RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/66  
 
27 October 2017  
(17-5834) Page: 1/19 
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG OF  28 JUNE  2017  
CHAIRPERSON: MS ZSÓF IA TVARUSKÓ (HUNGARY ) 
INTRODUCTION  
The Committee adopted the proposed agenda for the meeting circulated in 
document  WTO/AIR/IT/5, dated 16  June 2017. An annotated agenda for the meeting was 
circulated in document  JOB/IT/19, dated 19  June 2017. The Chairperson stated that she would 
take up the issue of the date of the next meeting under "Other Business".  
 
INTRODUCTION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  1 
1   THE ITA  SYMPOSIUM  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 2 
1.1   Report by the Chairperson  ................................ ................................ ............................  2 
1.2   Follow -up from the ITA  Symposium  ................................ ................................ ...............  3 
2   REVIEW OF THE STATUS  OF IMPLEMENTATION OF  THE MINISTERIAL 
DECLARATION ON TRADE  IN INFORMATION TECHN OLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/1/REV.56)  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  8 
2.1   Request by Canada, the European Union, Japan, Korea, Norway, and the United 
States Regarding an Implementation Issue Concerning India  ................................ ....................  9 
2.2   Request by the European Union, Japan, and the United States Regarding an 
Implementation Issue Concerning China  ................................ ................................ ............... 12 
3   REVIEW OF PRODUCT CO VERAGE  ................................ ................................ ..............  14 
4   NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK  PROGRAMME  ................................ ............................  15 
5   EMC/EMI  PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY 
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE S FOR EMC/EMI USED B Y ITA  PARTICIPANTS 
(G/IT/W/17/REV.17)  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 16 
6   DIVERGENCES IN CLASS IFYING INFORMATION T ECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1 , G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/ IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12, G/IT/29, G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -G/IT/W/40/ADD.15, AN D 
G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.2)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 17 
6.1   Implementation of the Decision (G/IT/27)  ................................ ................................ .....17 
6.2   Note by the Secretariat (G/IT/W/40)  ................................ ................................ ............. 18 
7   ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON ................................ ................................ .....................  19 
8   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 19 
8.1   Date of Next Meeting  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..19 
 G/IT/M/66  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1  THE ITA  SYMPOSIUM  
1.1  Report by the Chairperson  
1.1.  The Chairperson  reported on the ITA  Symposium that had just been organized on the 
occasion of the 20th Anniversary of the ITA. She recalled that this was the fifth  ITA Symposium 
that the Committee had organized. She expressed her appreciation to the speakers and panellists 
for their valuable contribution to the Symposium and expressed her gratitude to those who had 
attended the Symposium and m ade it such a success.  
1.2.  She stated that the Symposium had been very effective in meeting its purpose, namely: to 
have an overview of trade liberalization under the ITA, and the evolution of global trade in 
ICT products over the past 20  years; to examine how  ICT, as a development tool, could help 
developing countries and SMEs in promoting connectivity and achieving the sustainable 
development goals, and at the same time enabling diversification, technology upgrading, and 
innovation; and also to discuss what c omes next for the ITA and the ICT  sector.  
1.3.  She reported that, in the context of those discussions, a number of important and interesting 
points had been raised. All speakers acknowledged that the ITA was a unique instrument in the 
WTO. It was also highlight ed that the WTO matter ed to the ICT  industry and, in particular, 
WTO Agreements like the ITA and the Trade Facilitation Agreement. They noted the ITA's role in 
removing taxes on ICTs, thereby reducing the cost of key ICT  goods and infrastructure that can b e 
used to transform ideas into new business solutions, creating new opportunities for young people, 
and new business models. They also noted that, by raising the productivity and efficiency of all 
economic sectors in a country, including in its positive im pact on education and healthcare, the ICT 
was a super -capital, driving growth in developed and developing countries alike.  
1.4.  She noted that many speakers had highlighted that information technologies were essential 
to achieving  not only the UN Sustainable De velopment Goals ( UNSDG9c ) on universal access to 
the internet but all the sustainable development goals.  
1.5.  She also noted that the success of the ITA had led to its expansion, and that the import ance 
of the ITA  Expansion had also been recognized.  
1.6.  She further  noted that, based on the success of the ITA and the ITA  expansion, many 
speakers were calling for further expansion of the membership.  
1.7.  She summarized that speakers had cited many reasons for developing countries to join the 
ITA. They had felt that ITA  membership could spur economic growth in many developing 
economies; boost productivity and innovation; support ICT  services sectors and exports; spur 
participation in ICT  GVCs; and enhance the competitiveness of domestic manufacturers. They had 
also highlight ed that the benefits of joining the ITA were enjoyed most of all by consumers.  
1.8.  She noted that for many developing ITA  participants, ICT  exports accounted for a very 
important share in their total goods exports. Most country -specific cases showed that the I TA had 
not only helped in the development of the ICT  sector of those countries but had also broadened 
their economic development through the diffusion of technology. Furthermore, it had helped them 
to increase investment, innovation, and employment, and to  develop high -quality services.  
1.9.  However, it had also been underlined that, in order to be able to reap the benefits of the ITA, 
there was a need for ITA  participants to formulate other aspects of their national policy with a view 
to benefitting from the Ag reement.  
1.10.   She noted that, in this regard, some of the speakers had also addressed the issue of 
revenue losses deriving from tariff liberalization under the ITA, which was identified as one of the 
main preoccupations of developing and least developed countri es when joining the ITA. However, 
it was shown that, while in the short term this could be a problem, in the medium to long term the 
increased demand of ITA  goods compensated for any losses; therefore, the money saved from 
tariffs was not lost but rather f lowed directly within the economy to companies, including SMEs.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.11.   She also noted that it had been emphasized by some speakers that, besides the removal of 
tariffs, considered by many to be a prerequisite, other barriers to digital trade had also to be 
tackle d in order to enable developing countries to benefit fully from the Agreement. It was 
underpinned that special attention needed to be given to non -tariff barriers to ICT  trade because 
these were especially important for SMEs and developing countries.  
1.12.   On NT Bs, among other issues, there had been a repeated call for ensuring the acceptance of 
test results based on: relevant international standards; the transparency of the regulations; a 
risk-based conformity assessment; and the supplier's declarations of confo rmity. E -labelling was 
also presented as a modern and flexible approach to regulatory markings.  
1.13.   She noted that, since trade in ICT  products was especially affected by NTBs, a call had been 
made to organize another dedicated workshop on NTBs in the coming y ear. 
1.14.   When looking at future challenges, she noted that the importance of the continuous review 
of the ITA's scope had been highlighted, by some speakers, in light of the need continually to 
adapt the agreement to rapidly evolving new technologies. Referenc e had also been made to a 
wider digital agreement, or ITA  III, covering new technologies, such as virtual reality, artificial 
intelligence, robotics, and so on, and also possibly a wider range of NTBs.  
1.2  Follow -up from the ITA  Symposium  
1.15.   The representative of  the European Union  thanked the Chair, the Secretariat, and those who 
had contributed to the preparation and organization of this interesting and timely Symposium.  
1.16.   He stated that the event had been very helpful, with updated developments on the real 
econom y, in the ICT  sector, and on its relation with practically all other economic sectors, and on 
the positive impact of the ITA on development.  
1.17.   He said that there had been very clear messages sent as to the benefits for countries of 
joining the ITA and the IT A Expansion. His delegation hoped that those who had not yet become 
ITA participants would reflect upon that, and that all those that were ITA  participants but not yet 
participants to the ITA  Expansion, would likewise reconsider their participation in ligh t of the 
benefits. His delegation planned to continue their work of persuasion in this respect.  
1.18.   He noted that very specific calls had been made to expand product coverage. It was 
recognized that, by definition, the Agreement's product scope just in the are a of goods would 
continue to expand in the following years. ITA  Participants had to reflect, of course, on how far 
they wished to go. It was a matter that required their further reflection.  
1.19.   He also noted that a very clear call had been made to go beyond ta riffs, and to work also on 
non-tariff barriers. His delegation agreed that NTBs had become increasingly important. He said 
that it was his delegation's view that NTBs should be increasingly listed on the agenda of the 
