attention to the notification from Japan ( G/TFA/N/JPN/6) . 
1.97.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
1.98.   Japan is a donor of the WCO Customs Cooperation Fund  (CCF) and also  allocates its national 
budget to continue providing technical assistance to LDC and developing country Members. Under 
the COVID -19 pandemic, the technical assistance programs were continued online. Japan is 
committed to continuing its support for implemen ting the TFA in LDC and developing country 
Members.  
1.99.   The Chair  drew the Committee's attention to a notification from the United States 
(G/TFA/N/USA/5).  
1.100.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.101.   We appreciate the opportunity to introduce o ur notification regarding support for technical 
assistance and capacity building projects that will continue to strengthen the global ability to 
implement the TFA. In Reporting Year 2019, the United States notified more than USD 62 million in 
support for t echnical assistance and capacity building. We look forward to continuing to support full 
implementation of the TFA through capacity building and technical assistance. We would also like to 
highlight how some of our technical assistance activities provide s upport for trade facilitative reforms 
among the WTO Member Community.  
1.102.   Under the auspices of the US -Singapore Third Country Training Program, the United States 
and Singapore jointly held five-day training workshops in Singapore on the Implementation of the 
WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. The workshops were held in 11 -15 September 2017, 
24-28 September 2018, and 21 -25 October 2019. Experts from the State Department, CBP, USTR, 
USAID, Commerce, and the private sector presented on topics such as National Trad e Facilitation 
Committees and implementation challenges to trade officials from ASEAN member states.  
1.103.   USAID in collaboration with TCS Logistics (Pakistan), successfully launched the first pilot 
shipment to Central Asia under the Transports Internationaux Ro utiers (TIR) Convention, a customs 
agreement that facilitates the international transport of goods. The trial shipment cargo, consisting 
of herbal medicines destined for Uzbekistan, departed Karachi on 29 April 2021, and arrived in 
Tashkent on 4 May 2021, via the Karachi -Kabul -Termez route.  
1.104.   The pilot was the first in a series of five planned trial runs to the countries of Central Asian 
through Afghanistan and China. These pilots will test the viability of various routes for international 
transit to Central Asia and beyond under the TIR Convention, documenting the associated 
operational and logistical challenges along the way. The successful execution of the first pilot to 
Tashkent will build confidence among traders and transport operators from both sides to  adopt TIR 
for cross border trade and transit and boost regional trade integration and connectivity. Technical 
and financial support for the initiative has been provided by USAID through its Pakistan Regional G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 9 - 
 
  Economic Integration activity in support of its  ongoing assistance to the Government of Pakistan for 
streamlining TIR operations to enhance trade connectivity.  
1.105.   Additional support in destination countries for the execution of these pilots is being provided 
by the Competitiveness, Trade, and Jobs, anothe r USAID -funded activity in Central Asia.  
1.106.   USAID continues to support ethics and integrity training for customs in the Northern Triangle 
countries of Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. There have now been two courses; the first was 
in February and was for  executive level leadership and the second course is taking place in June for 
mid-level managers. The expectation is that around 300 officers/personnel from the customs 
administrations in the Northern Triangle will be trained.  
1.107.   The Border Management Academy  which trains border officers from Central America is still 
on hold since the pandemic has prevented officers from gathering for the training, but the ethics 
and integrity courses are being done as part of the "academy" to continue moving forward.  
1.108.   USAID's Trade Facilitation Program in Vietnam is working on improving the customs legal 
framework. The Program completed two research papers on: (i) reform of customs procedures and 
processes and specialized inspection of imports and exports; and (ii) reform of cu stoms management 
of goods being processed and manufactured for export, and of export processing enterprises, as well 
as customs management of Authorized Economic Operators (AEOs). The research papers will help 
GDVC to identify possible solutions and initia tives for reforming customs procedures and amending 
the relevant Decrees and to prepare or contribute towards finalization of the draft Specialized 
Inspection Decree.  
1.109.   Nathan Associates (the implementing partner) in Vietnam has been active during the 
pandemic by offering regular workshops. In late March a workshop was held on Specialized 
Inspections. Another is expected in August on post audit inspections. These workshops have been 
conducted in cooperation with Customs and Border Protection.  
1.110.   From 15 Ju ne-1 July 2021, the US Department of Commerce's Commercial Law Development 
Program (CLDP), in coordination with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Customs -Trade 
Partnership Against Terrorism, will host a trade facilitation webinar series with the G eorgia Revenue 
Service. The webinar series will focus on post clearance audit, risk management, and authorized 
economic operators (AEOs). The webinar series will feature capacity building sessions for customs 
officials on all three topic areas. The series will also include a virtual roundtable on Georgia's pilot 
AEO scheme that will bring together customs officials and private sector stakeholders to discuss the 
relevant institutional, legislative and capacity barriers to implementing a successful AEO progra m in 
Georgia.  
1.111.   On 15 -18 March 2021, the US Department of Commerce's Commercial Law Development 
Program (CLDP) hosted a virtual workshop for 20 trade and textile professionals in El Salvador. 
During this four-day workshop, experts from US Customs and Border Protection provided 
presentations on the Rules of Origin under the Dominican Republic, Central America Free Trade 
Agreement (CAFTA -DR), origin verifications, and the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS).  
1.112.   Finally, in December 2020, an exp ert from US Customs and Border Protection recorded a 
webinar on customs valuation and advance ruling appeals and modification for CLDP. 
CLDP distributed these pre -recorded webinars to the Honduran Customs Administration and the 
Honduran Economic Developmen t Secretariat.  
1.113.   The Chair indicated the report had been much helpful. Such a  substantive intervention 
allowed Members to better understand the activities ongoing in this area.  
1.114.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.115.   We thank the United States for the very detailed presentation which is extremely helpful. 
We would appreciate if the details could be shared in writing so that we can communicate to our aid 
colleagues.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 10 - 
 
  1.116.   The delegate of the United States  indicated they would be pleased to provi de the information 
in writing to the Chair.  
- Article 22:3  
1.117.   Six notifications were received under Article 22:3 since the Committee's meeting in 
April 2021.  
1.118.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to two notification s from Afghanistan  
(G/TFA/N/AFG/2  and G/TFA/N/AFG/2/C orr.1).  
1.119.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Afghanistan for their notification.  
1.120.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to a notification from Egypt  (G/TFA/N/EGY/3) . 
1.121.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.122.   We than k Egypt for your notification.  The United States would like to highlight that in 
May 2021, various members of US Customs and Border Protection's Office of Regulations and 
Rulings, Office of Trade, and other CBP personnel provided comments on the draft Egyp tian Customs 
regulations to assist in the preparation of the submission of US comments on the proposed 
regulations.  
1.123.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.124.   We would like to commend and congratulate Members who notified their contact po ints for 
aid. This is crucial. We noted that only 15 Members have notified their state of play in terms of 
assistance obtained and gaps on assistance for their category C commitments. None of the Members 
whose notifications are now under review have done such a detailed reporting to the Committee. 
We would like to recall our proposal document G/TFA/W/45, for Members  to invite donors to 
meetings, so as to review in depth the situation on their category C commitments, and to report to 
this Co mmittee and ensure that the next dedicated session on aid is supported by evidence that 
provides  concrete elements to discuss.  
1.125.   Following the US comment on Egypt's notification and on assistance to Egypt, we have been 
informed by our delegation that a new e lectronic system will soon be in place at customs. We would 
be very happy  to hear  if Egypt has any more precise information to share . 
1.126.   The delegate  of Egypt  thanked  the EU and US for their comments. They would transfer them 
to capital and would try to offer  further information as soon as possible.  
1.127.   The Chair drew the Committee 's attention to the notifications from Kenya  (G/TFA/N/KEN/2) , 
Mongolia (G/TFA/N/MNG/3/Rev.1) and Rwanda  (G/TFA/N/RWA/2) . Without any comments from the 
floor, the Chair moved to a notific ation from Zimbabwe ( G/TFA/N/ZWE/2).  
1.128.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.129.   We welcome Zimbabwe's notification. We have noted that Zimbabwe has quite a lot of 
category C commitments, so it is absolutely necessary to have  a contact point and we would like 
donors to have this contact point for organising assistance. We would welcome  if Zimbabwe could 
organise a donor coordination meeting so that everyone can be involved and see how best to help 
Zimbabwe implement its category C commitments. We note, unless if we are mistaken, Zimbabwe 
still has to notify Article 1.4, that was categor y B with the deadline for implementation that was last 
December. We note that Article s 10.6.2 and 12.2.2 were notified as category A and we would 
welcome if Zimbabwe could indicate the state of play for those commitments.  
1.130.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.131.   We thank Zimbabwe for the notification. We also note that Zimbabwe included Article s 10.6.2 
and 12.2.2 as category A and notified the Committee of its definitive date to implement Article 1.4 G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 11 - 
 
