RESTRICTED  
  
S/C/M/ 128 
 
1 November  2016 
(16-5999) Page: 1/18 
Council for Trade in Services    
 
REPORT OF THE MEETIN G HELD ON 7 OCTOBER 2016 
NOTE BY THE SECRETAR IAT1 
The Council for Trade in Services held a meeting on 7 October 2016, chaired by Amba ssador 
Gustavo Vanerio (Uruguay) . The agenda was contained in document WTO/AIR/ CTS/8. 
The agenda was ad opted . 
Before moving to agenda item A, the Chairman  recalled that the Council had held an informal 
meeting in July  to discuss three issues:  a suggestion by Brazil, under the e -commerce Work 
Programme, that the Secretariat update a 1998 paper that examines the treatment of electronic 
commerce in the GATS legal framework; the procedural aspects to conduct the fourth  review of 
MFN exemptions; and  a proposal by Brazil concerning future work of the Council's subsidiary 
bodies.  He would revert to the first issue under the  agenda item on the E -commerce Work 
Programme. The second and third issues, however, did not figure on the airgram for that meeting.  
Therefore, with respect to those two issues, he  wished to report briefly on the outcome of the 
informal discussion s in July.  
 
Starting with the review of MFN exemptions, at the informal meeting convergence had emerged on 
how it should be conduct ed. Accordingly, on 11 August he had  circulated a Chairman's Note, in 
document JOB/SERV/238, outlining the procedural arrang ements for the review. Since no 
objections to those arrangements were communicated to the Secretariat by the deadline of 
2 September 2016, as indicated in that Note and as confirmed to delegations by fax on 
5 September, the Council would  conduct the fourth  review of MFN exemptions as outlined in the 
Chairman's  Note.  
 
As for Brazil's proposal on future work of the subsidiary bodies to the Council  for Trade in Services , 
delegations generally did not favour the proposal to suspend some of their work and move i t onto 
the agenda of the Council. Many delegations did indicate, however, that they were open to 
considering when and whether meetings of particular bodies were needed, as the subsidiary bodies 
would not necessarily all have to meet during each cluster. It  was observed by some, 
nevertheless, that work in the W orking Party on Domestic Regulation was intensifying and that 
that body might need to meet more frequen tly than was normally the case. As a result, 
delegations would  have seen that an item titled "Futu re Work and  Timing of the Next Meeting" was  
added to the agenda of each of the subsidiary bodies. Th e item offered  an opportunity for 
Members to reflect on what future work might be undertaken in each body , and to provide 
indications on when the appropriat e timing for the following meeting might be.  
 
1  ITEM A – NOTIFICATIONS PURSUA NT TO ARTICLE III:3 OF THE GATS  
1.1.  With regard to the notifications made pursuant to GATS Article III:3 , the Chairman  drew the 
Council's attention to the communication s received from the European Union, in documents 
S/C/N/865 -867.  
1.2.  The representative of the United States  thanked the EU for its notifications. He then restated 
the importance of timely and complete notifications under GATS Article V regarding regional trade 
agreements. His  delegation wished to note, for services colleagues at that meeting, that a recent 
meeting of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements had reviewed a list of non -notified RTAs, 
                                                