Committee.  
1.20.   He further noted that there  had been broader calls to extend the ITA to the digital economy 
or entire economy, including services, and issues like localization of data. However, he thought 
this quite provocative at the moment and considered it more useful to remain focused on the ar ea 
of trade in goods.  
1.21.   The representative of Canada  thanked that the Chair and all those involved in the 
organization of the ITA  Symposium to celebrate the 20th Anniversary of the ITA, including the 
Secretariat for its work on the "20  Years of the Informati on Technology Agreement" publication, 
launched on the first  day of the Symposium. She also thanked the various knowledgeable speakers 
who had travelled to Geneva to share their valuable insights; the delegates, whose active 
involvement had been instrumenta l to the success of the Symposium; and indeed for the hard 
work and long hours that so many colleagues and stakeholders had dedicated to the preparation 
and organization of the Symposium.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.22.   She felt that the S ymposium speakers, collectively, had provided an overwhelming amount 
of factual and anecdotal evidence, from all corners of the globe, as to the multitude of benefits 
brought by the ITA and the more recent ITA  Expansion.  
1.23.   She observed that, during the proceedings of the Symposium, participants had heard f rom a 
large number of stakeholders, including: multinational companies with global operations and sales; 
industry associations representing various segments of the ITC  sector from a diverse range of 
geographical locations; government officials sharing the positive experiences and future plans of 
certain developing countries; and SMEs, either established start -ups or those promising to act as 
catalysts for future development.  
1.24.   She felt that virtually all of the speakers had had one thing in common: they had a ll been 
enthusiastic about the ITA and its potential benefits.  
1.25.   She acknowledged that participants had also heard some questioning of and scepticism 
about the ITA. The questions had related to the loss of tariff revenue or tariff protection for local 
indust ry, infrastructure needs, data localization, education, and the cost of IT  goods for 
consumers. She believed that these were important questions and hoped that the extensive 
information provided during the Symposium would help those Members that were grapp ling with  
these questions.  
1.26.   She recognized that each Member faced a unique set of challenges and that the ITA on its 
own could not address all of th ose challenges. The ITA was an important tool but one that needed 
to be used in conjunction with other domest ic policy measures to ensure that benefits were 
realized in an inclusive manner.  
1.27.   She noted that those WTO  Members who had not joined the ITA had not yet enjoyed the 
opportunity to realize its full benefits. For example, one representative of a large firm m entioned in 
the Symposium that it had only made investments in those countries that were participants to the 
ITA. 
1.28.   Her delegation took note of the various comments and suggestions made on how 
WTO Members could make further progress on trade in the ICT sector. Ideas included further 
discussions on addressing non -tariff barriers such as conformity assessment issues and e -labelling; 
expanding the geographical coverage of the ITA and its expansion; considering issues beyond the 
trade in goods; and revie wing the product coverage of the ITA to reflect new and emerging 
technologies.  
1.29.   She reiterated that Canada was open to discussing these ideas and looked forward to 
hearing the views of other ITA  participants.  
1.30.   The representative of  the Republic of Korea  congratulated all those involved on the success 
of the ITA  Symposium. He expressed his delegation's appreciation to the Chair for her hard work 
and leadership, and also to the Secretariat and speakers for their contributions. He felt that the 
ITA Symposium had  been a great opportunity to hear the real voices of the ICT  industry, and to 
recognize the huge contribution of the ITA to the rapid development of the ICT  industry. He 
believed that the ITA needed to be still more responsive to the needs of the ICT  indus try, noting 
that lCT  products changed at lightning speed. Securing ITA  and ITA  Expansion implementation; 
addressing the challenge of NTBs; and reviewing the scope of ITA  products were all issues that 
should continue to be addressed in the Committee.  
1.31.   He not ed that it had been recognized at the Symposium that ICT  products had, as an 
enabler of innovation, played a key role for many developing Members, especially in terms of 
economic growth and quality of life. He hoped that more WTO  Members would come to appr eciate 
the benefits of the ITA and ITA  Expansion and, by becoming participants to both, come 
subsequently also to enjoy those benefits in their own countries.  
1.32.   The representative of the United States  thanked the Chair and the Secretariat f or a 
successful an d productive S ymposium. She stated that her delegation had been impressed both by 
the wide range of expert presentations and by the regional diversity of the speakers.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.33.   She observed that the overarching message that had emerged from almost all of the 
presen tations had been quite clear: technology was central to every aspect of today's life, and 
affordable access to technology goods was essential to driving economic development and bridging 
the digital divide. Joining the ITA and the ITA  Expansion were thus p owerful policy tools to help 
achieve a range of development goals. She noted that one  developing country speake r had 
highlighted, on the first  day of the Symposium, that ITA  participation had gone from being a 
comparative advantage to being a necessity for  countries participating in the 21st century global 
economy. She said that there had been a number of notable messages conveyed by various 
presenters during the course of the Symposium, and she highlighted, in particular, the following: 
(1) ITA participati on was a catalyst for growth and innovation across a range of economic sectors, 
from agriculture to health to services. And it was mentioned that 80% of the economic benefits 
from ICT derived from its widespread usage throughout the economy, while only app roximately 
20% of the benefits came directly from the production of the technology itself; 
(2) ITA participation had become almost a prerequisite for participation in ICT  global value chains, 
and it was pointed out that non -ITA Members' participation in gl obal value chains had dropped by 
60% since the original agreement had entered into force; (3)  ITA participation also supported the 
achievement of the UN  Sustainable Development goals and domestic development strategies, as 
adopted, for example, in Kenya; ( 4) ITA participation had also helped bridge the digital divide by 
lowering the cost of consumer products and core business technologies. The WTO  Secretariat's 
new publication had noted, for example, that prices on ITA  covered produ cts, such as computers 
and cell phones, had dropped substantially since 1997, at between 25 and 66%; (5)  speakers from 
the ITU, UNCTAD, the WTO  Secretariat, and the World Bank, had all underscored the importance 
of improv ing the  accessibility and affordability of technology product s in order to increase internet 
penetration and build a 21st century high -tech infrastructure across various sectors of the 
economy. High tariffs nevertheless persisted on basic ICT -enabling technologies and products in 
non-ITA countries. Essentially, these products were being taxed as "luxury goods", to quote the 
World Bank speaker; and (6)  according to the ITU, 95% of the planet's global human population 
was covered by a mobile phone network. Why were these people not also online? One of the main 
barriers to connectivity was affordability, and prices of devices still remained too high in certain 
markets. Governments were empowered to help lower the prices of these goods by eliminating 
tariffs and joining the ITA.  
1.34.   She further stated that, given the econ omic and social benefits that accrued from 
ITA participation, it was important that all current ITA  Participants use the momentum generated 
by the Symposium to encourage other Members to increase their participation in the coming 
months.  
1.35.   She proposed that the Secretariat, by way of follow -up, develop a simple step -by-step guide 
for non -participants that detailed the process and concrete actions that countries needed to take in 
order to join the ITA. Each Member could then use this guide in their individual outreach efforts.  
1.36.   She also noted that certain NTBs continued to persist in the sector, but that opportunities 
also existed to tackle the emerging challenges and issues and to head off some of those challenges 
in an exchange of best practice and a greater u pfront alignment. She said that this was especially 
the case in such areas as e -labelling.  
1.37.   She further noted the suggestion from industry, made during the Symposium, for the 
ITA Committee to organize another NTB  Workshop in 2018. She saw value in this sugg estion, as 
such a workshop could help bring together experts from governments and industry to discuss NTBs 
and share their experiences and best practice.  
1.38.   The representative of Guatemala  thanked the Chair for ensuring the extended participation 
of those dev eloping countries able to bring speakers. In her view, the success of the Symposium 
was thanks to the wide diversity of regions and development levels represented by the speakers. 
She encouraged the Chair to continue in this work of inclusion and thanked t he Secretariat for the 
funds that had been made available. She thought that any future event should be organized along 
the same lines, with inclusiveness featuring again as a fundamental element.  
1.39.   The representative of Japan  congratulated the Chair for the success of the ITA  Symposium 
and expressed particular appreciation for the efforts made by the Chair and the Secretariat. He 
said that it had been a very interesting opportunity for Japan, especially as two  Japanese nationals 
had participated as speakers a t the Symposium. There had been a lot of interesting data and G/IT/M/66  
 