  by 31 December 2020. We would like to ask Zimbabwe what its plans are for making that notification 
available to the Secretariat.  
1.132.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.133.   The United Kingdom thanks Zimbabwe for notifying the Committee of the i mportant steps 
they have taken in implementing the TFA measures. The UK supports Zimbabwe with the 
implementation of the TFA through UNCTAD capacity building programmes, and we encourage 
Zimbabwe to contact the relevant programme coordinator at UNCTAD for any technical assistance 
needs.  
1.134.   The delegate of Nepal  indicated that the following statement covered all notification s: 
1.135.   The LDC group extends sincere appreciation to all Members , specially the LDCs for their 
notifications. I would also like to thank Japan and the US for their notification and continued support 
being extended to the developing specially least developed country Members.  
1.136.   My delegation would like to share that the LDC Members have fulfilled their obligations of 
notification as per the Trade Fac ilitation Agreement.  However, implementation of the category  C 
measures in a timely manner seems difficult unless sufficient and additional support is extended by 
donor country Members and international organizations.  Therefore, we need further enriched support 
from our development partners while implementing the category C measures in the days ahead to 
fully implement the TFA in a timely manner . 
1.137.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.138.   Regarding Nepal's statement. We would lik e to know how the LDC Members position 
themselves regarding the EU proposal in order to be well equipped to discuss and try to fill the gaps 
in aid that may be existing, that Members having notified category C commitments organise 
meetings with donors . The EU is ready to assist them and organise donor meetings so that by next 
October's dedicated session on aid  we are in a position to know exactly where the gaps remain and 
exactly w here assistance is delivered and where there may be overlaps. In our view, this is absolutely 
needed.  
1.139.   We believe that at some point in the four-year review process, this Committee should 
address the transparency measures that were committed as category A , B of C and which are still 
to be implemented . 
1.140.   The delegate of Nepal  indicate d the following : 
1.141.   I would like to thank the EU for its proposal  which is under discussion among the LDC 
Members. We will further discuss this proposal and share our collective views in the next meeting.  
1.142.   The Committee took note  of the notifications and state ments made.  
1.2  Status of Ratification and Notification Process  
- Update by the Secretariat  
1.143.   The representative of the WTO Secretariat  presented an update since the last Committee 
meeting held in March 2021. The presentation and a ll the information used had been sourced from 
the TFA Database website and it is available at ( https://tfadatabase.org ).  
1.144.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the f ollowing:  
1.145.   The EU very much welcomes this presentation, which is of very high quality.  This has been 
very useful to keep tabs on the implementation of the Agreement. The EU hopes that th e 
implementation information presented to the Committee  over the last f our years, and updated until 
the end of October 2021, will be included in the report of the four -year review of the TFA.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 12 - 
 
  1.146.   The delegate of the United States  thank ed the Secretariat's presentation and the excellent 
work undertaken by the Secretariat to manag e these notifications.  
- Trade Facilitation Agreement's Definitive Implementation Dates Covering the Period 
1 May 2021 to 31 December 2022 (G/TFA/INF/1)  
1.147.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to document G/TFA/INF/1 , which had been 
circulated in accordance with the decision taken by the Committee at its April meeting , to circulate 
a reference document each year identifying Members with upcoming implementation dates during 
the next two -year period. This document cover ed the period from June 2021 to  December 2022.  
1.148.   It was intended that the reference document would  be a useful tool to encourage Members 
to review the status of their implementation commitments, in particular those commitments that 
were due for implementation in the next two years. This w ould help Members to identify the 
measures needed to meet these implementation dates or, if necessary, to determine whether they 
should invoke the Article 17.  
1.149.   The document  highlight ed some very useful information. For example, 75 Members had 
planned implementation dates in the period from May 2021 to December 2022, covering a total 
number of 399 measures.  A closer look show ed that this year, between June and December, 
41 Members had planned implementation dates covering a total number of 149 measures.  
In addition,  two Members had implementation dates covering three measures between 1 May and 
today.  
1.150.   In 2021 and 2022, 43 % of the provisions were in category C.  This underline d the urgency 
of obtaining the necessary TACB to enable the implementatio n of these provisions in line with 
Members' commitments.  The Chair urged Members to submit their notifications of donor 
arrangements and technical assistance progress as an important tool in the efforts to close the gaps 
in obtaining the necessary technica l assistance.  
1.151.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.152.   This initiative was taken after various consultations amongst all Members of the Committee. 
In our view, it is very relevant indeed. The overview, as well as the Chair 's comments, demonstrate 
just how useful  and important  this initiative will be. It also reflect s how difficult it is to keep close 
tabs on the upcoming dates for all Members with category B and C notifications, those that they 
have committed to providing not ifications for.  
1.153.   We can already see that there are some Members that have provided notifications pursuant 
to commitments that already were due on 1 June. We also note that there will be many notifications 
due by our next meeting and even more by the implem entation of the four-year period. In light of 
the aforementioned, we wish to sta unchly call on all Members to make use of the relevant flexibilities 
in the Agreement, where necessary. We also wish to recall as the Chairperson did, that the EU has 
made a pr oposal to participate in all donor meetings with Members that have undertaken category 
C commitments. If you wish to organise such meetings, we would be happy to meet with as many 
donors that wish to do so, so that we can have a solid overview of the situa tion and step in where 
necessary. It is very important that donors make the best use of aid possible and make it as effective 
and useful as possible, b earing in mind the challenges posed by the COVID -19 pandemic. In the 
past, we have already referred to so me of these challenges for some assistance programmes.  
1.154.   The Chair encourage d all Members to keep a copy of this document and refer to it often 
because it would  be an important tool to maintain sight on when implementation dates were coming 
up. It was striki ng that  63 measures in category C had been committed to be implemented by the 
end of this calendar year. Like the call from the EU, the Chair  encourage d Members  to work on donor 
linkage to assist in  implement ing those provisions.  
1.155.   The delegate of Paraguay  indicated the following:  
1.156.   My delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for its presentation and for the preparation 
of document G/TFA/INF/1. We find it a useful document, which will allow us to take into account the G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 13 - 
 
  final dates that are about to expire in order to organise the coordination work within the National 
Trade Facilitation Committee in our capitals.  
1.157.   With regard to the final dates indicated for Paraguay, we wish to point out that according to 
the notification we shared today, document G/TFA/N/PR Y/1/A dd.2, Article 7.6. on average release 
times has been fully implemented on 9 April 2021, earlier than the final date originally 
communicated,  and contained in this compendium. For this reason, we request the Secretariat to 
update the table to reflect t he current status of Paraguay's notifications.  
1.158.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.159.   The UK would like to thank the Secretariat for this report. We think it is a useful addition to 
the transparency and  monitoring  function of the TFC. We echo some of  the point s that you have 
made,  and we hope that this report will also help Members address the gaps between offer and 
demand on TA needs, as Members share the objective of full implementation of the TFA.  
1.160.   The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
2  SUPPORTING THE TIMELY AND EFFICIENT RELEASE OF GLOBAL GOODS THROUGH 
ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WTO TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT - 
COMMUNICATION FROM AUSTRALIA; BRAZIL; CANADA; COLOMBIA; EUROPEAN UNION; 
ICELAND; JAPAN; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; MEXICO; NEW ZEALAND; NORTH MACEDONIA; 
NORWAY; SINGAPORE; SWITZERLAND; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, 
PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU; THAILAND; TURKEY; THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE 
UNITED STATES (G/TFA/W/25/REV.6 ) 
2.1.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
2.2.  On behalf of the co -sponsors, we welcome Switzerland and North Macedonia to Rev.6 and 
Uruguay, Montenegro, and Ecuador to Rev .7 of the communication.  As a reminder to all Members, 
the communicati on is non -binding and requires no changes to existing TFA commitments. 
The communication simply asks Members to self -assess, and where possible, consider any steps it 
may take to accelerate implementation.  
2.3.  The COVID -19 pandemic continues to cause serious d isruptions for businesses large and small. 
We all welcome Members support of this proposal to accelerate implementation of the TFA.  
2.4.  The delegate of Brazil  indicated the following:  
2.5.  I would like to join the United States to welcome the new Members of the com munication. 
We do believe that this communication can get traction and momentum towards  MC12. 
We encourage other Members to duly co -sponsor these recommendations that are not binding, 
especially during the time that COVID -19 is hitting strongly.  
2.6.  The delega te of Ecuador  indicated the following:  
2.7.  First of all, we would like to thank the delegation of the United States for its active 
dissemination of this proposal. The Trade Facilitation Agreement has become an important 
benchmark within and outside this Organi sation, not least because of the benefits derived from its 
effective implementation.  
2.8.  These benefits have been even more evident during the difficult times we have experienced 
during the pandemic. Keeping trade channels open and active has made it possible to deal with 
many of the difficulties of recent months.  
2.9.  Ecuador fully shares the objectives contained in this communication and has formally expressed 
its support. As indicated therein, there is a fundamental role for the National Trade Facilitation 
Commit tees. Our Committee made a detailed analysis of this proposal and we agree that an 
accelerated implementation of this Agreement will benefit all actors in international trade. However, 
there are challenges to be faced in order to achieve these objectives, where the role of donors, 
technical assistance and capacity building will continue to be a substantial factor.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 14 - 
 