1 This document h as been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 2 - 
 
  including many involving services. Those outstanding notifications included: the ASEAN Framework 
Agreement on Services; the Andean Community Agreement; China -Chinese Taipei; Costa Rica -
CARICOM; EFTA -GCC; Pacific Alliance; SAARC Agreement on Trade in Services; and Mercosur -
Accession of Venezuela. The United States hoped that the ser vices delegates had taken note of 
these outstanding notifications and would take action to notify their respective agreements to the 
Council.  
1.3.  The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the notification s and the statement 
made.  
1.4.  It was so agreed .  
2  ITEM B - OPERATIONALIZATION O F THE LDC SERVICES W AIVER  
2.1.  The Chairman  recall ed that, at its previous  meeting, the Council  had taken  note of the 
revision to Turkey's notification of preferential treatment, which had been is sued in document 
S/C/N/824/Rev.1 ju st before that meeting. In June, Turkey had introduced  its revised notification 
and had provided re levant background information. The LDC Group had shared its assessment of 
the preferences notified, respectively, by the Eu ropean Union and South Africa. The  Council had 
also heard a presentation by the Work Bank on its work on the LDC waiver preferences.  
2.2.  The delegation of Uganda , speaking  on behalf of the LDC Group,  called on the Council to  
proceed with its very important work  on the LDC services wa iver in the previous three years  
building upon the steady progress  made  on its operationalization . The waiver D ecision of 2011 had 
been a significant achievement for LDCs , since it was the realization of a pursui t that had started 
with the launch of the DDA. LDCs ha d had a long journey and still ha d more to do to ensure that 
concrete benefits were reaped by their services suppliers . Twenty -three  notifications  of 
preferences had been tabled as a result of that process , whereas none had been submitted for 
almost three years after the w aiver had been agreed by Ministers. LDCs  expect ed the mechanism 
to help their suppliers forge the necessary partnerships with consumers worldwide.  
2.3.  For that meeting , the Group would address first Turkey's revised notification  and then move 
to the EU notification.  The LDC Group appreciate d the information provided by Turkey regarding 
the revision to its 14 June 2015 notification. The Group  had taken note of the  changes in all entries 
under paragraph 1.2, except for those under tirets ( vii), (viii), and (ix). Regarding changes in 
tiret (i), the reference appeared to be to "permanent " residence abroad. For (ii) and (iii), there 
was the addition that the total stay was "in one year ". For (ii), (iii), (iv) and  (v), proof of fulfilling 
the conditio n was required. There were other editorial changes. For (vi), some apparent editorial 
changes we re made and the word " significant " was added  before " service "; the Group wished to 
know how th at standard applie d, as  the previous notification did not have that requirement. 
Item (x) added further conditions , such as a Certificate of Conformity, and the Group enquired if 
this w as already a requirement for that type of exemption or if it had been  added as a requirement 
for LDCs only . 
2.4.  LDCs had also noted the addit ional const raints placed in paragraph 1.3 and wished to 
understand , for the purpose of explaining to capitals, if those requirements  were the norm for 
Turkey when providing special access or only applied to special access intended for LDCs . The 
Group had also taken note of the addition of  paragraph 1.4  and wish ed to know whether the LDCs , 
by virtue of being LDC s, would  automatically receive the certificate, or if that was  another 
restriction. Finally, the Group wished to ask Turkey to explain the differenc e between the initial 
notification and the revision.  
2.5.  Turning to the EU notification , LDCs wished to move on from the specific case discussed at 
the June meeting of the Council to present their substantive review  of the EU preferences . At the 
outset, the Gro up underscored  the benefit s of the EU notification . It mostly provided for  better  
treatment  than the  EU DDA offer . Mode 3 restrictions had been  removed in medical  and dental 
services for psychologists  and psychotherapists, which might correspond to  the applied regime . 
Both market access and national treatment were provided . All modes of supply we re covered . 
Approximately 70 mode 3 sectors  were covered , as requested by the LDC Group . There were 
around 60 mode  1 and 2 sub -sector preferences related to the Col lective Request . Contractual 
Service  Supplier and Independent P rofessionals were included . S/C/M/128  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.6.  At the previous meeting , the EU had confirmed that it had drawn some preferences from the 
CARIFORUM EPA  concessions  corresponding to LDC requests. However, LDCs noted that , 
sometimes, for the same sector and mode, the LDC preference was less than th at provided in the  
EPA. For example, a number of new mode 3 restrictions  had been  added in the LDC preferences 
compared to the EPA. These were mainly from certain  EU Member  States such as Cyprus, and at 
times from Latvia, the Czech Republic, Spain and Croatia. In th ose instances, especially  as 
concerned  the Cyprus limitation s, the EU had not extend ed full CARIFORUM preferences to LDCs.  
Another example was the absence of any restrictions on tour guides under mode 3 in the EPA , 
compared to a nationality requirement for LDCs that applied in Cyprus. In the case of Croatia, 
LDCs could possibly understand  the situation, as  Croatia had  joined the EU in 2013 and the 
CARIFORUM EPA had been signed in 2008. But all other Member States had joined the EU before 
2008.  
2.7.  There we re also  occasions where the EU had provided  LDCs the same treatment as in the 
EPA. There were also instances where LDCs might be receiving better treatment than in the EPA 
and DDA offer. For  example, the LDC Group observed  a limitation in retailing services in the DDA 
offer concerning an ENT on "temporary trade in clothing, shoes and foodstuffs that are not 
consumed at the point of sale ". That same limitation  which was also found in the CARIFORUM EPA, 
was not found in the EU LDC waiver notification. The LDC Group thanked  the EU for th at LDC-only 
preference.   
2.8.  The EU notification contained the  Contractual Services Supplier (CSS) and Independent 
Professional (IP ) mode 4 ca tegories that had been requested by LDC s in some sectors of interest 
to them. Of the 26 CSS sub -sectors  provided to LDCs, 25 were related to the LDC Collective 
Request . Compared to the EU waiver notification, the CARIFORUM EPA contain ed 29 CSS sectors.  
"Chef de cuisine services ", "entertainment services ", and "fashion model services " had not been 
included for LDCs , notwithstanding the fact that the former two sectors  had been requested by the 
Group.  
2.9.  As in the EPA, Independent Professionals were provided in only 11 sub -sectors, and LDCs 
would  benefit also from the graduate trainees category. They recalled  that, at the last CTS, the EU 
representative  had made it clear that independent professionals did not include psychotherapists, 
midwives and nurses. This was also true for the CARIFORUM EPA.  
2.10.   In some  instances a horizontal limitation clause applied, which state d that: "the absence of 
EU reservations applicable in specific Member States in a given sector is without prejudice to 
horizontal reservations or to sec toral EU -wide reservations that may apply ". Clearly such a  
stipulation was rather open -ended and would  provide less certainty for LDC suppliers . The Group 
expect ed the EU to be in a position to assist LDC suppliers to navigate those EU -wide reservations 
and Member S tate reservations so as to ensure  that LDCs benefit ted from the preferences.  
2.11.   Like in the CARIFORUM EPA, several Member States appl ied residency requirements, ENTs, 
nationality requirements for managers and executives, as well as other restriction s or conditions.  
Compared to  the existing EU GATS Schedule and DDA offer, it appeared that  other Member States 
had removed some of those kinds  of restrictions.  
2.12.   In tourism , a sector  to which  LDCs attach ed great importance and  where they  had a 
comp etitive ad vantage,  the EU notification had improved  on the existing GATS schedule and DDA 
offers. In mode 3, it contained only three  limitations on hotels, restaurants and catering . How ever, 
the CARIFORUM EPA contained only  two. The Croatia n restriction required app roval for historical 
and cultural areas, while Bulgaria prohibited branching and Italy had  an economic needs test.  For 
travel agencies and tour operator services , Bulgaria prohibit ed branching and Portugal require d the 
corporate base to be in Portugal and prohibited  branchi ng. Tho se limitations were the same in the 
CARIFORUM EPA. However, the LDC waiver notification contain ed two additional limitations in that 
sector : a representation requirement for foreign providers  in Cyprus and an economic needs test in 
the Czech Republic.  
2.13.   In paragraph 3 of each of the Annexes for modes 1 to 3 of the notification, the EU made  a 
distinction between domestic regulatory measures that amount ed to market access or national 
treatment limitations and those that were not conside red restrictions by the EU, because 
requir ements applied  to all foreign suppliers, including LDCs, on a non -discriminatory basis. The 
Group noted that paragraph 1.8 of the EU notification  stated that "[t]o the extent that such S/C/M/128  
 