- 6 - 
 
  experience shared among participants on how developing country ITA  participants had benefitted 
from the ITA and the ITA  Expansion. In particular, many speakers talked about how ICT and 
ICT produ cts could help SMEs and make developing countries' economies more sustainable.  
1.40.   The representative of Norway  thanked the Chair, and congratulated her and the Secretariat 
on the very successful execution of the Symposium celebrating 20  years of the ITA. She also 
extended her thanks to all those speakers who had shared their views and helped increase our 
knowledge of these matters, and especially those who had spoken of the ways in which the ITA 
could help achieve all of the UN  sustainable development goals. S he found the direct and unfiltered 
input from industry to have been helpful and inspiring. She hoped that others had found the 
Symposium equally informative as regards the potential benefits of the ITA and perhaps also 
inspiring to the degree that they mig ht then be inclined to join the ITA and the ITA  Expansion.  
1.41.   The representative of China  joined others in thanking the Chair and the Secretariat for their 
hard work in hosting such a successful Symposium. She also thanked all speakers for their 
participation  and for providing such valuable insights. She observed that, after listening to them, 
her delegation had come  to appreciate the full extent of the benefits brought by the ITA and the 
ITA Expansion Agreements to those who participated in them. At the same time, they had also 
heard the questions and problems raised by some developing and LDC  countries with regard to the 
digital divide and lack of ICT  infrastructure. She felt that the Participants still needed to pay close 
attention to these problems.  
1.42.   She sai d that China held the view that the Committee should no w focus on the ITA and the 
ITA Expansion implementation and should also work with others to attract new participants to join 
the ITA and ITA  Expansion Agreements. In this regard, China believed that di scussion of 
ITA product coverage expansion, and such areas as data flow and localization, were not the 
purpose and should not be the focus of current discussions.  
1.43.   The representative of Singapore  thanked the Chair and the Secretariat for putting together 
such a solid programme and such a fantastic line -up of speakers for the Symposium. She said that 
it had been extremely encouraging to her delegation to hear how all participant countries, 
especially developing countries and LDCs, had already benefitted from the ITA; how the ITA had 
directly and indirectly contributed to meeting UN  Sustainable Development Goals; and how ICT 
had been an enabler for development. She hoped that the ITA –both the original ITA and the 
ITA Expansion –would continue to expand in terms of its geographical coverage.  
1.44.   She felt that the Symposium had certainly offered much food for thought, especially on 
what came next for the ITA. They had heard a number of suggestions from industry speakers. And 
Singapore looked forward to potential future  discussion of some of these "what next" suggestions, 
such as those relating to NTBs and , in particular, transparency, conformity assessment 
procedures, and e -labelling, and also those relating to a potential expansion of the ITA's product 
coverage.  
1.45.   The re presentative of Switzerland  thanked the Chair and the Secretariat for organizing the 
Symposium. She felt that the Symposium had been a very useful and instructive event, and had 
allowed the views of a wide range of experts to be shared, along with their ex cellent presentations. 
During the Symposium her delegation had heard a great number of success stories from 
participants, not only from successful companies but also from countries who had participated in 
the ITA and had seen its benefits for their ICT  sectors as well as for the wider economy.  
1.46.   At the same time, her delegation had also heard the concerns voiced by some countries 
regarding revenue losses as a consequence of ITA  participation. She agreed with those speakers 
who had argued that these would be s hort-term losses. In the long term, participation in the ITA 
would benefit the whole economy, and not just one  sector of it.  
1.47.   She highlighted the importance of NTBs  and believed that it was the right time seriously to 
address this issue. She said that her d elegation supported the suggestion to hold a n 
NTB Workshop  next year . She said that what had struck her especially forcefully during the 
Symposium had been the issue of the speed of technological development. The "real" world 
outside was not waiting for pa rticipants, so participants should not be losing time but should rather 
keep in touch with technological developments and be fully connected with the "real" world G/IT/M/66  
 
- 7 - 
 
  outside. Participants should certainly not wait too long before updating the ITA. Instead, 
participants should begin to be asking questions with regard to which new technology, or which 
new products, should they be considering for inclusion in a forthcoming ITA  Expansion.  
1.48.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  joined other delegations in congratulat ing the Chair 
and the Secretariat on the great success of the ITA  Symposium. He also thanked all the speakers 
for their tremendous contributions.  
1.49.   He said that his delegation had gleaned many valuable insights during the Symposium, and 
that these offered gu idance with regard to the focus of further discussion. Given the many benefits 
of ITA  participation that had been mentioned during the Symposium his delegation would 
encourage all those WTO  Members that had not yet joined the ITA to take positive efforts a nd 
steps towards doing so.  
1.50.   The representative of India thanked the Chair for her report, and for her efforts in making 
the Symposium such a success. He also thanked the Secretariat for its efforts. In addition, he 
thanked colleagues from other delegations for their views on the various issues that had been 
raised at the Symposium. He recalled that a number of colleagues had highlighted the importance 
of the ITA and its expansion in terms of overall economic growth, particularly for developing 
countries and LDCs. Some had also observed that one of the principal apprehensions among 
developing country WTO  Members when contemplating joining the ITA, or its expansion, was the 
potential loss of government revenue. In this regard, he referred to the presentation of  India in 
the Symposium, which had highlighted India's experience of the erosion of domestic electronics 
manufacturing due to an onslaught of zero -duty imports into India. The implementation of the ITA 
had led to a growing trade imbalance, to a loss of job s, and to high -priced imports due to price 
cartels that resulted in an accentuation of the digital divide due to a great number of consumers 
not being able to afford such products as computers and smartphones. High value -added 
manufacturing requiring high investment had suffered the most as, for example, in the 
manufacture of electronic components, semiconductors, raw materials, and parts, even to 
sub-assembly level. In spite of having implemented the ITA, India had not been able to attract any 
significant investment in any of those areas. As a result, the value addition in domestic electronics 
manufacturing continued to be low. He said that India therefore did not subscribe to the idea that 
a potential loss of revenue was the main concern.  
1.51.   The representativ e of Egypt  thanked the ITA  Chair for chairing such a wonderful 
Symposium. He also thanked the Secretariat for organizing it and for ensuring that it was such a 
success. He said that it had been very useful to attend the event, and that he had received and 
benefitted from a great deal of new information. He believed that the most important questions to 
have been raised centred on the question of how to attract other WTO  Members to join the ITA, 
especially those developing country Members that had not yet don e so. He said that, in this 
regard, his delegation wished to associate itself with India's statement. Egypt believed that the 
question of how to attract other developing country Members to join the ITA was where the 
Committee should focus its work and effo rts. At the moment, the Committee was mostly 
concerned with how to increase market access and ITA  coverage. But the most important task of 
the Committee should be to help developing countries to maximize the benefits for them of joining 
the ITA. In Egypt's  view, that would be the most successful way to attract more developing 
countries to join the ITA. He believed that the ITA  Committee could establish a sub -working group 
to study why certain developing countries, such as Egypt, could not benefit more fully  from joining 
the ITA. What were the problems? And what were the best solutions to help such countries? How 
could the ITA help to increase technology transfer to these countries? If the Committee could 
succeed in these areas a good example would be set. Eg ypt believed that this would then 
encourage many developing countries and the Committee would not need to go to any great effort 
to convince them of the value of participating in the ITA. They would easily be convinced.  
1.52.   The representative of  the Republic o f Moldova  thanked the Chair and the Secretariat for the 
hard work that they had dedicated to the organization of the Symposium. He expressed his 
country's support for ITA  Expansion, and stated that Moldova was itself in the process of 
considering becoming a participant in the ITA  Expansion. He encouraged others to do the same 
because he believed that the long -term benefits would outweigh the short -term risks.  
1.53.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  congratulated the Chair and the Secretariat for the 
successf ul Symposium. She also congratulated the Secretariat for its publication of the "20  Years G/IT/M/66  
 