  2.10.   Ecuador will continue its work and efforts to achieve an early implementation of its 
commitments under the Trade Facilitation Agreement.  
2.11.   The dele gate of Norway  indicated the following:  
2.12.   I would like to welcome North Macedonia and Switzerland as co -sponsors to this important 
communication. The pandemic has shown that the TFA is crucial in solving major challenges that the 
world faces. I encourage everyone to implement the TFA as soon as possible.  
2.13.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  indicated the following:  
2.14.   We are pleased to see that many Members are co -sponsoring the communication. 
The pandemic of COVID -19 has reminded us to review the efficie ncy of the implementation for TFA. 
We acknowledge the importance of accelerating implementation of the TFA, such as pre -arrival 
processing, simplifying customs clearance procedures and expediting shipments. Each stage plays a 
crucial role in ensuring regul ar shipment of essential goods to those Members in need during the 
current pandemic crisis. We are glad to be co -sponsors of the communication and would also like to 
join the US and previous speakers to welcome other Members to join the proposal.  
2.15.   The deleg ate of Uruguay  indicated the following:  
2.16.   I just wanted to echo what was said by the other co -sponsors . In the current context of crisis , 
giving a positive signal of accelerated implementation of the Agreement is fundamental in the face 
of the next ministeri al conference. I just wanted to encourage other Members to join  this 
communication . 
2.17.   The delegate of Paraguay  indicated the following:  
2.18.   The delegation of Paraguay would like to thank the proponents for the submission of this 
document. We consider that the pr oposal contains aspects of vital relevance on the impact of the 
accelerated implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, in the context of the COVID -19 
pandemic. Paraguay agrees that the COVID -19 pandemic is a global problem and requires a global 
response. Cross -border trade is an essential channel to get essential commodities, especially 
vaccines, to those who need them most. Today more than ever we need to strengthen the 
commitment to ensure that trade takes place on a continuous and unimpeded basi s. 
2.19.   While recognising the need to accelerate the implementation processes for the articles 
covered by this proposal, we believe it is important to also take into account the different categories 
notified by Members, especially those notified as category C. In the case of our country , and by way 
of example , we can cite the following notified commitments with a transition period and capacity 
building needs for their full implementation: articles on publication (Article s 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4 ) with 
a definitive date of 1 September 2021 ; Article 7.8 on expedited shipments with a definitive date of 
1 September 2022 ; and  Article 8 on border agency  cooperation with a definitive  date of 
1 September  2024.  
2.20.   For this reason, we reiterate the importance of strengthening cooperation mechanisms and 
call on donors to collaborate with the acceleration of the processes, the success of which will depend 
on the joint work of the entire membership.  
2.21.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
2.22.   The U nited Kingdom thanks the United States and all of the other co -sponsors for their work 
on this. Like others, we welcome new Members to this communication. We re-state our belief that 
the benefits of full implementation of the TFA are clear . Making trade fa ster and cheaper, safer and 
more predictable and reduc ing red tape, can go a long way in helping Members increase their 
participation in trade. Benefits around improving transparency are also notable, particularly in times 
when regula tory changes are frequ ent and fast -paced, such as during COVID -19. These benefits are 
if anything, more important when the global trading environment is under pressure.  
2.23.   Therefore, we urge other Members to support this call for acceleration of the TFA and consider 
how they can input a  renewed  focus on the delivery of commitments. To achieve those goals, it is G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 15 - 
 
  important that we work together as Members in the Committee. We acknowledge that 
implementation of the TFA is still a very country -specific exercise. Members have to naviga te a 
diverse set of challenges based on individual circumstances. This is reflected in the structure of the 
Agreement itself. In  this context, the UK is willing and committed to work with the Committee and 
all Members to explore what we can do to collectively separate the full implementation of the TFA, 
with the view to ensuring that all Members, developed and developing alike can fully realise its 
benefits.  
2.24.   The delegate of Korea  indicated the following:  
2.25.   As a co -sponsor, the Republic of Korea would  like to reiterate its support for this 
communication and appreciate the dedication of the United States whilst welcoming the Members 
participating as new co -sponsor s since the previous meeting. Korea believes that this communication 
will contribute to the  prompt recovery  of this challenging  COVID -19 situation , which has prolonged  
since last year. Korea will continue to actively take part in the  development of this communication.  
2.26.   The delegate of New Zealand  indicated the following:  
2.27.   New Zealand recently join ed the group of Members co -sponsoring this communication seeking 
acceleration of the TFA. We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the importance of 
this Agreement and its implementation at this time as we work to get better in supporting the global 
response to the COVID -19 pandemic. We endorse the messages in this communication and 
encourage WTO Members to accelerate implementation of the TFA.  
2.28.   The measures within the Agreement support the movement of essential goods across borders 
as smoothly  as possible, including ways to expedite customs clearance processes and implementing 
digital solutions to make cross -border business transactions more convenient and transparent. 
Specific benefits for implementation of the Agreement in response to the pan demic include expedited 
shipments, advance clearance, publication and information and availability for traders, allowance for 
electronic payments for fees and charges for customs clearance and allow ance of electronic copies 
of clearance documentation.  
2.29.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
2.30.   I would like to thank the US for their update and welcome all of the new co -sponsors. The EU 
also appreciates the large number of Members that are recognising the importance of accelerated 
implementa tion in times of COVID -19. We encourage others to join and to also accelerate their 
implementation of the TFA.  
2.31.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
2.32.   Japan, as a co -sponsor of the communication, welcomes all the new co -sponsors. We hope to 
garner  wider support for the timely communication that seeks to accelerate implementation of the 
TFA, which has increased in importance under the pandemic.  
2.33.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
2.34.   I would like to thank all of  the Members that took the floor today to endorse this 
communication , as well as others who offered to share their perspectives. We take note and value 
all of the discussion in the Committee on this communication and we encourage any Members with 
questions  to not hesitate to contact any one of us for any clarifications.  
2.35.   The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
3  REVISITING THE NEED FOR GLOBAL ACTION TO ELIMINATE CONSULARIZATION 
REQUIREMENTS - COMMUNICATION FROM COSTA RICA, NORWAY AND THE UNITED 
STATES (G/TFA/W/38/REV.1)  
3.1.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 16 - 
 
  3.2.  We would like to welcome the new co -sponsors Brazil and Switzerland; a Rev.2 will be 
forthcoming.  
3.3.  It is our strong belief that now is the time for Members with burdensome consularization 
processes to re -evaluate the utility and trade facilitative nature of those procedures with an eye 
toward s reducing the red tape to import, export and transit goods.  
3.4.  We would like to suggest for some Members' consideration that if you have relaxed all or some 
consularization measures to respond to the pandemic we would urge you to make these changes 
permanent , as a first step in eliminating all consularization requirements. Doing so would certainly 
help MSMEs rebound from the economic challenges brought on by the COVID -19 pandemic.  
3.5.  We welcome Members' new and continued support of this communication.  
3.6.  The delega te of Norway  indicated the following:  
3.7.  I would like to join the US in welcoming the new co -sponsors Brazil and Switzerland on this 
important issue. We think that consularization measures might be a burden in a regard to 
cross-border trade and we encourage e veryone to limit them as much as possible.  
3.8.  The delegate of Brazil  indicated the following:  
3.9.  I am pleased to announce that Brazil co -sponsors the proposal made by the United States,  
Norway, Costa Rica , and Switzerland to eliminate consularization requirement s. Thank you to the 
United States and Norway for your warm welcome to Brazil. Brazil understands that consularization 
is an obstacle to trade due to the bureaucratic complexity , time spent and costs involved , without 
corresponding gain s in terms of inspect ion or compliance with domestic customs rules. Furthermore, 
MSMEs are especially affected due to the need of addition financial and human resources. Brazil has 
been working with regional and extra regional donors  to reduce and preferably eliminate 
consular ization. The elimination of consularization requirements protects the population from 
unnecessary health risks of COVID -19. Therefore, we join the United States to speak with one voice 
and welcome Members' new and continued support of this communication.  
3.10.   The delegate of Switzerland  indicated the following:  
3.11.   Switzerland would like to thank the proponents for the paper and warm welcome. We agree 
that consularization is a burdensome practice that should be eliminated and therefore we are pleased 
to co-sponsor t he communication.  
3.12.   The delegate of Costa Rica  indicated the following:  
3.13.   The Costa Rica n delegation would like to thank the United States and Norway for submitting 
this proposal, which we are pleased to co -sponsor. We also welcome Brazil and Switzerland as 
co-sponsors.  
3.14.   Costa Rica shares the importance of maintaining trade free of barriers tha t negatively impact 
the economic development of Members and their businesses, and thus the well -being of people. 
The current juncture, where the world is making extreme efforts to recover from the impact of the 
COVID -19 pandemic, requires a comprehensive a pproach by the multilateral system, and the 
elimination of consulari zation requirements is a step in the right direction. Trade facilitation is 
undoubtedly a cornerstone of the economic revival process we are facing.  
3.15.   By eliminating consulari zation requirem ents, we create mechanisms to facilitate trade, but 
also protect the population from unnecessary health risks in the current health situation. 
Furthermore, this and other trade facilitation measures have a particular impact on micro, small and 
medium -sized enterprises, as the costs associated with trade affect them more sensitively, so with 
this measure we strengthen the competitiveness of MSMEs.  
3.16.   We would like to urge all Members to undertake the necessary internal assessments to support 
this proposal throu gh which we hope to further accelerate the implementation of the TFA and the 
economic development of Members.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 17 - 
 