- 4 - 
 
  requirement is applied in a n on-discriminatory manner, it does no t need to be specified." LDCs 
appreciated  that a number of Member States were not listed with domestic regulatory or other 
restrictions of the first type. However, restrictions of the second type described by the EU we re 
indeed intended to be res trictions also on LDCs. These amount ed to market acc ess barriers on LDC 
suppliers.  
2.14.   The Group wished to seek  the following clarification from the EU. Did the later accession of 
Croatia to the EU impact comm itments under the CARIFOR UM EPA? Did  the limitations in the EU 
notification from Cyprus also impact  the EPA? How was the EU building awareness with its services 
consumers about the preferences  it had  offered to LDCs?  Would  the EU provide capacity building 
and assistance in LDCs so  that LDC service suppliers in the sectors covered by the notifications 
could  benefit from the preferences  granted ? How were non-bank banking services for 
money -transfer and check -cashing services covered in the financial services preferences in the 
notification ? 
2.15.   Recalling that a ll Decisions associated with the LDC waiver refer red to the need for capacity -
building and supply side -assistance , the Group also stressed that paragraph 1.4 of  the Nairobi  
Decision  went further in terms of  assistance to LDC supplie rs to utilize the preferences.  LDCs 
recognize d that some of their partners were challenged in terms of ideas on how to meet th ose 
expectations. The LDC Group was pondering ways to encourage Members to take concrete steps to 
implement the provisions of th ose Decisions.  They asked the EU to provide assistance to LDC 
suppliers who were indeed attempting to utilize preferences and enter service s market in a more 
predictable and facilitative manner. However , LDC suppliers  were still faced with market access 
and regulatory limitations, including obstacles such as application fees for permits a nd other 
burdensome paperwork. As part of an assistance programme to fulfil the objectives of 
paragraph  1.4 of the Nairobi Decision, the EU could remove  or reduce  those fees and reduce 
burdensome paperwork for LDC suppliers on a case -by-case basis.  
2.16.   In the EU notification, certain Member States appl ied residency permits for the supply of 
professional services where a  particular LDC professional had  been solicited or otherwise 
responded to internet invitations to apply for positions in the EU. The Group wished to revert to 
what it had presented at the previous meeting of the CTS in that regard, and what it had just laid 
out. This relate d to ways to implement the preferences, and the Group used the example of the EU 
since their notification entailed  28 Member States.  
2.17.   At the last CTS meeting, LDCs had  presented a case brought to their attention earlier that 
year concerning a Tanzanian psychologist. They were proud  that an LDC suppli er ha d been 
encouraged  by the good news from the LDC w aiver process and the commitment of LDC partners, 
developed and developing  countries alike . The psychologist in question was a highly -qualified 
independent professional. The EU had clarified that Indepe ndent P rofessionals (IP) covered by its 
notification did not include psychologists. It was also clarified that the profession was instead 
covered under the preferences for Contractual S ervice Suppliers  and that the Member States with 
residency requirements  for IP did not have the same requirement for CSS. The Group would advise 
the psychologist that his profession was covered in the  EU notification under CSS, and that 
assistance might be sought from the EU in that regard. For example, it could be useful if the EU 
could  boost its development assistance to LDCs in services by helping LDC suppliers set up bona 
fide contractual services supplier establishments in their territories . By so doing, legitimate 
suppliers could  see a pathway to utilize the EU preferenc es notified for CSS.  
2.18.   For sectors covered for Independent P rofessionals, where the applicant was qualified  and a 
residency requirement exist ed for a Member S tate, the Group  asked if the EU could assist such 
applicants  to obtain residency permits. Qualified  applicant s should not be summarily rejected. 
Separate from the issue of coverage in the EU’s notification, in the Tanzania case, the applicant 
was welcomed by the head-hunter  in Spain and the  two had exchanged a few emai ls to prepare 
the application. It was only when the head-hunter  noticed that  the psychologist's residency was in 
Tanzania that all interaction  had ceased. It would be useful if, in such cases, the residency 
requirement were suspended, in the spirit of the waiver, to allow qualified LDC pers ons to at least 
complete the application process based o n the merits of their skills. If applicant s were successful, 
assistance should be provided to obtain the residency permit in either of the two EU Member 
States.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.19.   In closing, LDCs applaud ed the EU for i ts work and its notification. They looked forward to 
receiving responses from the EU  and to working together with the EU, in the respective Member 
States , to ensure the success of the notification and preferences being implemented between LDC 
suppliers and  EU consumers.  
2.20.   The representative of Turkey  said that he would revert in detail to the LDC Group's 
questions in due course. He underscored th at Turkey attached great  importance to the waiver. It 
was ready to engage with LDCs  to help their suppliers benefi t from the waiver preferences and to 
impro ve its  notification in line with LDCs' needs. As Turkey had indicated when introducing its 
revised notification, the revision had been motivated by the desire to clarify some of Turkey's 
preferences in relation to work permits, duration of stay and modification of the scholarship -
granting authority. The revised notification did not imply any new LDC -specific restrictions.  
2.21.   The representative  of the European Union  thanked the LDC for their interest in the EU 
notificat ion and welcomed their positive assessment.  The EU  reiterated its readiness to further 
explain its notification, in the Council or bilaterally.  As previously  indicated , the notification was the 
result of a domestic process where the EU  had considered the LDC collective request, notably in 
light of its trade and development agreements. In that context, inspiration ha d indeed been sought 
from the EU -CARIFORUM  Agreement. This was in line with the Bali Ministerial Decision on the 
operationalization of the waive r. According to that Decision, Members could  accord preferences 
similar to those arising from preferential trade agreements to which they we re party. While the EU  
was satisfied to have fully implemented the Bali Decision, the final outcome  that r esulted in  the EU 
notification wa s not solely a transposition of an existing agreement but a tailor -made set of 
preferences, representing the EU's  best effort to respond to the collective request.  
2.22.   For that  reason, the re were differences , including  in relation to the  coverage offered at the 
Member State level, as rightly in dicated by the LDCs. That  was the norm  in any EU set of 