- 8 - 
 
  of the Information Technology Agreement", which she found very useful. Her delegation 
considered that the Symposium had fully explained the benefits to global trade o f the ITA and 
ITA Expansion, and hoped that the Symposium would bring additional momentum and 
encouragement to potential participants to join the agreement. In particular, they agreed with 
many speakers on the need to address non -tariff-barriers affecting trade in ICT  products, that the 
global value chains of ICT  products were complex, and that many ICT  products were designed for 
the global market. Non -tariff barriers had a discriminatory impact on SMEs and developing 
countries; Hong Kong, China, would ther efore support further work in this area.  
1.54.   The representative of Sri Lanka  also congratulated the Chair and the Secretariat on the 
successful conclusion of the Symposium and joined the delegation of Guatemala in thanking the 
Secretariat for the opportunity m ade available to developing countries to participate actively in it. 
Her delegation also looked forward to a productive workshop in Colombo to be held with the 
technical assistance of the Secretariat.  
1.55.   The representative of the Philippines  joined others in congratulating the Chair and the 
Secretariat for the successful Symposium. She thought that there had been an excellent selection 
of speakers, panellists, and resource persons, coming from a range of stakeholders, and not only 
from academia, but also from the private sector, and government. This mixture of resource 
persons had given the Philippines valuable additional information that had resulted in a very good 
assessment of the benefits not only of the ITA but also the ITA  Expansion, even with a very shor t 
implementation period. She said that the Philippines would continue to be fully engaged in 
whatever future negotiations developed with a view not only to expanding the geographical 
coverage of the ITA but also to further product expansion.  
1.56.   The Chairperso n proposed that the Committee take note of all the statements made and 
agree to revert to this matter at its next meeting.  
1.57.   It was so agreed . 
2  REVIEW OF THE STATUS  OF IMPLEMENTATION OF  THE MINISTERIAL DECL ARATION 
ON TRADE IN INFORMAT ION TECHNOLOGY PRODU CTS (G/IT/1/REV.56)  
2.1.  The Chairperson  informed Participants that an overview of the status of implementation of 
the Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products could be found in 
document  G/IT/1/Rev.56.  
2.2.  She indicated that , under this agend a item, and in addition to the overview of the status of 
implementation, two  sub-agenda items had been added. The first sub -agenda item had been 
added at the request of the European Union, Japan, Korea, and the United States, regarding 
Indian Customs Notif ication No.  11/2014. Recently, Canada and Norway had also joined this 
request. The second  sub-agenda item had been added at the request of the European Union, 
Japan, and the United States, regarding an implementation issue concerning China.  
2.3.  The representat ive of El Salvador , on the review of the Status of Implementation, stated 
that, as she had informed the Committee at previous meetings, she had drawn her authorities' 
attention to the pending completion of the domestic legal procedural requirements by El Salvador. 
She said that her authorities were studying this issue and she would report back to the Committee 
in due course.  
2.4.  With respect to Morocco, the Chairperson  stated that Morocco had become a participant to 
the ITA on 14  November  2003. However, it had  not yet submitted its final ITA  schedule of 
commitments. Despite the outreach to Morocco on several occasions in the past by previous 
ITA Committee Chairs, and also including an exchange that she herself had had with Morocco 
two weeks earlier, still no fo rmal response had been received.  
2.5.  The representative of Morocco  responded that she had not yet received instructions from 
Capital, but she had taken note of the points made and would of course make these known to her 
authorities.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 9 - 
 
  2.6.  The Chairperson  thanked bot h El Salvador and Morocco for their updates, and urged El 
Salvador to complete its domestic legal procedures, and Morocco to submit its ITA  schedule of 
commitments for the formal rectification and modification as required by the 1980  Decision, and to 
do so  as soon as possible.  
2.7.  She proposed that the Committee take note of the all the statements made.  
2.8.  It was so agreed . 
2.1  Request by Canada, the European Union, Japan, Korea, Norway, and the United 
States Regarding an Implementation Issue Concerning India  
2.9.  The Chairperson  turned to the first sub -agenda item, which had been requested by Canada, 
the European Union, Japan, Korea, Norway, and the Unites States, regarding an implementation 
issue concerning India. She referred to document  G/IT/W/42, dated 1  April 2016, wh ich had been 
circulated at the request of the delegations of the European Union, Japan, and the United States. 
She also referred to document  G/IT/W/45, circulated at the request of the delegation of India.  
2.10.   The representative of the European Union  stated th at the issue in question had already been 
taken up several times in this Committee, the Market Access Committee, and the Council for Trade 
in Goods, and that their concerns were with regard to the 10%  import duty that India applied on 
ICT products, those u nder HS  Code 8517, which were covered by the ITA, and which had also 
been included in India's bound tariff schedules. She thanked India for its detailed written replies to 
their questions and stated that the EU had carefully examined India's arguments.  
2.11.   She noted that, in India's reply, India had confirmed that this was not an issue of 
classification for India, that the 10%  duty was in fact applied to a number of ICT  items, and that 
India did not consider itself to be bound by its ITA  commitments given that the products now 
covered by the HS  Codes did not exist at the time that the commitments had been made.  
2.12.   She stated that her delegation remained unconvinced by the arguments that India had 
provided. In particular, the fact that India considered these product s as new products, and 
therefore not covered by the ITA, did not hold in light of past WTO  case law. For example, in 
European Communities – IT Products , and in light of the fact that the ITA covered all products 
which had been classified in the WTO  model l ist of items contained in document  JOB(07)/96.  
2.13.   She argued that the products in question were identified through their Harmonized System 
classification, which was regularly updated to take into account different HS  revisions. Thus they 
all fell within the s cope of the Agreement, regardless of their description. Moreover, the zero per 
cent duty had also been bound in India's tariff schedule.  
2.14.   Her delegation had also previously mentioned two  additional ICT  products for which India's 
applied tariff was not in co nformity with its binding commitment at zero  per cent, namely digital 
still video cameras, classified under HS  code 8525.80.20 in the Indian tariff schedule, and 
so-called other electronic integrated circuits, or EICs, classified under HS  code 8542.39.00. 
2.15.   She stated that, in addition, her delegation had recently been informed of India's intention 
to reintroduce customs duties on mobile phones, which also fell within the scope of the ITA, and 
which had been bound at zero in India's tariff schedule.  
2.16.   She claim ed that India had continued to ignore their requests and had infringed upon its 
WTO commitments regarding its bound duties. Therefore, she requested a clarification from India 
of the new issue of mobile phones.  
2.17.   She regretted that her delegation and others had had to raise these issues again after 
several attempts to solve them in various committees as well as bilaterally. Given the importance 
of such products in international trade, her delegation again strongly called upon India to proceed 
rapidly with the  elimination of these tariffs, which not only constituted a violation of India's 
WTO commitments, but were also a trade barrier in full contradiction with the G20's call to roll 
back protectionism.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 10 - 
 