  3.17.   The delegate of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
3.18.   Indonesia would like to respond to the United States' proposal on Revisiting the Need for 
Globa l Action to Eliminate Consularization Requirements.  
3.19.   Regarding the definition in section 3 of the proposal, Indonesia views that the definition of 
consular transactions and legalization cannot be fully equated. The legalization procedures carried 
out by the  consular office are  important and necessary to ensure the validity of a document required 
in a global trade partnership. If there is no validation, the risk of legal uncertainty and business 
protection will increase.  
3.20.   Regarding the legal standing, Article 10.1 of the TFA is closely related to a review  of measures, 
particularly to export, import and transit procedures. If a certain process or procedure has become 
a bottleneck for trade, then a review of the measure can be carried out to obtain the more effec tive 
and efficient measure.  
3.21.   Based on that analysis, Indonesia views that the main goal of this proposal is cost reduction 
and/or elimination , which is not in accordance with Art icle 10.1 of TFA. Article 10.1 TFA is to simplify 
processes and/or procedures s o they would not become complex and  is not associated with the cost 
reduction and/or elimination.  
3.22.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
3.23.   If we understood, Indonesia seems to be in favour of consularization  and t hat Indonesia  
considers it necessary to authenticate certain documents. We would like clarification on its position 
given that now blockchains and new IT systems are far more efficient to prove authenticity of 
documents than a stamp done on paper in a consular. This is our view.  
3.24.   The EU has, from the beginning, supported this initiative taken by Norway and the US, and 
now co -sponsored by Brazil, Costa Rica , and Switzerland. We continue to support it. We are worried 
that we seem to have information indicating that certain Members a rguably consider introducing 
new consularization requirements in relation to certification of products in the area of SPS. The EU 
calls on all Members that are considering adopting such measures or are implementing 
consularization practices, to supress the m as they delay the clearance of goods , and they are a n 
unjustified burden to trade and are against trade facilitation objectives.  
3.25.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  indicated the following:  
3.26.   We would like to thank the US and other co -sponsors' communication to revisit  the need for 
global action to eliminate consularization requirement , and we would like to express our support . 
3.27.   We know that consularization requirements may not only increase additional administrative 
cost for traders, bu t also cause unnecessary delay of shipments. Under the current global crisis, it's 
timely for Members to review the necessity of the aforesaid practices, so as to refrain from extra 
administrative burden s when shipping essential goods across borders.  
3.28.   We'd like to express our support the communication proposed by the co -sponsors.  
3.29.   The delegate of Australia  indicated the following:  
3.30.   Australia supports the communication by Costa Rica, Norway and the United States in order 
to eliminate consularization requirement s. We see that consularization requirements place additional 
delays  and costs on traders, with little to no benefit in terms of customs and border processes. 
Australia agrees this is a  potential area of reform under Article 10.1  of the TFA , and it will rem ove 
necessary bottlenecks and deliver meaningful  outcomes to MSMEs  and to facilitate global trade, 
economic growth and boost COVID -19 recovery.  
3.31.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 18 - 
 
  3.32.   Japan thinks that eliminating consularization requirements is in line with the purpose of 
Article  10.1 of the TFA, which is one of the important provisions in the context of how to deal with 
the pandemic.  
3.33.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
3.34.   Thank you to the Members that took the floor on this very  important communication. I would 
like to particularly thank the European Union, Chinese Taipei, Australia and Japan for their supportive 
comments of this communication and we also tak e note of the comments from Indonesia.  
3.35.   The Committee took note  of the in formation and the statements made.  
4  BRIEFING FROM THE UNITED STATES ON THE 26 MAY WEBINAR – "A CONVERSATION 
WITH THE US PRIVATE SECTOR AND WHY ACCELERATING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WTO 
TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT IS A GAME CHANGER"  
4.1.  The delegate of the United  States  indicated the following:  
4.2.  The United States shares our sincere appreciation to all that joined us for the webinar on 
27 May entitled "Why Accelerated Implementation of the TFA is a Game Changer". There were over 
200 registrants from more than 50 cou ntries. Participants heard from US companies: Cargill, FedEx, 
Intel and Amazon.  
4.3.  These companies shared experiences in confronting supply chain bottlenecks during the 
COVID -19 pandemic. They pointed to circumstances where accelerated implementation of the T FA 
resulted in goods, particularly medical goods and supplies, moving unhampered and how the Trade 
Facilitation Agreement itself presented a common roadmap for all to follow.  
4.4.  We heard that robust TFA implementation is a priority and many of the hurdles tha t traders 
faced during COVID -19 could have been reduced or eliminated through accelerated implementation 
of TFA commitments.  
4.5.  They support the hard work that many Members of this Committee have already undertaken 
to implement category B and C commitments ah ead of their definitive deadlines and believe 
increasing focus on implementing TFA reforms has a direct and significant impact on global business.  
4.6.  As WTO Members, we all benefit when we hear views from our respective private sectors: what 
is working, what is not working or what can be done better. We encourage Members to seek 
ambitious implementation deadlines whenever possible and look forward to further opportunities to 
hear from a variety of private sector voices regarding TFA implementation.  
4.7.  Later on, t he United States and Brazil will be introducing a proposal entitled: Proposal to 
Formalize Engagement with the Private Sector, which is included on today's agenda as part of the 
four-year review process. We look forward to hearing our views.  
4.8.  The delegate o f the European Union  indicated the following:  
4.9.  The EU is  strongly in favour of engagement with the private sector in the TF Committee 
informally, and that we are in consultations with the US and Brazil to see how our further proposals 
on the modalities to i nvolve the private sector could be discussed.  
4.10.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
4.11.   The UK would like to thank the US for hosting what was a very rich and engaging private 
sector -led discussion which the UK attended. That conversation  further highlighted the importan ce 
of simple, fast , and predicable trade for all business, in particular for MSMEs, and demonstrated the 
importance of feedback on TFA implementation from the private sector , either directly or through 
National Trade Facili tation Committees ( NTFC). We encourage initiatives of this nature as a useful 
way to hear experiences, approaches,  and perspectives from those stakeholders, which are very 
much involved with TF especially  as trade operators can really access and hear on  the ground  how 
trade facilitation impacts their activities .  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 19 - 
 
  4.12.   The delegate of the Russian Federation  indicated the following:  
4.13.   We would like to thank the United States for holding this session and would also like to clarify 
whether there was any link circulated of the recording of this meeting.  
4.14.   The delegate of Chinese Taipei  indicated the following:  
4.15.   I would  like to thank the US for holding the webinar on a voluntary basis. The private sectors 
are important stakeholders and partners for customs and othe r border agencies in the 
implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement. I believe their insights and feedbacks in the 
meeting are valuable and vital for members to think about how to move the TFA forward.  
We appreciate the efforts made by the US in this regard.  
4.16.   The delegate of Mexico  indicated the following:  
4.17.   I would like to thank the US for this outstanding webinar that they organised. As we said in 
this Committee, Mexico believes that the experience of the private sector and those that implement 
the TFA is very valuable. With regard to this , Mexico is considering organising a similar event to that 
of the US to which  everyone will be invited. We look forward to broad participation.  
4.18.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
4.19.   Thank you t o everyone who took the floor. We were delighted to have hosted this webinar 
and it is wonderful news that Mexico is considering a similar type of  webinar and we would urge 
others to consider that as well.  
4.20.   In response to the Russian Federations question , I believe we will be circulating a document 
in the near term that will have a variety of links in it.  
4.21.   The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
5  EXPERIENCE SHARING/THEMATIC DISCUSSION  
5.1.  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://tfadatabase.org ) with related links also being included in the minutes of the  meeting. If a 
delegation requested it, their intervention would a lso be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.  
5.2.  Members  addressed the following  issues:  
A. Experiences Sharing: Accelerate Implementation of the WTO Trade Facilitation 
Agreement Through China Customs' Smart Governance – Presentation  by China  
5.3.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . 
B. Implementing the WTO TFA: Shifting 11 Provisions from Category C to Category B  – 
Presentation by Nepal  
5.4.  Information  on the p resentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . 
C. Implementation of the TFA Measures – Presentation by Tajikistan  
5.5.  Inform ation on the presentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . 
D. Implementation of Article 7.4 Of the Trade Facilitation Agreement; and National Trade 
Facilitation Committee - Developments Since 2017 – Presentation by Turkey  
5.6.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 20 - 
 
  E. Vanuatu's Experience with Implementation of Customs Automatio n and Single Window 
– Presentation by Vanuatu and UNCTAD  
5.7.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . 
F. Compendium Sharing Experiences Related to the COVID -19 Crisis – G/TFA/W/40  
5.8.  The delegate of India indicated the following:  
5.9.  Chair my delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for the compilation presented. However, 
this compilation does not include details of COVID related TF measures taken by India, as circulated 
under document G/TFA/W/26. My delegation would thus like to request this Committee and the 
Secretariat to include details of the COVID related TF measures taken by India and circulate a revised 
compilation.  
G. From Bali To Borders: ITC Support to WTO  Members for Implementing TFA – 
Presentation by the ITC 
5.10.   Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: 
https://tfadatabase.org . 
6  REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGR EEMENT IN 
ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 23.1.6 OF THE TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT  
- Informal Discussion on the Review – Report by the Chairperson  
6.1.  The Chair recalled that Article 23.1.6 state d that "The Committee shall review the operation 
and implementation of this Agreement four years from its entry into force, and periodically 
thereafter". The Trade Facilitation Agreement entered into force on 22 February 2017, therefore, the 
first review of the Agreement was required to be carried out this year.  
6.2.  At its meetin g on 3 March 2021, the Committee approved a roadmap for the conduct of the 
review, which was circulated in document G/TFA/1.  In accordance with the roadmap, the Committee 
had held its second informal meeting dedicated to a discussion of proposals submitted  by Members 
under the review on 22 June. As you recall, it was also agreed at the meeting on 3 March that the 
Chair would update each regular meeting of the Committee on the discussions in the informal 
dedicated meetings, and that there would be an opportu nity for additional discussion, especially for 
those Members that had been unable to participate in the informal dedicated session.  
6.3.  Accordingly, the Chair had prepared  a report (JOB/TF/226) on the  22 June  informal meeting 
dedicated to the review .  
6.4.  There had been two agenda items for consideration at the informal meeting: (1) discussion of 
the first draft of the factual report which was circulated as document G/TFA/W/41; and 
(2) consideration of any submiss ions by Members in relation to the review.  
6.5.  The discussion of each agenda item had been  structured in relation to how the Committee had 
agreed to organize the resulting report on the review, i.e. Section I covering the TFA provisions, 
Section II dealing wit h the special flexibilities of the TFA, and Section III covering any proposals 
related to the institutional arrangements and final provisions.  
- Discussion of the First Draft of the Factual Report  (G/TFA/W/41)  
 