commitments, as each negotiation was different.  The EU did not have  a "one-size-fits-all" 
approach, but rather provided tailor -made commitment s. In addition, the EU's trade agreements 
were regularly updated following the progressive enlargement of the EU.  
2.23.   The EU had raised awareness about its  notification . He could assure LDCs that the EU 
preferences had been debated significantly within the EU with stakeholders at large as well as with 
Member State s. A lot of communication had been made about the EU notification and the market 
access that was now available to LDCs . 
2.24.   With respect to fees and procedures , the EU was ready to commit in that regard  and was 
encouraged by the discussions that Members had had  that week. The EU was of the view that the 
domestic regulation discussions were the place where multilateral streamlined procedures could be  
established. T he EU had a keen interest in establishing  those rules at the WTO . 
2.25.   He confirmed  that the scope of the EU notification include d money -transfer services  for 
mode  3, and to some extent for mode  1 as well for some Member States.  LDC providers  had the 
option to establish a n activity in the EU under mode 3  to provide  money -transfer service s. 
2.26.   With respect to the question raised in relation to the Nairobi Decision, which called upon 
Members to undertake specific technical assistance and capacity -building measures to orient LDC 
service suppliers to preference benefits available, as well as  paragraph 3.2 of the LDC  collective 
request , which called for the provision of  specific technical assistance and capacity -building, he 
wished to confirm  the following.  First, L DCs were the most important target of EU Aid for Trade. 
Second, in the coming months , the EU would provide EUR 10 million to the EIF trust fund, which 
specifically targeted  LDCs, for phase  2. Third, the EU was finalising with the ACP S ecretariat a 
contribution to pr ovide TA in the area of services. Fourt h, as had  been presented in the Committee 
on Trade and Development session on Aid for Trade on 25 May, the EU and its Member States 
were currently reviewing their joint Aid for Trade strategy , to ensure that the strategy best 
reflect ed the needs and realit ies which drove  the delivery of the EU's collective annual Aid for 
Trade provision of EUR 12 billion. Fifth, the EU was  putting forward support for the LDC waiver as 
one of the potential priorities for  inclusion in the review; this would  be considered in d ue course 
against the other priority issues included in the review.  Finally, technical assistance could be 
requested already, under the currently implemented Aid for Trade framework. Those countries that 
require d support in their implementation of the waiv er should communicate their needs as a 
priority to their local EU delegation in the course of their on -going dialogue.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.27.   The representative of Uganda  thanked Turkey and the EU for their interventions and their 
explanations, and looked forward to further disc ussions on the notifications.  
2.28.   The Chairman  said that Members had had a useful discussion and he encouraged further 
exchanges. He s uggested that the Council take note of the s tatements made and revert to that  
item at its next meeting.  
2.29.   It was so agreed . 
3  ITEM C – WORK PROGRAMME  ON ELECTRONIC  COMMERCE  
3.1.  The Chairman  recall ed that, at the June meeting, Brazil had suggested that the Secretariat 
update a 1998 paper that examines the treatment of electronic commerce in the GATS legal 
frame work (document S/C/W/68 ). He indicated that, at that stage, Brazil did not intend to revisit 
its proposal.  He then drew delegations' attention to the communication just received from a group 
of Members on a CTS thematic seminar on e -commerce. The document, which had been  issued to 
delegations on 5 October, was contained in document RD/SERV/133/ Rev.1. 
3.2.  The representative of Chinese Taipei  said that, along with Australia ; Colombia;  Hong Kong, 
China ; Israel; Korea; Mexico; Panama;  Singapore and the United States, her delegation had jointly 
submitted a communica tion, in document RD/SERV/133/Rev.1, proposing that the CTS hold a 
thematic seminar on e -commerce.  The idea of organising  such a seminar had been first put 
forward by her delegation at the CTS meeting o f 3 June 2015. The suggestion  had received 
support from many M embers, but its  consideration had been  postponed due to the heavy 
preparation leading up to MC10.  
3.3.  At the juncture, t he sponsors believe d that the proposal wa s very timely and extremely 
relevant to the future direction of gl obal trade and the WTO. If allowed to expand carefully and 
responsibly, e -commerce could be the key to unlocking a new wave of global trade growth that 
also stimulate d the right kind of inclusive development.  
3.4.  The primary purpose of the seminar was to asses s recent market and regulatory 
developments relating to e -commerce. The focus would  be on the trade -related aspects of e -
commerce, addressing in particular the opportunities and challenges that e -commerce create d for 
businesses and consumers alike, togethe r with the regulatory responses that were required. The 
further aim was to find a suitable balance between unleashing the huge trade growth potential of 
e-commerce and fulfilling legitimate regulatory requirements at the same time.  
3.5.  The first s ession would  present experiences testifying to the benefits and challenges of e -
commerce from the perspective of the private -sector. In particular, it would focus on the digital 
opportunities and benefits that e -commerce could bring to small and micro enterprises once  they 
had access to the necessary technology.  The s econd session would  discuss existing multilateral 
trade disciplines relating to e -commerce, and the areas in which they were deficient. It would  also 
look at experiences from other fora  for issues and disc ussion -points on the possible directions for 
Members'  future efforts.  In the t hird session, the focus would  be on how to attain th e delicate 
balance between ensuring legitimate regulatory objectives and facilitating the development of e -
commerce. Th e semin ar would  share information and experiences of regulatory responses that 
governments ha d put in place to harness the opportunities of e -commerce in services, while 
ensuring that the public interest was also served.  
3.6.  The topics proposed for the seminar were only notional at that stage, and were for Members’ 
consideration. In particular, the sponsors sought  comments on the structure and the topics to be 
covered. As for the timing of the seminar, the suggest ion was that it be held back -to-back with 
one of the re gular CTS meeting s, in the first half of 2017.  
3.7.  All delegations who took the floor  thanked Chinese Taipei and the other sponsors for their 
proposal.  
3.8.  The representative of Brazil  wished to make a general request that documents relating to the 
e-commerce Wor k Programme agenda item be issued with the addition of the General Council  
symbol , so that they could be circulated also under the Dedicated Discussion taking place under S/C/M/128  
 