  2.18.   She said that they had continued to monitor India's compli ance with its commitments 
carefully.  
2.19.   The representative of the United States  stated that, like the EU, they continued to have very 
serious concerns regarding India's import duties on certain telecommunication products. Her 
delegation had provided a detaile d explanation, along with others, on multiple occasions, in 
various committees, and bilaterally, in Washington, as well as in Delhi, of the seriousness of their 
concerns with regard to the 10%  tariffs that had been imposed on four  categories of 
telecommuni cation equipment, pursuant to Indian Customs Notification No.  11/2014.  
2.20.   She said that they had repeatedly requested that India indicate the tariff classification for 
the product categories identified in the customs notification. But India had repeatedly fai led to 
provide this information, arguing that the main issue was not the classification but the tariff 
binding commitments. The US agreed with India that the issue at hand was indeed, fundamentally, 
a question about India's ‎binding tariff commitments; nam ely, the potential discrepancies between 
India's bound WTO  commitments to provide duty -free access to certain products, and the non -zero 
import duties that were actually being charged at the border.  
2.21.   She argued that, if the telecommunications products ident ified in the customs notification 
were indeed being classified in a tariff subheading for which India's WTO  schedule reflected a 
zero duty rate, then a decision by India to impose any tariff rate other than zero would be 
inconsistent with India's WTO  binding commitments.  
2.22.   She further stated that they had noted numerous times that India's WTO  bound schedule for 
subheading  8517.62 reflected a bound commitment of zero. And yet they found, to the contrary, 
that India's published MFN  schedule reflected a 10%  duty for products classified within this 
subheading. She emphasized that here they again agreed with India that the issue was indeed 
tariff binding commitments. The US asked India to abide by its commitments and to revoke 
Customs Notification No.  11/2014.  
2.23.   She said that, unfortunately, and as raised at the meeting of the Market Access Committee 
the previous month, they were concerned that the Indian Government was very close to taking a 
decision to increase duties on mobile phones, and was actively working to id entify, at the same 
time, additional product categories, and technology products, on which to increase tariffs in 
support of the "Make in India" campaign.  
2.24.   She here drew attention again to India's WTO  schedule, specifically for tariff 
line 8517.12.00, which  covered "telephones for cellular networks and for other wireless networks", 
and for which India's binding tariff commitment was zero. She appealed again to the Indian 
Government to abide by its WTO  commitments as it considered in the coming days whether o r not 
to raise the customs duty on imported mobile phones, or any other technology product.  
2.25.   The representative of Japan  stated that they had already raised the issue of India's tariff 
commitments at previous meetings of the CTG and the Market Access Committee, and that their 
concerns had not yet been dispelled. He asked India to respect its commitments under its 
ITA schedu le of concessions. His delegation would verify the consistency between GATT  Article  II 
and India's ITA  Schedule of Concessions, where all lines were specified.  
2.26.   He emphasized Japan's concerns over India's tariff lines other than telecommunications 
goods, as  previously raised at meetings of the CTG and the Market Access Committee , and as also 
mentioned by the US and the EU; for example, printed circuit assembles, digital cameras, and 
mobile phones. He asked India to explain.  
2.27.   The representative of Norway  echoe d the concerns raised by other delegations and noted 
the discrepancy between India's applied rates and its bound commitments on certain ITA -related 
products. She further noted with concern reports in the Indian press of a plan to increase customs 
duties on  additional IT  products.  
2.28.   She said that theirs was a most basic trade concern: a Member's applied tariffs could not 
exceed those that had been listed in that Member's schedule. Technological advancement within a G/IT/M/66  
 
- 11 - 
 
  product segment should not change that fact. Should such an alternative interpretation prevail it 
would put into question a significant number of Members' commitments.  
2.29.   Norway had both an economic and a systemic interest in this iss ue as it was fundamental 
that all Members abided by their WTO  obligati ons. She looked forward to hearing India's 
clarifications.  
2.30.   The representative of Canada  expressed her continued concern over the implications of 
India's Customs Notification No.  11/2014, as referred to also by other Members. She said that the 
increase of a pplied tariffs for items under HS  heading  8517, as well as other items raised by the 
US, the EU, and Japan, was inconsistent with India's bound tariff commitments and ran contrary to 
the objectives of multilateral tariff liberalization. She pointed out tha t the increase in applied rates 
could hinder and have a negative impact on Canada's exports to India, particularly for those 
products under HS  heading  8517. Her delegation encouraged India to honour the commitments 
that it had undertaken in its Schedule of  Concessions.  
2.31.   The representative of Switzerland  expressed their concern about the duty treatment on 
certain telecommunications equipment. She agreed with India that the issue was its tariff binding 
commitments. She said that Switzerland had looked into Ind ia's latest certified schedule, as 
contained in document  WT/Let/1072, which had been effective since 12  August  2015. According to 
that schedule, in HS2007, India had undertaken a commitment to grant duty -free tr eatment for 
HS sub-heading  8570. 62, a binding  commitment from the schedule certified in 
document  WT/Let/181. It would be in breach of India's WTO  commitments if India decided to 
enforce a tariff on products for which its tariff had been bound at zero.  
2.32.   She said that Switzerland joined previous speaker s in urging India to abide by its 
WTO commitments. In addition, Switzerland wished to express concern regarding the possible 
imposition of tariffs on additional information technology products for which India had also 
undertaken a commitment to grant duty -free treatment. Regarding India's latest certified tariff 
schedule, of August  2015, she emphasized that there was no doubt that India had undertaken a 
commitment to grant duty -free treatment for mobile phones, which were classified under 
HS subheading  8517.12. Any decision to impose an import duty would therefore be inconsistent 
with that commitment.  
2.33.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  stated that they had taken note of India's Customs 
Notification and that they shared the concerns raised by other delegati ons. He emphasized that 
Chinese Taipei had a strong commercial interest in the products under HS  heading  8517 and also 
shared the systemic  concerns expressed by others with regard to this issue. He looked forward to 
hearing India's detailed explanation and  hoped that a mutually satisfactory solution would be 
found.  
2.34.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  thanked the delegations of the United States, 
the European Union, and Japan, for raising this issue again. He said that Korea continued to be 
very concerned about this issue, from a systemic perspective, as India's tariff policy would not be 
in conformity  with its ITA  commitments. Moreover, Korea was concerned that India was 
considering expanding import duties to additional ITA  products. He said that Korea would closely 
monitor the issue and hoped that further clarification would be provided by the Indian 
government.  
2.35.   The representative of Singapore  stated that they wished to place on record their continued 
interest in this issue. They were concerned by the fact that the issue had been on the agendas of 
this Committee, the Market Access Committee, as well as  the Council for Trade in Goods, for some 
time. Her delegation would closely monitor any developments.  
2.36.   The representative of Thailand  stated that Thailand shared the systemic concern with regard 
to India's increased duties on telecom products classified un der heading  8517, through Customs 
Notification No.  11/2014, and likewise about a potential increase in duties on mobile phones. She 
noted that an increase in duties on telecom products above bound levels was inconsistent with a 
Member's ITA  schedule.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 12 - 
 
  2.37.   She r equested India to provide a clarification of the classification of the products at issue, 
and also a justification for introducing a 10%  import duty on those products. Thailand would 
continue to monitor the issue very closely in light of India's commitment s pursuant to the ITA, as 
well as in light of the concessions India had made in its WTO  Schedule.  
2.38.   The representative of India thanked the delegations of the United States, the European 
Union, Japan, Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, Korea, Norway, Canada, and T hailand, for their interest 
in India's customs duty regime on certain electronics, IT, and telecom products.  
2.39.   He summarized that the Members that had intervened had raised three  main areas of 
concern, namely: (1)  imposition of customs duties on certain IT a nd telecom items, by Customs 
Notification No.  11 of 2014; (2)  apparent disparity in applied duties on certain tariff lines, namely 
HS lines 8525 .80.20 and 8542 .39.00, with India's zero binding commitment under its ITA and 
GATT  Schedules; and (3)  the possib le imposition of a customs duty on mobile phones.  
2.40.   In respect of the first  concern, he stated that India recalled its written responses recorded in 
WTO document  G/IT/W/45 to questions posed by certain Members in document  G/IT/W/42.  
2.41.   In addition, India also r eferred to the replies to questions that it had given at the meetings 
of the Committee on Market Access on 2  May 2017, and the Council for Trade in Goods on 
6 April 2017 and 17  November  2016. He said that there had been no change in India's position. 
Conce rned Members should refer to India's written replies as well as to its oral statements given at 
the aforementioned meetings.  
2.42.   Regarding the second  issue, he informed the Committee that there had been no applied 
duty on ITA  items falling under tariff lines  8525.80.20 and 8542 .39.00. India had made those 
items exempt from customs duty, as notified in Notification Nos.  24 and 25, both dated 
1 March  2005.  
2.43.   On the issue of mobile phones, he said that his delegation acknowledged the concerns that 
Members had raised  at this meeting as well as at previous meetings of the CTG and the Market 
Access Committee.  
2.44.   He stated that Members' statements in these meetings were being or had already been 
forwarded to the authorities in Capital for consideration.  
2.45.   He further stated th at there was no customs duty on mobile phones at present.  
2.46.   The Chairperson  proposed that the Committee take note of all the statements made.  
2.47.   It was so agreed . 
2.2  Request by the European Union, Japan,  and the United States Regarding an 
Implementation Issue Conc erning China  
2.48.   The Chairperson  moved to the second sub -agenda item, which was requested by the 
European Union, Japan, and the Unites States, regarding an implementation issue concerning 
China.  
2.49.   The representative of the United States  raised a concern with reg ard to a change in China's 
implementation of its ITA  commitments for certain semiconductor products covered by the 
1996 ITA. She said that the US was particularly concerned about this issue in light of the fact that, 
since 1  January  2017, China had been im posing tariffs on a number of products that had 
previously received duty -free treatment by virtue of China's commitments under the 
ITA Agreement. As a result of an amendment in 2017 to the Harmonized System, a number of 
semiconductor devices, known as "mul ti-component integrated circuits", or MCOs, had been 
reclassified in the HS  under heading  8542.  
2.50.   She said that, in China's implementation of the 2017  amendment to the Harmonized System 
nomenclature regarding MCOs, China had identified 17  national tariff lin es in its 
HS2012  nomenclature that were to be classified as MCOs under heading  8542 in the G/IT/M/66  
 