- Section 1 of the TFA  
 
6.6.  Japan had suggested  for ease of reference, a table be included in paragraph 2.4, on page 8 of 
the factual report , like Table 2 on Page 4.  
6.7.  The Russian Federation had made a suggestion to add the following text to paragraph 2.7 of 
Section 2 of the factual report: "For the maintenance of transparency of Members' notifications of 
official places where information under Article 1 of TFA is published, the Secretariat shall annually G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 21 - 
 
  monitor the operability of these places (links) related, namely, to the implementation of Article 1.4 
of TFA, and circulate the request to appropriate Members to update this information where such 
links have been identified as broken."  
6.8.  China had requested to remove paragraph 2.6 "Involvement of the private sector" as this 
activity  was not an official activity of the committee. Private sector participation was still under 
discussion.  
6.9.  The European Union had suggested that the following additional inf ormation be included in the 
factual report:  
6.10.   Regarding transparency notifications, TFA transparency notifications included in the document 
"Updating of the listing of notification obligations and the compliance therewith as set out in 
Annex  III of the Report of the Working Group on Notification Obligations and Procedure" which was 
circulated by the Council for Trade in Goods in document G/L/223/Rev.28, dated 26 February 2021 
should be included.  
- Section 2 of the TFA  
 
6.11.   Nepal, on behalf of the LDC Group, had suggested to:  
• include a brief analysis of some of the tables in the factual report;  
• specify the categorization of provisions by LDCs;  
• identify common articles notified by LDCs under each category;  
• identify provisions that LDC identify most difficult t o implement;  
• include a table on import and export data (2017 -2020) to understand TFA implementation in 
global trade scenario by groups of Members;  
• type of TA requested by provision;  
• Include a section on LDC implementation challenges and solutions;  
• include the areas of intervention by donor -country Members; and,  
• a summary of the presentations made by Annex D partners and other organizations would be 
useful.  
 
6.12.   Paraguay had made general comments on the importance of the factual report reflecting the 
experiences  and difficulties of the land -locked developing countries in the process of implementing 
the Agreement; and had suggested to improve and streamline matchmaking processes to ensure 
cooperation through the available mechanisms. Paraguay would  share specific information through 
the group of landlocked developing countries, including on implementation of category B and C, 
transit, digitalisation, and e -commerce.  
6.13.   Mongolia, on behalf of landlocked countries, had requested the inclusion in the factual report 
of disaggregated information regarding the landlocked developing countries implementation of the 
TFA, including their challenges.  
6.14.   The European Union  had suggested that more substantial information could be brought into 
the factual report based on the Secretaria t regular reports to the TF Committee including, for 
example:  
• the achievements that all developing countries and LDCs had made commitments, except for 
four Members;  
• information on two Members that had  failed to notify any commitments except category A 
since 2014, and given that their only notification date d back seven  years, the EU consider ed 
that all deadlines had passed, and those Members must consider that all their commitments 
are category A;  
• the number of Members that had shifted categories, and the number of provisions that had 
been shifted from B to C or from C to B;  
• the number of Members that had requested an extension for implementation of commitments 
whose date has passed already; and,  
• regarding transparency notifications made in accordance with implementation commitments, 
the report should include outstanding notifications and include figures on the share of 
members that regularly update their transparency notifications.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 22 - 
 
  - Consideration of submissions by Members in relation to the  Review  
 
6.15.   The Chair recalled that t hree written submissions had circulated since the dedicated session 
on the Review on 21 April:  
i. A proposal from Brazil and the United States to formalize engagement with the private sector, 
circulated in document G/TFA/W/42 ;  
ii. A proposal from the European Union to streamline the coordination process to identify the 
need for future assistance, circulated in document G/TFA/W/45; and  
iii. A proposal from Japan to follow up the actual status of implementation of the TFA, circulated 
in document G/TFA/W/46.  
 
- Section 1 of the TFA  
 
6.16.   The United States would  circulate a communication sharing the US experience in 
implementing second test procedures as required by TFA Article 5.3.  
6.17.   Brazil had previewed a proposal to improve the exchange of inf ormation under Article 12, 
which would  be introduced in the formal meeting.  
- Section 2 of the TF A 
 
6.18.   Nepal, on behalf of the LDCs, would  submit the LDCs collective perspective on their 
implementation challenges, success stories, notifications, relationship with donors, and the 
implementation of category C measures.  
6.19.   Japan's proposal suggest ed: 
• to establish follow -up methods on the outstan ding notifications that were overdue, and the 
actual implementation status of Members that have notified the Committee of their 
implementation dates;  
• to add a new standing agenda item for Members to provide updates on overdue Section I and 
Section II not ifications (which is in support of US proposal in G/TFA/W/35);  
• Members submit follow -up notifications or provide presentations in experience sharing 
sessions to confirm their actual implementation dates ; and 
• that Members review ed on a regular basis th e effectiveness of the list of definitive dates 
prepared by the Secretariat in document G/TFA/INF/1.  
 
6.20.   The European Union proposal suggest ed: 
• to formally invite the Members having notified category C commitments to report on their 
current situation and future needs. To facilitate this process, the EU is ready to participate in 
donor meetings, called by Members in their capitals, to discuss their  needs. The current 
number of 15 notifications of TACB arrangements does not allow the Committee to make a 
proper review of the implementation of the Section 2 flexibilities;  
• encourage Members to coordinate with donors and to report in time for the dedic ated session 
on TACB in October. EU is in preparatory phase for period 2022 -2028 it would be helpful to 
know where gaps exists for financing assistance.  
 
- Section 3 of the TFA  
 
6.21.   The European Union proposal suggest ed: 
• to continue, after the pandemic, to o ffer the opportunity for the remote participation of capital -
based officials in Committee meetings, which would allow the Committee to benefit from 
experts' input;  
• As a pilot project the Committee to use an e -agenda for two meetings and then the Committe e 
could draw conclusions as to whether the e -agenda could be of use to facilitate the preparation 
of meetings;  
 G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 23 - 
 
  6.22.   On agenda -setting:  
• Item 1.1 – notifications under Article s 1.4, 10.4.2, 10.6.2 and 12.2.2 should be separated 
between those notifying new inform ation and those that are simply notifying the restoration 
of broken weblinks ; 
• have more specific agenda items for future meetings. For example, under reference to 
transparency notifications, separate new notifications from updates of web -links; 
• under Article 17, distinguish notifications under Article s 17.1 and 17.2 - which are notifications 
simply for information - from 17.3, which are requests to the Committee ; 
• Committee meetings should address due notifications and not solely notifications that have 
been made; and, as the notification deadlines have passed three years ago, that Article 15 
notifications are in general excluded from the agenda and only mentioned exceptionally as 
necessary (which was in support of US proposal in G/TFA/W/35).  
 
6.23.   The final writt en proposal was from Brazil and the United States  to formalize engagement 
with the private sector, and it had been  circulated in document G/TFA/W/42.  
6.24.   The proposal suggest ed to: 
• hold sessions with private sector on the margins of the TF Committee meetings in order to 
receive feedback from the private – which is the most sensitive stakeholder ;  
• consider establishing a process to review anticipated requests to participate in inform al 
sessions.  
 
6.25.   Comments and reactions to this proposal included the following:  
• support had been  expressed by some Members for proper engagement from the private sector 
in an informal manner but should be within Committee meetings to ensure that all Member s 
can participate and are associated with the event ; 
• a number of interventions highlighted the importance of defining the modalities of participation 
to ensure representation in terms of size, geographical distribution of businesses, size of 
businesses to avoid overwhelming the Committee agenda by this engage ment with the private 
sector ; 
• while encouraging of participation of the private sector, the point was made that there were 
avenues in place already with the national authorities and there were relevant events hosted 
by the WTO ; 
• some Members also recogn ized the importance of participation by the private sector, especially 
MSMEs ; 
• one Member expressed interest in having more discussion on the role of NTFCs in this proposal 
as NTFCs can monitor on the ground implementation challenges ; 
• another Member hig hlighted the need to agree a framework of discussions with the private 
sector and identify the objectives and outcome of those discussions.  
 