- 7 - 
 
  the aegis of the General Council. If all documents submitted to bodies charged with t he Work 
Programme were also given the General Council symbol, this would help delegations keep better 
track of discussion s as, within a delegation, it might be different colleagues who followed 
discussions in different bodies . Turning  to the proposal  on th e table , his delegation fully supported 
the idea of holding an e-commerce seminar under the CTS, as there were many  e-commerce  
issues that needed to be discussed  and better understood . Brazil was working to add some 
suggestions to the proposed programme fo r the seminar and wished to keep open the possibility of 
adding further elements . 
3.9.  The representative of Paraguay  said that his delegation was fully supportive of a CTS seminar 
on e-commerce and added that Paraguay had not been able to co -sponsor the initia l proposal for 
internal coordination reasons but would do so in the near future.  
3.10.   The representative of Bangladesh  said that the seminar could help improve Members' 
understanding of e -commerce, as there were many aspects for which knowledge was  very limited . 
In that sense, the seminar could help reduce  the knowledge gap, particularly on the more 
techn ological  aspects  of e-commerce, its coverage, the products traded and the extent of 
cross-border trade. A rriving at a better understanding of the issues involve d was essential before 
addressing barriers . He suggested that other international organisations , such as ITU, UNCTAD 
and other s, be invited to contribute to the event and was confident that this would contribute to 
making discussions and, ultimately, trade  more inclusive.  
3.11.   The representative of Korea  indicated that his delegation had co -sponsored the proposal . 
Korea believed that the seminar would provide a very useful opportunity to build a shared 
understanding on many important issues, building on Members ' discussions on e -commerce in the 
second half of that year. He  asked the Membership to offer broad support to the proposal . 
3.12.   The representative of Argentina  also expressed his delegation's support for the proposed 
seminar. E -commerce presented  two very imp ortant characteristics  that should facilitate Members' 
discussions.  First, it was an issue that went beyond the traditional developed -developing country 
divide. Second, it  was an instrument  could help reduce the gap between SMEs and bigger firms. E -
commerc e offered an opportunity to put the WTO back at the centre of the development of wor ld 
trade, a  centrality that had been eroded over recent years due to  many issues being addressed 
outside the multilateral context. Reluctance to discuss issues in the WTO h ad resulted in some of 
those being addressed in other fora.  Members should not pass up on the opportunity to give once 
again importance and centrality to the WTO when it came to international trade.  
3.13.   The representative of Chile said that his delegation foun d the proposed seminar interesting  
and beneficial  as a means to improve Members' understanding of e -commerce, and supported the 
suggestion . Chile looked forward to the event and hoped to contribute to it.  
3.14.   The representative of Colombia  said that his delega tion strongly believed in the benefits of 
e-commerce and its positive effect on development. For that reason, it had co-sponsored the 
proposal to hold a CTS seminar on e -commerce. He highlighted the importance of micro, small and 
medium -sized enterprises because, as mentioned in the proposal, it was these companies that 
faced the greatest challenges in overcoming institutional obstacles due to their limited resources. 
He called on all Members, and developing countries in particularly, to participate activel y in the 
seminar and believed that the event could contribute to Members' discussions on the relationship 
between e-commerce and international services trade and trade more generally.  
3.15.   Noting  that e -commerce was an increasingly important aspect of trade in services , the 
representative of Hong Kong, China  said that the WTO had to catch up with reality or it might 
become irrelevant. In that regard, the proposed seminar was timely . It could enable all Members 
to learn, consider and explore how the regulatory re gime on trade in services could improve the 
ever-expanding arena of e -commerce and what needed to be done to address the service -related 
issues of that important dimension of trade. His delegation had been happy to co -sponsor the 
proposed seminar, which wo uld bring together businesses, academics, trade experts and 
regulators, to exchange ideas, foster a greater understanding on the latest state of play of e -
commerce and assess the implications on services trade. He encourage d other Members to support 
the pr oposal.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 8 - 
 
  3.16.   The representative of Canada  expressed his delegation's strong support for the proposed 
seminar and indicated that it was ready to join as co -sponsor. He echoed previous interventions, 
such as the one by Argentina, about the fact that rule -making i n e-commerce had gotten ahead of 
the WTO. Indeed, Canada's FTA practice had evolved to include negotiation of a series of e -
commerce provisions that built on multilateral disciplines. He concurred with Bangladesh about the 
existence of a knowledge gap in t hat area; many Members had not yet undertaken the relevant 
policy -development process. In that regard,  the proposed seminar prov ided an opportunity to 
close that  gap around those issues.  
3.17.   Given the many complex issues that e -commerce entailed, t he represent ative of Nigeria  
fully supported the proposed seminar as a means to address the existing knowledge gap. He noted 
that several initiatives were being undertaken in that regard and echoed Brazil's request that the 
agenda for the seminar be kept open to furth er refinement.  
3.18.   The representative of New Zealand  said that his delegation looked forward to participating  
in the proposed seminar . E-commerce was an area of emerging interest for many Members and 
New Zealand  strongly supported the idea of  taking a close lo ok at the issue to see what could be 
done in a WTO context.  He looked forward to further engaging on the proposed outline for the 
event in due course and stressed the value of considering the viewpoint of business and the 
experience of SMEs via the engagem ent of the private sector  in that context .  
3.19.   The representative of Mexico  said that  the proposal was very positive and the outline for the 
seminar contained very interesting elements. H er delegation was pleased  to have co -sponsored 
the proposal and was deli ghted by delegations' positive reactions to it.   
3.20.   The representative of Singapore  was also pleased t hat her delegation was one o f the 
co-sponsors of the propos ed seminar , which it saw as import ant to further discussions on 
e-commerce. She hoped for Members'  support  and looke d forward to further work on the proposed 
outline for the seminar . 
3.21.   The representative of India said that her delegation had just received the proposal  and 
would need more time to study it before  revert ing to it with a definitive position . She noted  that 
the MIKTA workshop had just been held and many papers ha d been submitted on e -commerce, 
discussions on which were at a fairly nascent stage. Against that background, it was essential to 
properly understand the new issues that the  proposed s eminar was intending  to address  and, 
more importantly , how the outline of the seminar f ell within the non -negotiating, exploratory 
mandate of the Work Programme . More generally , in India's  view, Members  needed to respond in 
an informed way , and must not ru sh towards negotiating a new se t of WTO rules on e -commerce. 
She said that in  that context Bangladesh had  raised very pertinent issues.  
3.22.   Members needed to understand first the exact nature of  the issue that the discussions were 
trying to address , given the  knowledge gap between developed and developing countries. 
Boundaries of what was being proposed were not clear and stakeholders were confused. 
Delegations needed more time to consult  stakeholders  and to understand the ramifications of the 
various proposal s on e-commerce. Most developing countries were grappling with basic access and 
connectivity issues , such as providing uninterrupted power supply, improving patchy internet 
connectivity, enhancing the bandwidth and improving the financial infr astructure, w hile some 
Members we re proposing rule -making on e -commerce. Before addressing  any kind of rulemaking , 
there were many unanswered questions that we re pertinent from a developing country 
perspective . They included the following: How wou ld the new digital age  impact existing trade 
patterns? Without proper regulation , what would  be the impact on consumers and domestic 
producers? In instances in which there were many lacunae in physical and financial infrastructure , 
how would new rules impact trade? Was  the play ing-field level? Those that had data had  access to 
consumers and markets, so would  developing countr ies small  suppliers be able to catch up?  
3.23.   Although India welcome d discussions on all issues related to e -commerce as per the existing 
mandate, what was critical was the need for policy space for developing countries for further 
regulatory development. She could not convey a final view o n the proposed seminar and requested 
that the Council revert to it.  
3.24.   The representative of Uruguay  said that her delegation wou ld study in detail the proposal, 
which seemed very interesting upon a preliminary reading.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.25.   The representative of the European Union  said that his delegation was very supportive of 
the proposal to hold a thematic seminar on e -commerce . Now that horizontal d iscussions were on -
going in the WTO, t here was a need to look at the GATS -related aspects of e -commerce and, as 
such, the proposed seminar was a very good idea. Substantively, services -related issues would 
add value to the horizontal discussions on e-comme rce. As for t he remarks by Bangladesh and 
India, he said that discussions over the coming months would naturally highlight which service -
specific issues should be tackled in the CTS. Since the proposal on the table was to hold the 
seminar sometime in 2017,  the horizontal WTO discussions would automatically feed the seminar's 
agenda.  
3.26.   The representative of the Russian Federation  said that her delegation shared Members' 
growing appetite to reinvigorate discussions on e -commerce in the WTO. E-commerce was 
const antly growing and brought benefits to all. What Members needed to do first was to c larify 
what e-commerce was and how to deal with it. She reiterated that e -commerce was a cross -
cutting issue. There was still no agreement amongst Members on whether certain  e-commerce 
transactions were goods or services or something else. At that point, the Dedicated Discussion was 
the most appropriate platform for conducting seminars that included horizontal issues. Members 
should move step -by-step: have broad discussions a t the horizontal level first, and then gradually 
move into more concrete and specifi c topic discussions in the respective bodies.  
3.27.   The representative of Dominican Republic  said that e -commerce was an evolving issue ; in 
that sense, a thematic seminar would help delegations update themselves and enable them to take 
the best decisions on how to address the issue.  
3.28.   The representative of Australia  said that the CTS had been discussing the possibility of 
holding an e -commerce seminar for some time . Australia was ve ry conscious of the position of 
Members who wished to ensure that the seminar built  on, and did not merely repeat, previous 
seminars, workshops and briefings. In that respect, and as a co -sponsor, her delegation 
appreciated the pragmatic approach that Chin ese Taipei had taken in developing the proposal. She 
noted that the proposed seminar would be held in the first half of 2017, after the horizontal 
deliberations in the Dedicated Discussion . This would be a good time to go into more detail on 
what could be done in the services space, taking advantage of the discussions delegations had had 
horizontally. In that sense, the sequencing was very appropriate. Australia also welcomed the 
indication that the agenda would be adjusted as necessary, based on Members' d iscussions in the 
Dedicated Discussion , to make sure that it made best use of Members' time and focused on issues 
that Members agreed had the best prospects for further work. She recognised that it might seem 
early to start discussin g a seminar for the fir st half of 2017, but having the idea in mind at that 
stage was useful to be able to talk to respective capitals and experts to begin putting together a 
programme that would ensure active engagement and maximum participation.  
3.29.   The representative of Japan  said that , although e -commerce was a cross -cutting issue that 
covered several aspects, such as goods and services, a seminar under the CTS, with in its 
mandate, would contribute to identify ing those issues that were critical to making  use of the 
potential of e -commerce. To that end, Japan appreciated the proposal on the table and would 
participate actively in the upcoming discussions.  
3.30.   The representative of South Africa  said that she had  not received instructions with regard to 
the proposed seminar and would  revert to it at the following meeting. Her delegation had  taken 
note of the submissions introduced by the proponents at the  11th Dedicated Discussion on 
E-commerce held under the auspices of the General Council.  South Africa was prepared to engage 
in a discus sion, within the framework of the existing Work Programme , but with special attention 
put to its developmental aspects. Her delegation's  engagement would  be under the broad 
framework set out in the Work Program me that should address ways of " enhancing the 
participation of developing cou ntries in e -commerce" . In that respect, South Africa's  interest would 
be in exploring measures that ensure d Members redress both the high concentration of e-
commerce amo ngst a few countries and Africa' s marginal participation . 
3.31.   Paragraph 1.1 of the Work Programme (document WT/L/274 ) stated that " the General 
Council [..] establishes the programme for the relevant WTO bodie s as set out in paragraphs  2 
to 5". Her delegation concur red with the  submission by  Canada  et al., in docume nt JOB/GC/97,  
where it was stated  that "four WTO Committees would contri bute to the programme" . Some of the 
recent submissions had  introduced talking points that could inform future discussions. In S/C/M/128  
 