- 13 - 
 
  2017 nomenclature. She claimed that ten out of these 17  tariff lines had been covered by China's 
ITA commitments and had therefore been bound at duty -free in China's  WTO schedule, while 
seven of the tariff lines were subject to duties. She further stated that ten  of these national tariff 
lines had been duty -free as of 1  December  2016, namely: 8473.30.10, 8473.30.90, 8517.70.30, 
8517.70.60, 8543.90.21, 8543.90.29, 8543 .90.30, 8543.90.40, 9026.90.00, and 9027.90.00.  
2.51.   She stated that, as of 1  January  2017, China had no longer been extending duty -free 
treatment to those products previously classified under the ten  duty-free tariff lines in HS2012. It 
appeared that this was a result of the transposition, and China had been applying a duty equal to 
the simple average of the duties for the 17  products in the HS2017  transposition, rather than 
preserving its duty -free treatment under the ITA.  
2.52.   In her view, this was not a technical  issue but an issue that had a direct bearing on China's 
WTO binding commitments.  
2.53.   Her delegation noted that, regardless of the transposition methodology used, the results of 
any HS  transposition should be tariff rate neutral, meaning that the value of a ta riff concession 
should not be impaired as the result of a change in HS  nomenclature. To the contrary, however, 
the manner in which China had been implementing the HS2017  amendment for MCOs was having 
a direct and negative commercial impact on US  companies.  
2.54.   She argued that the 17  tariff lines that China had identified as MCOs under previous 
nomenclature, whether previously dutiable or duty -free, should be incorporated into 
HS2017  heading  8542 with the tariff rate that was applicable on 31  December  2016.  
2.55.   She further argued that China should simply implement the HS2017  amendment for 
MCO products in a manner that maintained China's duty -free ITA  commitments.  
2.56.   She urged China to reinstate zero  duties on all products previously classified under the 
ten tariff lines  in HS2012  nomenclature and for which China had an obligation to provide duty -free 
treatment pursuant to its ITA  commitments, and to do so without delay.  
2.57.   The representative of the European Union  echoed the comments made by the US and stated 
that the EU too k this issue very seriously, especially as it directly affected EU  exports. The MCOs 
that were a part of China's previous commitments under the ITA should not be affected by what 
was considered to be a technical change. He said that the EU considered that the ten  product lines 
in question should be revised in order to be restored to a zero  tariff rate, as was the case before 
1 January  2017. He asked China to consider these views.  
2.58.   The representative of Japan  also shared the concerns of the United States and stated that 
they had been aware of new customs duties on imports on existing duty -free lines committed 
under ITA -1 at a zero  tariff rate as of January  2017. He noted that China was applying the simple 
average of the duties for the 70  products involved in t he HS2017  transposition rather than 
preserving its duty -free ITA -1 commitments. He said that, since this was an issue that had a direct 
bearing on China's WTO  binding commitments, his Capital was concerned about the issue and 
wished to receive further clar ification.  
2.59.   The representative of Singapore  stated that her delegation wished to register its interest on 
this implementation issue and would be closely monitoring any developments.  
2.60.   The representative of Switzerland  stated that her authorities shared the co ncerns expressed 
by previous speakers as MCOs were IT  products that should be granted duty -free treatment. She 
understood that several MCOs had already been duty-free until 31  December  2016 but that, as of 
1 January  2017, they had been subject to duties al though they were the same products. She 
encouraged China to restore the duty -free treatment that had prevailed until the implementation 
of HS2017. Implementation of HS  modifications should not affect the tariff treatment of any 
products.  
2.61.   The representative  of the Republic of Korea  stated that Korea held commercial and systemic 
interests with regard to this issue. He asked for a detailed explanation from China and indicated 
that Korea would continue to follow the issue closely.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 14 - 
 
  2.62.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  shared the concerns raised by others. He said that 
they too held a significant commercial interest in the products concerned and looked forward to 
China's detailed response.  
2.63.   The representative of China  thanked the United States, the European Union, Japan, 
Singapore, Switzerland, Korea, and Chinese Taipei, and took note of their interest and concern 
regarding China's ITA  implementation. She explained that, since 2017, and according to new 
changes in the HS  system of the WCO, China had made some change s to tariff nomenclature and 
tariff lines. Among those changes, MCO  products corresponded to five  tariff lines of eight  digits in 
the 2017  tariff nomenclature of China, namely: tariff lines of processors and controllers, to 
8542.31 .11 and 8542.31 .19; tarif f lines of memories , to 8542.32 .10; tariff line s of amplifiers, to 
8542.33 .10; and tariff line s of other integrated circuits, to 8542.39 .10. 
2.64.   She stated that, according to WTO  Procedures for the Introduction of Harmonized System 
2012 Changes to Schedules of  Concessions Using the Consolidated Tariff Schedules Database, 
there were four  methods used to identify new tariff rates caused by the merging of tariff lines as a 
result of tariff nomenclature transposition. These methods were as follows: (1)  applying the  lowest 
rate of any previous tariff line to the whole of the new tariff line; (2)  applying the rate previously 
applied to the tariff line with the majority of trade; (3)  applying the trade weighted average rate of 
duty for the new line; or (4)  applying the  arithmetic average of the previous rates of duty where 
no basis existed for establishing reasonably accurate trade allocations.  
2.65.   She indicated that, for the tariff lines at issue, except  for tariff line  8542.31 .11 which 
corresponded to ex -out 8504.40 .91 of  HS 2007 and adopted the tariff rate of 8504.40 .91, other 
4-digit tariff lines corresponded to 18 or 16 -digit tariff lines of HS2007, most of which were ex -out 
tariff lines. She stated that, since the other list of tariff lines were all ex -out tariff lines , China 
could not find any basis for excepting reasonable, accurate, trade allocations, but could only use 
the fourth  method, namely, applying the arithmetic average of the previous rates of duty.  
2.66.   She argued that, for the MCO  applied tariff rates, China ha d always applied a rate consistent 
with this method of WTO  HS transposition, namely, the arithmetic average of the previous rate of 
duty. Based on that, China had also met its tariff reduction obligations with regard to the 
ITA Expansion and the ITA. She f urther argued that, according to China's commitment made in the 
ITA Expansion negotiations, there were five  steps in the tariff reduction of MCOs. On 1  July 2017, 
China planned to further cut tariffs on related MCO  products. For example, the tariff rates o f 
8542.32.10/33 .10/39 .10 would be further reduced, to 2.7%. She informed the Committee that all 
the aforementioned information and corresponding data could be found on the website of the 
Ministry of Finance.  
2.67.   The Chairperson  proposed that the Committee take  note of all the statements made.  
2.68.   It was so agreed . 
3  REVIEW OF PRODUCT CO VERAGE  
3.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, since the Committee meeting of 15  May 2012, and as 
requested by some delegations, the "review of product coverage" had been included as a regular 
agenda item. It provided an opportunity for the Committee to receive reports and updates from 
those participants engaged in consultations relating to the review of product coverage pursuant to 
Paragraph  3 of the Annex to the ITA.  
3.2.  The representative of Canada, speaking as the Chair of the ITA  Expansion Group, reported 
that, since the last Committee meeting, in the autumn of 2016, Macao, China, had officially joined 
the ITA  Expansion Declaration. So the ITA  Expansion Agreement now stood at 25  participants, 
representing 54  WTO Members.  
3.3.  He also reported that the majority of participants to the ITA  Expansion had implemented 
their tariff commitments in their domestic national tariffs, or were on track to do so by the agreed 
timelines in the ITA  Expansion Declarati on. He stated that, in addition, 23 of 25  participants had 
submitted their modifications and rectifications to their respective Schedules of Concessions to the 
GATT  1994 in accordance with the Decision of 26  March  1980 on the Procedures for Modification G/IT/M/66  
 