6.26.   For those Members that so requested, their statements from the informal dedicated session 
would  be included in the record of this formal session.  
6.27.   Information on the work being conducted by Members on upcoming written proposals was 
welcomed.  It was encouraging to see the increase in written submissions, and the informal exchange 
had been  another positive sign of Members  active engagement. There was a sense of  a growing 
momentum for engagement with the review.  The Chair encourage d all Members to consider  possible 
submissions they would like to add to the discussion and to submit them in writing.  
6.28.   The delegate of the Europe an Union  indicated the following:  
6.29.   This is quite a piece of work that you have been doing, collecting all of the inputs from the 
Members that was shared during the informal session yesterday. We would like to reiterate our call 
that the sharing of experiences on COVID -19 should be part of the  four-year review  report.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 24 - 
 
  6.30.   The Russian Federation  indicated the following:  
6.31.   We would like to thank the Secretariat and you Chair for providing us with this summary  of 
our discussions yesterday. We would like to clarify whether it would be possible to circulate those 
notes that were taken in the course of the discussion yesterday and today.  
6.32.   The Chair  explained that the notes would be circulated to Members .  
6.33.   The delegate of Ecuador  indicated the following:  
6.34.   Firstly, we would like to thank and congratulate you and the entire Committee. Your work is 
outstanding. We know that this is a lot of information,  and this summary helps us a great deal to 
properly understand the conversations. Firstly, I would like to make a comment on the topic of 
proposals and how these will be analysed. I don 't know if you a planning to consolidate them in one 
single  document with a view to it being a component for the review of these propo sals, that they be 
aligned but as an intermediate step, how are you planning to analyse all these proposals that are 
being submitted and the next few steps we can expect. I would also like to refer to the EU proposal 
and how its organisation with donors wi ll work. We are also analysing this just like the other 
proposals and we hope that we can give more details in the future.  
6.35.   On this particular proposal, we think that is it very useful. We think that it is vital to remember 
that there are challenges and lim itations like several Members have said in this Committee. For 
Ecuador, as mentioned here, we have contacted the diplomatic representations of the donor 
countries and in capital but responses in regard to TF are not among the priority areas for 
cooperation  in the future. They need to carry out further conversations to confirm whether they 
might be able to consider this assistance. We are well aware that this is part of internal processes 
of each respective Member, but we are putting this on the table. This takes time and there are delays 
when it comes to technology and assistance and capacity building. Our NTFC is working hard with 
the donors to get the necessary support to implement the relevant activities and category C in 
particular that we are committed to, and we would prepare a notification on our agreements with 
donors because we think that is important to reflect the existing divides as a result of the review of 
this agreement. We think that this will be a very useful topic in the session planned for October.  
6.36.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
6.37.   Thank you for your thorough report. We want to thank the Secretariat for drafting the factual 
report on the first four years of implementation. The document conveniently includes all 
implementation data and relevant weblinks in one place for ease of reference.  We continue to 
encourage Members to submit their proposals to improve Agreement implementation.  
6.38.   The delegate of Brazil  indicated the following:  
6.39.   Congratulations to you Chair and the S ecretariat for the report. I would like to make clear 
that Brazil announced in the informal discussion about our proposal on Article 12, Customs 
Cooperation, we will explain further today in the item "Additional Opportunity for Discussion " and 
we are going  to present it formally written in next sessions.  
6.40.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
6.41.   We would agree that  it would be very useful to have  the proposals in writing in one document 
for ease of reading and management .  
- First Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement - Factual Report (G/TFA/W/41)  
6.42.   Without any comments from the floor, the Chair moved to the next item.  
- WTO Trade Facilitation Committee: Proposal to Formalize Engagement with the 
Private Sector - Communication from Brazil and the United States (G/TFA/W/42)  
6.43.   The delegate of the United S tates indicated the following:  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 25 - 
 
  6.44.   Thank you to the Members of this Committee, the Chair, and Secretariat for providing us a 
forum to introduce the United States and Brazil's Proposal to Formalize Engagement with the Private 
Sector.  
6.45.   As Members, we can gauge th e relative success of implementation plans by feedback from 
the private sector. In some cases, the private sector may be the most sensitive stakeholder to trade 
facilitation reforms and changes in border agency operations. Therefore, every opportunity to t ap 
into valuable private sector insight is critical for the success of full implementation of the TFA.  
6.46.   Brazil and the United States propose that the Committee convene informally on the margins 
of formal Committee meetings to host discussions with and prese ntations from the private sector to 
facilitate direct feedback regarding on -the-ground implementation of the TFA. The private sector 
organizations may present how implementation of specific provisions of the TFA has improved the 
private sector experience o r identify areas of remaining challenges.  
6.47.   Furthermore, as a Committee, we may want to consider establishing a process to increase 
the efficiency of reviewing the many anticipated requests from the private sector to present at these 
informal sessions.  
6.48.   We lo ok forward to a robust discussion on this topic from the Membership.  
6.49.   The delegate of Brazil  indicated the following:  
6.50.   The close collaboration dialogue between governments and the private sector is essential for 
the effective implementation of the TFA. We a lready do this in Brazil. The NTFC CONFAC, works in 
partnership with the private sector through the subcommittee on cooperation and local facilitation 
commissions. CONFAC would like to do that more in the TFC. The competent authorities of the 
Brazilian gov ernment have a large interest in exchanging views with the private sector on the 
implementation of the TFA, with a view to increasing the transparency of the government action and 
to seek solutions to reduce the costs related to the procedures of imports, exports , and transit of 
goods. As the US mentioned, we aim to establish a process to increase the efficiency of reviewing 
the many anticipated requests from the private sector we present at the informal sessions of the 
TFC. 
6.51.   The delegate of the European Uni on indicated the following:  
6.52.   The EU  congratulate s the US and Brazil for their proposal. The EU supports that the private 
sector should be engaged in the TFC meetings and provid e input, so as to have a reality check of 
how TFA implementation is working on th e ground . We are currently in discussion with the US and 
Brazil on the establishment of the process that would ensure representati on of the sectors that would 
participate and also  to ensure that it is organised to the extent possible.  
6.53.   The delegate of Ecuador  indicated the following:  
6.54.   Firstly, we would like to thank the US and Brazil for this proposal. We are also grateful for the 
further comments made with it. We are still studying this proposal but on a preliminary basis we 
would like to indicate that we agree with the core principals. The participation of the private sector 
can assist in providing feedback to identify problems that might emerge in the implementation of 
the various provisions of the TFA. The informal meeting format seems very appropriate and useful 
to us. We now need to look at how to strike the right balance in this exchange with the private sector 
such that we can best enrich this dialogue.  
- Additional Opportunity  for Discussion  
6.55.   The delegate of Brazil  indicated the following:  
6.56.   As I mentioned before, we announced in the informal session our future proposal on 
Article  12. I would like to explain more about it and soon, we are going to circulate the document. 
On the co ntext of the TFA review, Brazil is honoured to anticipate Brazil's proposal on Article 12 to 
improve customs cooperation and  look forward to other Members joining us. The exchange of G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 26 - 
 
  customs information  has a vital role as a TF mechanism because it fosters  risk management, 
provides security of operations and the agility of the release of regularly marked  cargos.  
6.57.   Article 12 of the TFA emerged with this purpose of meeting the concerns related to the 
exchange of information between customs. It has enabled the exchange of information in the 
situations when there are no doubts about the veracity and correction of the declarations presented 
by the importers or exporter. Nevertheless, Article 12 does not provide the legal basis for electronic 
exchanges in advance, and automatic information for the purpose of risk management. These 
exchanges are recommended instruments such as the customs guidelines on integrated supply chain 
management and the safe framework of standards. Both were developed and approved under the 
WCO but do not have the international agreement status and consequently, also do not provide the 
necessary legal basis for the implementation of such exchanges.  
6.58.   In addition, each request for information based on Article 12 is conditioned on compliance of 
certain requirements, for example, that the applicant has performed prechecks in its own country 
and provides the description of the case under investigation. On the one hand, these conditions 
prevent the requests for large volumes of information which woul d make it difficult to service by the 
requested Member. On the other hand, it requests the scope of the instrument. It hinders its use as 
a risk management tool. It limits to suspicious situations as to the veracity and accuracy of the 
information provides  by the importers or exporters.  
6.59.   Brazil encourages Members to establish bilateral mechanisms for transmission of advanced 
electronic data from the export declaration and the automatic regular exchange of data and of its 
import and export for the purpose of  risk management.  
6.60.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
6.61.   Simply to express appreciation to Brazil for its preview of its proposal and contribution to the 
four-year review and we look forward to the circulation of this proposal and getting back to Brazil 
with an y comments.  
6.62.   The Chair asked if any Member had considered whether to adhere to the agreed roadmap or 
to delay the circulation of the first draft of the review until after the July meeting, which had been 
re-scheduled for 19 -20 July. This would give Members sufficient time to co ntinue their review of the 
factual report and the submitted proposals.  
6.63.   The current timeline saw a first draft of the review report to be circulated in July and the first 
discussion was to take place at the July meeting of the Committee, with July also being the deadline 
for submitting issues for consideration during the review. The end of August would be  the cut -off 
date for submission of written comments from Members on the first draft. Circulation  of the second 
draft of the review report would take place  in mid-September with an informal meeting of the 
Committee in late September to discuss the second draft.  
6.64.   The next informal meeting was four weeks away, having been scheduled for 19 July. To give 
Members sufficient time to consider the first draft report ahead of 19 July, it would  be necessary to 
circulate it in early July, to give approximately two weeks for Members to review it.  
6.65.   However, several  Members had indicated that they were still reviewing the first draft of the 
factual report and  had not yet sub mitted the formal comments or drafting suggestions to the 
Committee. In that sense, the Chair wondered  if there was a value in keeping the meeting in July 
for further discussion of proposals, both the current ones that had come in, as well as new ones to 
come, a number of which had been already  identified , and asking the Secretariat to do a first draft 
of the report after the meeting to be circulated shortly thereafter, and then ask for comments f rom 
Members by mid -September and then hold a  discussion of that first draft report at the September 
informal meeting.  
6.66.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
6.67.   The EU supports the date of mid-August for comments and a focus in July on propo sals that 
have been announced as well as new proposals .  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 27 - 
 