- 10 - 
 
  accordance with the Work Programme, the Council for Trade in Services was  to examine issues 
specific to its mandate . There were several services -specific issues in those submissions that f ell 
under the competence of the CTS and would contribute to the Work Programme.  South Africa was 
prepared for an exploratory e ngagement with Members on th ose technical issues and look ed 
forward  to the proponents’ views on tho se services -specific issues. Her delegation was interested 
to hear how tho se considerations would contribute to enhancing the participation of developing 
countries, including those in Africa with marginal participation , in e-commerce. Proponents should 
be clear that South Africa's  interest was in approaches and measures that were developmental in 
their effect, that support ed inclusive growth in the area of e -commerce and that avoid ed 
exacerbating existing imbalances.  
3.32.   It went without saying that that  discussion was without prejudice to South Africa's  existing 
rights and obligations under the GATS, including its right to regulate to support its national 
prioritie s with respect to the development of e -commerce in its national jurisdiction.  
3.33.   The representative of Seychelles  supported the proposal and looked forward to participating 
in the seminar.  
3.34.   The representative of Egypt  said that the proposal was very timely, gi ven that e -commerce 
was on the rise, had a cross -sectoral nature and had significant effects in helping promote 
development and economic growth. In order for that to happen and for the workshop to be 
productive, it was very important that it tackle various  issues , bearing in mind the situation of 
developing countries w ho lacked capacity and potential in that regard. The technical and legal 
aspects of e -commerce, which were unfortunately lagging in many developing countries, should be 
addressed in the semina r. He had also taken due note of the comments made by Bangladesh and 
India regarding the knowledge gap. Egypt hoped to participate constructively in the seminar.  
3.35.   The representative of China  said that, in principle, his delegation supported more 
information -sharing initiatives on e -commerce. At the same time, he was aware that e -commerce 
was a cross -cutting issue that covered not only trade in services but also trade in goods, 
development and other trade policy aspects. Therefore, delegations might also need  to have 
seminars and workshops in other  subsidiary  bodies  or, as suggested by Russia, in the Dedicated 
Discussion, so as to help Members have a more comprehensive and balanced understanding of the 
importance of e -commerce.  Like India, he reserved his dele gation's right to revert to the proposal.  
3.36.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  said that her delegation had participated in 
an interesting session of the Public Forum organised by Estonia and wished to thank all those who 
had organised and partic ipated in that session. Her delegation was very interested to advance e -
commerce in the services area and the participation of SMEs in GVCs. Moldova looked forward to 
participating in the seminar, in order to find more promises of an efficient negotiating process in 
trade in services and to be able to deliver concrete results for MC11.  
3.37.   The representative of Barbados , speaking on behalf of the ACP Group, had taken note of the 
proposal and might revert to it. Speaking for her own delegation, she said that Me mbers were 
being asked, first, to indicate whether or not to hold a seminar and, second, to provide comments 
on the proposed programme. In this regard, Barbados was still examining the proposal with regard 
to both aspects and would revert to both.  
3.38.   The repr esentative of Qatar  said that the proposal was pertinent and a positive step in the 
e-commerce discussions. His delegation would have liked to join as co -sponsor but w as unable to 
do so for i nternal procedural reasons . Qatar fully supported the proposal an d looked forward to 
participating in the seminar and sharing some of its experiences with e -commerce, in particular its 
positive impact on SME growth.  
3.39.   The representative of Panama  said that his delegation was pleased to co -sponsor the 
proposal. Members sh ould continue to discuss and clarify how to organize the seminar according to 
their desires. He was grateful for the interest in the proposal shown by many delegations.  
3.40.   While he did not yet have specific instructions with regard to the proposal , the 
repre sentative of Uganda  echoed the comments by Bangladesh and India with regard to the 
knowledge gap that existed within many Members' constituencies and wh ich should be filled. In 
that regard, any initiative that improved Members' understanding of the issues involved would be S/C/M/128  
 