- 15 - 
 
  and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25). Nineteen of those 
23 schedules had been certified, and the remaining participants' ITA  Expansion schedules were 
either pending for review or waiting for the completion of domestic procedures . 
3.4.  He said that, in terms of implementation, the Group was well advanced and on track for full 
implementation in the near future. He noted that there was still some more work to do and some 
participants had not yet completed their domestic procedures. He en couraged them to complete 
their domestic procedures as soon as possible so that they would fully realize the benefits of this 
important initiative. He also reminded the Committee that the ITA  Expansion Declaration was open 
to all WTO  Members to join, and t hat he and his Group strongly encouraged all WTO  Members that 
had not yet joined the ITA  Expansion Declaration to consider participation in this important 
initiative, and particularly those that were already members of the original ITA. He recalled what 
was said during the Symposium, and made clear by several industry speakers, namely , that the 
original ITA and the ITA  Expansion were conceived as a set so as to address the dynamic and fast 
pace of technological developments in the ICT  sector. In this contex t, he was pleased to note the 
comments made by the Moldovan delegate about Moldova's interest in joining the ITA  Expansion, 
as well as the plan for an imminent TA  workshop in Sri Lanka. He said that he and his Group stood 
ready to provide more information on the ITA  Expansion to any Member that required it . 
3.5.  The Chairperson  thanked Canada and proposed that the Committee take note of the 
statements made and agree to revert to this matter as appropriate at its next meeting.  
3.6.  It was so agreed . 
4  NON-TARIFF MEASURE S WORK PROGRAMME  
4.1.  The Chairperson  turned to the Non -Tariff Measures Work Programme and reminded the 
Committee of the mandate to address NTM  issues. She recalled that the Committee had attached 
great importance to NTBs and that, since 2000,  NTBs had become a n essential part of the regular 
work of the Committee.  
4.2.  She also recalled that, at the Committee meeting of 14  October  2013, agreement had been 
reached on the Swiss proposal to organize an industry -driven workshop dedicated to NTBs 
affecting trade in ICT  products. The workshop had taken place on 7  May 2015, and the main issues 
raised at the workshop by industry representatives were as follows: transparency ; standards for 
recognition of test results; e -labelling; and energy efficiency. A factual report by my predecessor 
had been circulated in document  G/IT/28.  
4.3.  Following the workshop, and based on the discussions that the Committee had held at its 
meetings of 14  October  2015, 18  April 2016, and 1  November  2016, the Chair had been asked to 
continue consultations  on the follow -up to the ITA  NTB Workshop in 2015.  
4.4.  She reported that, over the past few months, she had held informal discussions with several 
delegations, including the delegation of Switzerland, which  was coordinating informal discussions 
on NTBs among a small group of participants. During those informal discussions she had requested 
the interested delegations again to give more thought as to how the Committee should proceed in 
its follow -up discussion  on NTBs. She asked the delegation of Switzerland to report on their work.  
4.5.  The representative of Switzerland  reminded participants that his country was a strong 
supporter of the NTB  Work Programme, and recalled what had been said at the Symposium, 
namely t hat NTBs were of increasing importance, especially since tariffs were being gradually 
phased out in the ICT  sector. He considered that NTBs in the ICT  sector were disproportionately 
affecting small and medium -sized enterprises, especially those in developi ng countries. He likewise 
considered that this reinforced the need to address these issues. He reported that, since 
mid-2016, Switzerland was coordinating an informal group of Members that were interested in 
discussing NTM  issues relating to ICT  products. Participants in the informal group were: Australia; 
Canada; Colombia; China; the European Union; Hong Kong, China; Japan; Korea; New Zealand; 
Norway; the Philippines; Singapore; Switzerland; Chinese Taipei; and the United States. Most 
recently, Thailand ha d also joined the group. He reported that, since the last Committee meeting, 
members of this group had deepened their discussions of the three  issues that had already been G/IT/M/66  
 
- 16 - 
 
  outlined in his last November  statement, namely: conformity assessment; transparency ; and 
electronic labelling.  
4.6.  On conformity assessment, Members had begun to engage in an information exchange whose 
objective was to achieve a comprehensive mapping of current practices in terms of : (1) mutual 
recognition of test results, based on international schemes, such as the IECEE –CB schemes (as 
discussed in the IEC  presentation at the Symposium), or ILAC/IAF -accredited laboratories; and 
(2) acceptance of SDOCs. This mapping exercise covered t he areas of EMC, electrical safety, radio 
equipment, and environmental standards.  
4.7.  In addition, the delegations of Japan and Switzerland had submitted for discussion among the 
members of the group an informal written proposal that aimed to enhance internati onal 
recognition of such standards and practices.  
4.8.  On transparency, exploratory discussions had begun with regard to options and ways to 
improve the quality of notifications and all the information available to Members that were specific 
to products covered  by the Agreement.  
4.9.  On electronic labelling, members had also begun to engage in an exchange of information 
regarding their current practices and regulations relating to the recognition of the electronic 
labelling of certificates and standards.  
4.10.   He reminded the Committee that participation in the group was open to all participants to 
the ITA  Agreement that were interested in working on these issues. In that context, if any 
delegation had any question regarding the work of the group, or if they were interested  in 
participating, they should not hesitate to contact him or any other member of the group at any 
time. 
4.11.   The representative of Japan  stated that NTM s were a very important agenda item for Japan; 
they were especially interested in the international prolonga tion of the different conformity 
assessment procedures and/or testing reports. His delegation was fully engaged in the discussion 
taking place in the small group mentioned earlier by Switzerland. He was grateful for the 
consultations with the Chair on this  issue. His delegation had also begun to communicate with 
those participants in the group on a Capital -to-Capital basis.  
4.12.   The representative of Thailand  thanked Switzerland for its report on the discussions that 
had taken place in the small group. She indic ated that Thailand attached importance to advancing 
the work on the NTMs  Work Programme in the ITA  Committee. She hoped that a positive and 
meaningful outcome in this area could be achieved in the near future.  
4.13.   The Chairperson  suggested that the Committee t ake note of the statements made, agree 
that the Chair continue her consultations, and that the Committee revert to this matter as 
appropriate at its next meeting.  
4.14.   It was so agreed . 
5  EMC/EMI  PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESS MENT 
PROCED URES FOR EMC/EMI USE D BY ITA  PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W /17/REV.17)  
5.1.  The Chairperson turned to the EMC/EMI  Pilot Project – the draft list of Types of Conformity 
Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used by ITA  Participants. She recalled that one of the 
outcomes of th e NTM  Work Programme mentioned earlier had been the completion of a pilot 
project that had led to the adoption of the "Guidelines for Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) and 
Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Conformity Assessment Procedures" on an ad refe rendum  
basis. Upon adoption of those "Guidelines", the Secretariat, based on the survey responses 
submitted by and notifications received from Participants, had prepared a note on the "Draft List of 
Types of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI use d by ITA  Participants" (contained in 
document  G/IT/W/17).  
5.2.  She stated that, during subsequent proceedings of the Committee, Participants had indicated 
that they had found the information contained therein very useful and wished to have it G/IT/M/66  
 