  6.68.   The delegate of the Russian Federation  indicated the following:  
6.69.   We agree that the comments should be submitted by mid -August. On the other hand , we 
would like to share the proposal, that for example we maintain and keep the first version of the text 
without any changes being introduced and have a compilation version of just suggestions provided 
by Members.  
6.70.   The Chair explained that the comments to be received by end August would be in relation to 
the first draft of the that would come after the July meeting. For now, comments to document 
G/TFA/W/41 were being expected as soon as possible to start making the necessary adjustments. 
Some comments ha d already been made and had been mentioned on the Chair's report. However, 
some Members had indicated that they were still examining the document and would come back to 
the Committee with comments . This proposal would give space for them to continue that process 
and provide their comments , hopefully  before the Ju ly meeting . Once the July meeting  took place , 
the Secretariat could  update the document as soon as possible and incorporate  the proposals . How 
to do so is the next topic for discussion.  
6.71.   The delegate of Ecuador  indicated the following:  
6.72.   We are in the case that you described -we are still analysing the first version of the factual 
report. As we understand, based on  the discussions in this meeting , there is new input that needs 
to be included. What we suggest is to include those pieces of information in the document so that 
we can track change s, without losing sight of the basic document. This is something we have done 
in other committees when we have had so -called live documents. This would certainly not be the 
only instance where we would be feeding in new comments. We appreciate the time constraints 
here, but we would suggest doing it in this way so that we can really see clearly what adjustments 
or amendments might have been made in real -time. 
6.73.   The Chair responded  that Members could consider  follow ing the procedure applied in the 
Technical Barriers to Trade ( TBT) Committee, where suggestions from proposals were listed  in the 
substance of the report , maintaining ownership  of the proposal . The Committee could then exa mine 
the report and continue discussions to decide how to best incorporate the proposals,  because the 
Secretariat could not make this decision.  This could be done through a compilation of proposals with 
the titles and the document numbers, including a webl ink to them.    
6.74.    Members were encouraged to submit their proposals and comments on the factual report 
(document G/TFA/W/41) as soon as possible and the Chair would be circulating his report on the 
22 June informal  meeting . The Secretariat was asked to put together a docume nt for the proposals 
that had come in so far.  
6.75.   The delegate of Ecuador  indicated the following:  
6.76.   I just wanted to have more clarity. As we understand it, the factual report is very specific, it 
outlines what has been said in the last four years and specific  aspects of the Agreement. What we 
want is for the proposals to go beyond that and not just be directly related to the factual report as 
such. We also understand that in the report , the review will have different sections, the factual report 
will be just o ne of the sections of the general report, and another section will be the part with 
proposals of future work. That's how we have understood it. If we are mistaken,  please provide more 
clarity. If we were to submit future steps and proposals of future work,  this would be in a separate 
section, that is why we suggested having a consolidation of all proposals because it  is useful, some 
sort of summary document to know what is on the table and are currently talking about. This could 
have a title and summary, we  don't mind about that, we are flexible,  but we would suggest that 
there be one document or instrument to contain all the proposals.  
6.77.   The Chair  indicated that Members would have to think about how best to structure the report , 
especially how to best incorpo rate Members' proposals. The comments had been noted and the 
Committee would come back to this discussion.  
6.78.   The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 28 - 
 
  7  RECENT AND UPCOMING ACTIVITIES  
- Report by the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement  Facility (TFAF) (G/TFA/W/43)  
7.1.  The representative of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility (TFAF) made an update to 
supplement the written report that had been  circulated in document G/TFA/W /66. 
7.2.  During this period , work had been focused on the grant program and the TFAF website.  
7.3.  The written report provided statistics on the expressions of interest (EOI) received and the 
Project Preparation Grants (PPG) that had been awarded to date.  
7.4.  To date, 18 expressions of interest (E OI) had b een received, each of which had been circulated 
to a list of 68 representatives of donors and development partners that were active in the provision 
of TFA implementation support.  
7.5.  Of the 18 EOIs circulated, five had resulted in the identification of potential implementation 
support , for a total of 57 articles of the TFA. Almost all EOIs requested assistance for multiple TFA 
provisions.  
7.6.  Once a potential implementation partner has been identified, TFAF puts the two parties in 
contact w ith each other and steps  back.  However, if implementation support does not come through , 
the Member can return to the TFAF grant process.  
7.7.  If circulation of an EOI does not lead to implementation support , the Member will be invited to 
complete an applicati on for a PPG. This application form builds on the existing EOI application in 
order to keep the process streamlined. It is up to the requesting M ember to complete and validate 
an application  form if they want to move the PPG process forward.   
7.8.  Of the 13 EOIs that did not result in finding implementation assistance:  
• Two countries were not eligible to request a PPG because they are WTO Observers or in 
arrears.   
• Eight Members completed their applications and requested a PPG.  
• One Member did not move forward to  a grant request after deciding that they could implement 
the provisions themselves.  
• Two Members started the application process but did not complete it , perhaps due to other 
priorities during the COVID -19 pandemic.  
 
7.9.  One of these E OI applications was rece ived during this reporting period and resulted in an offer 
for implementation support within one day of receipt , covering  six provisions of the TFA.  
7.10.   As the procedures for circulating and responding to Expressions of Interest have become more 
established an d familiar to development partners, offers to provide implementation assistance have 
been coming forward more quickly and in greater numbers.  This is true for the PPG process as well.  
7.11.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
7.12.   We thank TF AF for its report, and we are pleased to see that grants are being requested and 
in turn being approved and implemented.  
7.13.   On page 2, paragraph 3.1, we would like to ask if the Facility could share what does a PPG 
grant means for 9 or 11 provisions? What doe s it look like?  
7.14.   The next two concern paragraph 5.1. Who are the development partners you have reached 
out to specifically? What events did TFAF supply speakers for?  
7.15.   Who are the Annex D partners, specifically, referred to in the report, what actual coordina tion 
took place? In other words, when engaging with the Annex D partners, what are the outcomes of 
those discussions?  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 29 - 
 
  7.16.   Finally, we would like to ask TFAF i f it could provide an update of the donors since the last 
report, and the amounts each contributed?  
7.17.   We look forward to the yearly report about donors and contributions also.  
7.18.   Thank you again, and we look forward to hearing more details.  
7.19.   The representative of the TFAF indicated the following:  
7.20.   A project preparation grant (PPG) for nine provisions, for example, means that the Member 
had requested a PPG grant for nine provisions of the TFA. They would all be provisions that the 
Member had notified in category C and for which they have not found implementation support.  
The application form s for approved grants are on the TFA Facility website under "Grants Awarded" . 
7.21.   With regard to what a completed PPG for multiple provisions looks like , we can look at the 
Grenada project proposal that resulted from their PPG for eight TFA provisions. It cont ains a separate 
project proposal for each of the TFA provisions requested. Each one contains a description of trade 
facilitation in Grenada, an analysis of implementation of the specific TFA provision , including 
information on the implementation needs, tec hnical requirements, capacity required to implement, 
a budget, a draft timeline, expected outcomes, risk assessment and mitigation, as well as 
cross-cutting issues ( e.g., gender, environment, climate change), and information on potential 
implementation par tners.  
7.22.   The information set out in a TFAF PPG project proposal can be found in the Grant Rules that 
are found on the website. If Grenada uses any of these proposals to apply for a project 
implementation grant, then the application containing this project pr oposal will be available on the 
website.  
7.23.   TFAF maintains a list of 68 development partner representatives that includes donors and 
development partners that are active in the provision of TFA implementation support. For example, 
USAID is on the list as are all WTO Donor Members. The Annex D + organ izations are on the list , as 
well as other organizations such as TradeMark East Africa, IADB.   
7.24.   When TFAF receive s an expression of interest, the first step in the grant process, the 
Expression of Interest (EOIis circulated to the entire list to see if any one can provide implementation 
support, before moving to the PPG. Once a PPG is completed, we assist the requesting Member to 
find implementation partners. We may circulate the resulting project proposal to the entire list. 
However, we normally start with development partners that are working in the country or region 
that we are aware of. In addition, as part of the grant process the grant recipient also reaches out 
to their own donor network through their NTFC and the consultant through his or her professi onal 
and regional networks.   
7.25.   In these cases, we will contact the development partner or partners directly to see if they can 
assist with implementation of any of the provisions covered by the grant. I don't want to mention 
specific partners and projects b ecause I don't want to put them on the spot in case their support 
does not come through.  
7.26.   As to speakers for events , TFAF did not speak at any events because of the moratorium so 
we tried to find speakers from the Market Access Division to fill requests. We  could not find speakers 
for all events requested but we did find speakers for the following events since the last report:  a 
Workshop for the NTFC of Guatemala ; an UNCTAD Training Session for the Government of 
Zimbabwe; UNCTAD  training for seven Francophon e African  Countries; COMCEC  Trade Working 
Group for Middle Eastern Countries; UNECE Launch of the National Trade Facilitation Roadmap  of 
the Kyrgyz Republic; ICAO Workshop for the Middle Eastern Region; Arab African Business Forum  
on Agrifood  Products; and an event coming up which is the WCO Knowledge Academy.  
7.27.   Most of these events are listed on the calendar of TF events on the TFAF website  under the 
"Media and Resources " tab. G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 30 - 
 