- 11 - 
 
  very welcome. That was why he found that some delegations wanted the Membership to move too 
quickly; it was best to go step -by-step, discussing issues in depth in the Council and other bodies 
mandated by the Work Programme, so as to appre hend everyone before moving to a level where 
any negotiations could be started. Some of the concepts covered in the proposals circulated were 
alien to some capital -based colleagues; deepening Members' knowledge base would empower 
delegations and facilitate  discussions, particularly on the part of more reluctant delegations. He 
reserved his delegation's right to revert to the proposal but he liked the idea of brainstorming .  
3.41.   The representative of Nigeria  said that his delegation was part of the Friends of 
Development of E -commerce. Two questions were being addressed in th e discussion. First, 
whether to have a seminar, and in that regard he had not heard any opposition. Second, what the 
content of the seminar should be, and that was where discussions should be  focusing, to ensure 
that all sensitivities were taken into account. It was also important to close the knowledge gap, 
and the question was how to do it. He believed that the seminar would achieve that objective. He 
was mindful that parallel discussions we re on -going in the Dedicated Discussion and that the CTS 
had its own mandate under the Work Programme. He said that the seminar could deepen , and be 
complementary to , on-going conversations, without prejudging what would happen at MC11. He 
called on the pr ogramme to be flexible to address policy and regulatory issues, MSMEs -related 
issues , concerns and interests of developing countries, as well as inputs coming from respective 
capitals.  
3.42.   The representative of Peru said that his delegation supported the propo sed seminar and 
thought that it would serve to achieve a result on e -commerce for MC11. He looked forward to 
getting more details and contributing to the seminar.  
3.43.   The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  also expressed her delegation's' support 
for the proposed seminar, as any exchange of knowledge and experiences on e -commerce which 
enhance d Members' understanding of important trade-related issues .  
3.44.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  thank ed Members for  their support, comments,  and 
questions.  In reply to the questions from Bangladesh, India, and Uganda, she explained that the  
intention behind the seminar was simple , namely to bring trade officials, including services 
colleagues, on the  same page in terms of a better understand ing of how e -commerc e was evolving 
and what challenges it brought to traditional trade.   
3.45.   Chinese Taipei  recognize d the importance of bridging the d igital divide . The  issue could be 
dealt with collectively , in various fora, including the four  WTO bodies  tasked  with the Work 
Programme , and other international organizations, such as UNCTAD, as mentioned by Bangladesh. 
She believed that  there was no conflict to  Members continuing discussions in the CTS in parallel.  
3.46.   On future work, she understood that Members might need more time t o examine  the 
proposal . She invite d delegations to consider the proposal, favourably she hoped, and wished to 
call for informal consultations by the Chair in November to collect Members' comments  on the 
content of the seminar . Additionally, she wished  to request assistance from the Secretariat, 
probably at a later stage, in preparing the draft programme for the seminar based on the 
comments received from Members . She  looked forward to continuing discussion s at the following  
meeting.  
3.47.   Noting that initiatives intended to foster delegations' understanding of e -commerce issues 
would be valuable in principle, the Chairman said that he would hold consultations in November to 
try to reach an agreement on the proposed seminar.  
3.48.   The representative of India underscored that she had no instructions and could not agree to 
the Council holding an e-commerce seminar.  
3.49.   The Chairman  confirmed that there was no agreement on holding the seminar . He would 
consult precisely on that issue , in the hope of reaching an agreement on the Council organising the 
event , and on the programme  for the event . He then suggest ed that the Council take note of the 
statements made and revert to th e item at its next meeting.  
3.50.   It was so agreed . S/C/M/128  
 