- 17 - 
 
  completed. She rep orted that, when the Committee last met, among the 53  ITA Participants, 
33 had provided such information. However, there were still 20  participants, including those most 
recently joined, who had neither submitted a survey response nor a notification regard ing the type 
of assessment procedures used by their authorities for EMC/EMI.  
5.3.  She referred back to her letter of July  2016 where she reminded the delegations concerned 
that they had so far neither submitted survey responses nor notifications regarding the t ype of 
assessment procedures for EMC/EMI that were currently used by their authorities. She also 
reminded the delegations concerned that they should not hesitate to contact the Secretariat for 
further information and clarification.  
5.4.  She reminded the Committ ee of the fact that a new draft list, circulated as 
document  G/IT/W/17/Rev.17, now included Montenegro, whose update had not been reflected in 
the previous revision.  
5.5.  She further stated that this information had increased transparency with regard to the typ es 
of conformity assessment procedures for EMC/EMI used by these ITA  participants, and had also 
facilitated international trade in this important sector. She once again encouraged the remaining 
20 delegations that had not yet done so to provide this inform ation to the Secretariat as soon as 
possible so as to enable the Committee to complete its work in this area. She again reminded 
delegations that , should they have a query of any kind , they should contact the Secretariat for 
detailed information, clarifica tion, or assistance.  
5.6.  In parallel, she asked the Secretariat to continue to contact those delegations concerned, and 
in particular those that had joined the ITA  Agreement more recently, with a view to providing 
technical assistance as needed so as to facili tate the preparation of the survey responses 
requested.  
5.7.  Finally, she once again asked Participants to reflect upon what steps, if any, they would be 
prepared to consider with a view to maximizing the usefulness of the information on 
EMC/EMI  conformity asse ssment procedures that had been provided and which would hopefully be 
soon forthcoming. Participants were invited to share their insights in this regard, with the 
ITA Chair, and with the Secretariat, at any time, or with the full Committee either then or a t its 
next meeting.  
5.8.  She suggested that the Committee take note of this agenda item and revert to it at its next 
meeting.  
5.9.  It was so agreed . 
6  DIVERGENCES IN CLASS IFYING INFORMATION T ECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1 , G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/ IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34 , G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12, G/IT/29, G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -G/IT/W/40/ADD.15, AN D 
G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.2)  
6.1.  The Chairperson  moved to the item on divergences in classifying information technology 
products, and indicated that, under this agenda item, there were two sub -items: ( i) the 
implementation of the Decision contained in document  G/IT/27; and (ii)  the Note by the 
Secretariat as contained in document  G/IT/W/40.  
6.1  Implementation of the Decision (G/IT/27)  
6.2.  The Chairperson  recalled that on 20  July 2013 the Decision (document  G/IT/27) regarding 
the endorsement of List  IA items of document  G/IT/W/6/Rev.3, or the so -called 18  items (as 
reproduced in document  G/IT/W/34), had been approved. As required by the Decision, each 
participant must reflect the agreed classifications in its WTO  Schedule of concessions, as 
appropriate, and following the procedures set forth in the 1980  Decision on Procedures for 
Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25). Participants must 
submit the relevant documentation in connection with such modification no later than 
30 April 2014, as specified in the Decision. The WTO  Secretariat would provide technical assistance 
in making such modifications to developing country participants upon request.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 18 - 
 
  6.3.  She said that, as mentioned at  previous meetings of the Committee, the Secretariat had 
been approached by five  ITA participants, namely, Guatemala; the Philippines; Japan; El Salvador; 
and Macao, China; of whom four were developing country participants. The technical work in the 
Secret ariat with regard to these requests had been ongoing. It was to be noted that the technical 
work involved in that exercise was time consuming and thus could only be undertaken on a 
gradual basis. In the previous year, the Secretariat had prepared a documen t of rectification and 
modification at the request of the delegation of Macao, China. The Secretariat had also helped the 
Philippines in the preparation of a rectification and modification document concerning its 
endorsement of 6 of the 18  items (G/MA/TAR/ RS/421).  
6.4.  She also noted that, in anticipation of additional requests, the Secretariat had undertaken a 
preliminary analysis of the remaining developing country participants. She urged these developing 
country participants to contact the Secretariat if they  required any technical assistance.  
6.5.  She proposed that the Committee take note of her statement.  
6.6.  It was so agreed . 
6.2  Note by the Secretariat (G/IT/W/40)  
6.7.  The Chairperson turned to the Note by the Secretariat on the Divergence of Classification: 
Possible HS2007  Classification for the Remaining 37  "Attachment  B" Items, which had been 
circulated as document  G/IT/W/40 on 17  December  2014, based on the Swiss proposal for a 
three -step procedure (that was contained in document  JOB/IT/12).  
6.8.  She recalled that, at t he Committee meeting of 31  October  2014, it had been agreed that: 
"Participants are expected to submit a communication to the Secretariat no later than 
30 June 2015, indicating: (a)  the items that, in the participant's opinion, should be classified 
differe ntly from the HS2007  codes listed in column  8 of the Annex to this document; and (b)  the 
HS2007  subheading(s) that, in the participant's opinion, are relevant for the classification of the 
item in question." "The Secretariat will compile communications rec eived in a separate document. 
On that basis, participants would then be expected to assess the next steps that could be taken to 
reduce any remaining divergence in classification."  
6.9.  She then reported to the Committee that, by 28  June 2017, the Secretariat h ad received 
comments from 15  participants, namely: Norway (G/IT/W/40/Add.1); Chinese Taipei 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.2); Switzerland (G/IT/W/40/Add.3); the European Union (G/IT/W/40/Add.4); 
Hong Kong, China (G/IT/W/40/Add.5); China (G/IT/W/40/Add.6); Japan (G/IT/W/4 0/Add.7); 
Canada (G/IT/W/40/Add.8); the United States of America (G/IT/W/40/Add.9); India 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.10); Macao, China (G/IT/W/40/Add.11); El Salvador (G/IT/W/40/Add.12); the 
Republic of Korea (G/IT/W/40/Add.13); Panama (G/IT/W/40/Add.14); and Thailand  
(G/IT/W/40/Add.15).  
6.10.   She also reported that, based on the submissions received, it appeared that there had been 
no objection to the proposed HS2007  classification of 15  ITA items, corresponding to ITA  item 
numbers: 129; 130; 133; 135; 138; 139; 143; 144; 1 50; 153; 154; 155; 157; 169; and, finally, 
191. It was to be noted that most of these items related to HS2007  heading  8486 (Machines and 
apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor boules or wafers) and one  item related to 
subheadings within HS2007  heading 8471 (on automatic data processing machines and units 
thereof).  
6.11.   She recalled that, at the Committee meeting on 18  April 2016, the Committee had agreed 
on a "Decision for the HS2007  Classification of 15  Additional 'Attachment  B' Products" on a 
referendu m basis with 10  days for comments on the text of the Decision. This Decision had been  
circulated on 17  May 2016, in document  G/IT/29.  
6.12.   On the issue of possible HS2007  classification for the remaining 22  "Attachment  B" Items, 
she recalled that, on 29  July 2016, in a separate fax from the ITA  Chair to all ITA  Participants, she 
had encouraged those participants that had not yet submitted to the Secretariat their comments 
on the HS2007  classification of the remaining 22  "Attachment  B" items, as contained in 
document G/IT/W/40/Suppl.2, to do so by close of business on 14  October  2016.  G/IT/M/66  
 
- 19 - 
 
  6.13.   She reported that, thus far, the Secretariat had received feedback from two  delegations. 
Both delegations had informed the Secretariat that their comments were presently under 
finalization in Capitals and that they would be forwarded to the Secretariat as soon as possible.  
6.14.   She also recalled that, at the Committee's previous meeting, on 1  November  2016, she had 
summarized that, for the remaining items, the Committee had already come ex tremely close to 
finalizing the HS2007  classification of five  ITA item numbers, namely: 122; 137; 142; 168; and 
194. 
6.15.   However, since some delegations needed more time to finalize their comments, she 
suggested that the Committee look to reach an agreement on  the classification of these 
five additional items at its next meeting.  
6.16.   It was so agreed . 
6.17.   Accordingly, if participants had any questions or concerns about those items, she 
encouraged them to engage with the Secretariat and their fellow interested Members a s soon as 
possible.  
6.18.   She also encouraged delegations to continue their work of assessing the next steps that 
could be taken to reduce any divergence in classification with regard to the remaining 
22 ITA items.  
6.19.   It was so agreed . 
7  ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON 
7.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 11  May 2017, as a result of the CTG Chair's consultations, 
the appointment of officers for subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods had been 
confirmed. She said that, pursuant to that confirmation, for 2017 she had a gain been appointed as 
the Chairperson of the ITA  Committee. She thanked all the Participants for their confidence in her 
and promised once again to serve as the Chair of the ITA  Committee to the best of her knowledge 
and ability.  
7.2.  It was so agreed . 
8  OTHER B USINESS  
8.1  Date of Next Meeting  
8.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that its next meeting had been scheduled for 
6 November  2017.  
8.2.  It was so agreed . 
__________