  7.28.   As to who are the Annex D partners and what discussions took place , we stay in close 
communication with the core Annex D partners - WB, WCO, UNCTAD, OECD, plus ITC, UNECE, Global 
Alliance, GEA, IATA, ICC, IRU, UNESCAP, CARICOM – to give you an idea.  
7.29.   Communication takes place through email, What's App, TEAMS, on -line meetin gs- and may 
take place with various groupings of organizations. In these communications we share information 
with partners to keep them informed , especially information that might be useful for their 
implementation work  such as the accelerated implementati on document. Or they share information 
on upcoming events or publications. For example, this month several partners shared information 
on their panels for the WTO 2021 Public Forum.  
7.30.   In normal times we coordinate joint events  and we either participate or fi nd speakers for their 
events. I already mentioned the recent events. We answer their questions , for example, several 
partners have asked about the possibility of holding TF side events at MC12. We are looking into this 
for them, and we have meetings from t ime to time.  
7.31.   Since the last TFC meeting , we had a meeting with GTAF to discuss where they might be able 
to provide implementation support for TFAF grants. We had a meeting with UNCTAD , together with 
our respective directors. This meeting was requested by U NCTAD to share information and possible 
future cooperation if TFAF can resume activities.  
7.32.   As to the TFAF donors , we have not received any new contributions in this period. We have 
had nine donors that have provided funds for the TFAF trust fund, as well as  three Members that 
provided funding for the needs assessment program during the negotiations . Their remaining funds 
were transferred to the TFAF trust fund, with their approval, when TFAF was created.  
7.33.   With regard to  the TFAF annual report , this will conta in the end of year financial report from 
2020 that shows the amount of funding remaining in the trust fund from each donor and 
development partner. The following Members have provided funding: Australia; Austria; China; 
Czech Republic; Finland; France; Ire land; New Zealand; Norway; Separate Customs Territory of 
Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu; United Kingdom; United States.  
7.34.   The legacy donors , which are  the three members that have funds that were transferred from 
the needs assessment program are Ireland, C hinese Taipei  and the  US. 
7.35.   The delegate of Guatemala  indicated the following:  
7.36.   I just wanted to take the floor to thank the presenter for the report with regard to 
improvements that are being made to the webpage. We would like to encourage the Secretariat to  
continue in this direction. We think that the webpage will be extremely useful, not just for the work 
of the Committee but also to share at a later stage with the Committee any experience that has 
been shared amongst Members. We note that , unfortunately, because of the moratorium we have 
not carried out many of the activities that were planned in previous years, but we hope to participate 
in the Chair's consultations and we anxiously hope that we will come up with a favourable decision 
so that we can conti nue with this area of activity which has been suspended for the moment. We 
also hope that we will come up with a solution promptly.  
7.37.   Information would be appreciated on the current status of selection of this Committee  and 
whether the Chair and the people who will participate have already been a ppointed.  
7.38.   The representative of the TFAF indicated the following:  
7.39.   The Project Implementation Grants  will be reviewed by a selection committee that is made 
up of developing, LDC and donors to the trust fund. We had to  replace two members from among 
the donors, and we are currently talking to two donor s and development partners to confirm that 
they are available for the project implementation grants. We are in discussion and waiting for their 
final confirmation. Hopeful ly by the next meeting we can report that the selection committee is 
complete . G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 31 - 
 
  8  TFAF CONSULTATIONS – REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON  
8.1.  The Chair  drew the Committee's attention to a communication from the United States circulated 
in document G/TFA/W/36 entitled "Role of the Trade Facilitation Committee in the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement Facility".  
8.2.  The communication had been introduced at the Comm ittee meeting of 22 -23 April  2021. After 
a substantive exchange of views, it was agreed that the Chair  would hold an informal open -ended 
consultation and invite The Global Trust Fund, the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF), 
and the Finance Man agement Service to present on their procedures. This meeting had taken  place 
on 20 May, and it had provided an opportunity to learn about the different mandates, functions, and 
governance of these bodies which in turn could inform our subsequent discussion s. 
8.3.  As a follow -up to that meeting, the Chair had  convened  a second open -ended informal 
consultation on 9 June. With a view to facilitating a focussed discussion, three questions had been 
posed to Members in the convening notice for that meeting, which had circulated on 3 June : 
i. Question 1: Are the TFAF functions in need of an update, keeping in mind the different phases? 
If so, what would be Members' suggestions?  
ii. Question 2: Recalling the information shared with the Committee on 20 May, what, in the view 
of Members, would be the advantages and disadvantages to changing the model for the TFAF 
management structure? and  
iii. Question 3: Could an enhancement of the regular reporting mechanism provide a tool to elicit 
more formalized feedback from the TF Committee on Members' needs and planned activities? 
Also, as an avenue for oversight of planned activities while limiting micro -management?  
8.4.  Seven delegations had taken  the floor during the discussion.  
8.5.  Regarding Question 1, whether TFAF's functions needed  an update, views were expressed 
noting the valuable contributions of the TFAF to implementation of the TFA, and that there was no 
need to update its functions at the moment. It was further recalled that the Facility was a result of 
negotiations between Mem bers and was an integral part of the Agreement. This was an important 
difference between TFAF and other trust funds.  
8.6.  Some Members had expressed the need for TFAF to get back to work to provide technical 
assistance and capacity building. However, one Membe r had expressed concerns in relation to TFAF 's 
function and conflicts of interest. In connection with this concern, a question had been  raised as to 
whom TFAF reports and from whom it takes instructions -donors to TFAF or the Trade Facilitation 
Committee. T here had also been a view that a significant overlap existed between the activities of 
the ITTC and those of TFAF outside the grant activities, and either the Committee supervises every 
stage of the technical assistance process or ITTC carries out the TA a spect while TFAF focuse d on 
grants.  
8.7.  The discussion had moved on to TFAF's Operational Guidelines. Views had been  expressed that 
the Guidelines were a good model, and reference had been  made to Article 16 of the Guidelines , 
which provided that TFAF was operated, managed, and monitored by the WTO Secretariat and that 
it report ed to the Committee. However, a view had been  expressed that the guidelines were not a 
consensus document and did not represent the views of all Members.  
8.8.  While several  Members had agreed  that good governance and oversight was important, they 
also wanted to avoid micromanagement and ensure that the Facility was able to deliver what it was 
intended to do. They considered that it would be counterproductive to have more regulations that 
would  hinder the TFAF from fulfilling its objectives.  
8.9.  There had also been a view that it was important to hear from beneficiaries since the objective 
of the TFAF was to serve them. The beneficiaries could not feel that they had lost aid because of 
changes in th e functions of TFAF. In light of the current imposed moratorium on TFAF's technical 
assistance and capacity -building activities, some delegations had expressed a strong view that the 
moratorium should be lifted and TFAF should continue with these activitie s, while consultations were 
ongoing.  G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 32 - 
 
  8.10.   Another delegation had proposed, as a basis for discussion, that a first step could be to look 
at the text of the Guidelines in those areas that were causing concern and propose text to modify it.  
8.11.   With regard to Questio n 3, there had not been  apparent disagreement about there being 
scope and support for enhanced reporting by the TFAF to the Committee. It had been  suggested 
that there could be a range of measures through which to achieve that objective, for example, 
throu gh the inclusion of a standing item in the agenda of the Committee.  
8.12.   Mention had also been made that the Committee should be able to request information from 
the TFAF on matters related to enhancing the implementation of the Agreement, for example under 
Articles 21 and 22. In this connection, it had been  observed that as of the October 2020 Committee 
meeting, TFAF had circulated a report of its activities ahead of every Committee meeting, allowing 
Members to review and comment on its work.  
8.13.   A different view had been  expressed, however, that the extent of reporting had not been 
satisfactory in the past and the Member did not expect any scope for improvement in the future.  
8.14.   In summary,  there had been  an apparent agreement that the Committee was responsible for 
the oversight of TFAF. No Member stated that this was not the case. The pending issue was how to 
better reflect this oversight function?  There was  clear interest in resolving this matter.  
8.15.   There appear ed to be a view among Members that they saw the Committe e providing 
oversight of the Facility and there was continued interest that the situation remain ed unchanged. 
Considering the genesis of TFAF and its mandate when it was created, it would seem appropriate 
that the Committee would have that responsibility.  However, there had been  no agreement on how 
to move forward.  
8.16.   Accordingly, it was agreed that the Chair  would hold further consultations with interested 
Members to consider if there is a way to get past the separation and divergence of views around 
TFAF's other activities and to restart them.  
8.17.   It had been planned to hold those consultations ahead of the Committee meeting but as the 
result of the high demand for meetings this month, unfortunately, that had not been possible. 
The next consultations would be  convene d at the earliest possible date.  
8.18.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
8.19.   We look forward to the Committee reaching a consensus decision as to whether TFAF will 
report to the TF Committee, or its donors. A final understanding would clarify our next steps greatly.  
8.20.   As we have stated before, once there is a consensus, the decision can be made to update the 
operational guidelines to "operationalize" the role and responsibility of the TF Committee in the 
actions of the  TFAF, so that TFAF can remain in the Market Access  Division , or it can be moved to 
the ITTC and operate under those guidelines.  
8.21.   If TFAF remains in the Market Access  Division, we look forward to working with Members to 
ensure that the guidelines ensure tra nsparency, accountability, responsibility of Members, role and 
responsibilities of the TF Committee, and TFAF, and that the guidelines reflect the Paris Principles 
on Aid Effectiveness.  
8.22.   We encourage TFAF to continue its PPG work. We look forward to the swi ft revision of the 
operational guidelines so that TFAF can resume its other functions.  
8.23.   The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
9  OTHER BUSINESS  
9.1.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
9.2.  The United States is pleased to inform the Committee that USAID's MSME report, presented at 
the April TF Committee meeting, is now available in French and Spanish and Dari. The documents G/TFA/M/17  
 
- 33 - 
 
  can be found on the www.tf afacility.org . For those in the room we have a one -page summary in the 
room of what is contained in the room.  
9.3.  The Chair  informed the Committee that the next meeting would take place on  19 and 20 July 
to continue work on the Review and to hold another regul ar meeting. The re was a tentative date of 
22 September for the next informal discussion on the review, and the dates for the Autumn meeting 
were 19 to 21 October.  
9.4.  The Committee agreed to invite the Annex D organizations, as well as the Global Alliance on 
Trade Facilitation, to the next meeting.   
9.5.  The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
9.6.  The meeting was adjourned .  
 
__________