- 12 - 
 
  4  ITEM D – CERTAIN MEASURES REL ATED TO THE REFORM O F THE UNIFI ED GAS 
TRANSPORTATION SYSTE M OF UKRAINE  
4.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of the Russian Federation.  
4.2.   The representative of the Russian Federation  recalled her delegation's  previous statements 
in respect of the measures taken by Ukraine in the energy sector . Unfortunately, the Russia n 
Federation  had to revisit the  issue again and express its serious concern as regard ed the adoption 
and implem entation of the Law of Ukraine No.  1645-VII "On amendments to some legislative acts 
of Ukraine on reforming the management system of the Unified Gas Transportation System of 
Ukraine" and the Law of Ukraine No.  329-VIII "On the Natural Gas Market" of 9 April 2015 which 
invalidated the Law of  Ukraine No.  1645-VII as of 14 August 2014.  
4.3.  The new Law as of 9 April 2015  provided  for preferential treatment for the U nited States  and 
the Energy Community Members to perform functions of an operator of the Ukrainian GTS System 
as well as of gas storage facilities which was not extended to any other WTO Member.  
4.4.  The Russian Federation  wished to draw the attention of the Membership to the fact that the  
new Law was in clear violation of the fundamental principles of the General Agreement on T rade in 
Services , MFN and National Treatment, as well as of specific commitments undertaken by Ukraine 
under the GATS.  
4.5.  The Russian Federation had finally received some answers to the numerous questions  it had  
posed more than a year earlier . Her delegation was  dissatisfie d with the treatment of the Russian 
inquiry by the Ukrainian sid e. The response of Ukraine looked  senseless and did not cover in a true 
manner the substance repeatedly raised by her delegation  a number of times.  
4.6.  Therefore, the Russian Federation was  of the opinion that the Ukrainian side h ad failed to 
abide to the practice and requirements in the WTO to respond attentively to the legitimate attempt 
by another WTO M ember to clarify certain important issues of its interest. That actually set a doubt 
that Ukr aine took  its WTO responsibilities seriously as should be the case.  
4.7.  It was especially regret ful that the issue under consideration, namely the discriminatory 
treatment of different national operators with regard to their participation in running the GTS, did 
raise concerns of other WTO Members.  
4.8.  In concluding, she wished to call  on Ukraine to change the pattern of its behaviour  and 
embrace a more responsible approach.  In that  regard, her delegation  again request ed Ukraine to 
bring the Law of Ukraine No.  329-VIII "On the Natural Gas Market" of 9 April 2015 in full 
conformity with its obligations under the WTO Agreement s. 
4.9.  The representative of Ukraine  thank ed the Russian Federation for its continuing interest 
regarding the reform of the Unified Gas Transporta tion System of Ukraine. Ukraine had carefully 
considered the issues raised by the Russian Federation in its statement at the pr evious meeting of 
the CTS, on 17  June. Therefore, Ukraine ha d already provided its answers to the questions of the 
Russian Federa tion related to the Law of Ukraine "On the Natural Gas Market" of 9 April 2015.  
4.10.   In its answers , Ukraine had aimed to clarify the provisions of the Law in order to ensure 
transparency as one of the main principles of the GATS and the WTO. By providing thos e answers , 
Ukraine wished  to demonstrate its willingness to cooperate and provide explanations with respect 
to the current reform of the Unified Gas Transportation System.  
4.11.   The Law of Ukraine "On the Natural Gas Market" was based on the principles of free 
competition, transparency and non -discrimination. All subjects of the natural gas market were 
granted equal access regardless of their country of origin. Specifically, Article 19 of the Law 
stipulated  that all subj ects in the natural gas market we re equal in their right to be granted access 
to the gas transmission and gas distribution systems, gas storages and the liquefied natural gas 
facilities , as well as to connect to the gas transmission and gas distribution systems. Moreover, 
such requirements were used in best international practices within the relevant field.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 13 - 
 
  4.12.   Therefore, Ukraine wishe d to draw the Membership's  attention  to the fact  that the current 
Law was in full compliance with the Schedule of Specific Commitments of Ukraine at accession, 
according  to which Ukraine was obliged to adhere to the principles of non-discriminatory  treatment 
with respect to origin, destination or ownership. The Law did not limit access to  the relevant 
Ukrainian market , as required by the GATS.  
4.13.   Ukraine would  make every re asonable effort to support clarity and precision on its 
legislation in respect of the obligation s it had under taken under the WTO Agreements. In case of 
additional questions , Ukraine was open and ready to further cooperate on th e issue.  
4.14.   The representative  of Armenia  shared the concerns expressed by the Russian Federation 
and called for the reform of Ukraine's Unified Gas Transportation System to be performed and 
organized in full compliance  with WTO rules and procedures . 
4.15.   The representative of Cuba had noted the statement  by the Russian Federation and urged 
all Members to abstain from applying  any measure that could create an unnecessary trade barrier 
that went against WTO obligations . He hoped that the issue at hand would be able to be  resolved 
via construc tive dialogue  between the parties involved . 
4.16.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
4.17.   It was so agreed . 
5  ITEM E - MODE 4 – ASSESSMENT OF BARRIE RS TO ENTRY  
5.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of t he Council at the 
request of the delegation of India.  
5.2.  The representative of India welcomed the opportunity to revert to the very important and 
pertinent issue of barriers to entry being faced by service suppliers in mode 4. Members would 
recall that, whil e introducing its submission in March 2016, her delegation had explained in detail 
the need for the Council to focus on barriers in mode 4 trade.  
5.3.  The supply of services through mode 4 was particularly important for developing countries 
and LDCs. It was di sappointing that commitments in an area of critical interest to developing 
countries and LDCs were shallow and fraught with the most staggering market access, 
administrative and other barriers. Mode 4 was the least traded mode of supply, accounting for les s 
than 5% of world services trade, despite clearly documented gains for both origin and destination 
countries.  
5.4.  India had also made a submission, in document JOB /SERV/229, building on the 2009 
Secretariat Background Note on mode 4. India's  submission highli ghted the increasingly complex 
nature of barriers to mode 4 entry. These included subjective definitions of sub -categories under 
Intra-Corporate Transferees (i.e. executive, specialist and managers/senior managers), resulting 
in rejection of bona fide appl ications and the undermining of commitments. The non -portability of 
social security benefits was another significant mode 4 barrier. In the submission, India had also 
shared its experience with respect to certain select countries, which were major export m arkets for 
Indian suppliers. The LDC Collective Request had also referred to some very similar issues.  
5.5.  The June meeting of the CTS had seen a constructive engagement on the submission by  a 
large number of Members. Some very useful suggestions had also eme rged from that discussion. 
Building on what she had heard at the previous meeting  and keeping in mind the reluctance on the 
part of some Members to agree to an update of the 2009 Secretariat Background Note  on mode 4 , 
as well as  the suggestion for India to reconsider its approach, at that meeting her delegation 
wished to propose that the Council hold either a dedicated discussion or a seminar, back -to-back 
with a Council meeting, on the barriers to mode 4 entry.  
5.6.  She stressed that her delegation was not prop osing to include any Member -specific barrier in 
the discussion, and was continuing to pursue those issues through the bilateral channel . Rather, its 
proposal was to have a generic discussion on some of the important issues that had been 
highlighted in Indi a's March 2016 submission. These included definitional issues and social security S/C/M/128  
 
- 14 - 
 
  issues related to mode 4. In the discussion that had follow ed India’s submission, some Members 
had also highlighted the following issues which should be taken up in any discu ssion on mode 4, 
namely: issues related to recognition of qualification s; residency requirements for the provision of 
mode 4 services; coverage of certain mode 4 operators that were not clearly specified; and ENTs 
on mode 4.  
5.7.  The purpose of the proposed sem inar or dedicated discussion would be to look into the 
barriers, some of which she had just indicated, faced by services suppliers in mode 4, and also to 
look at what possible WTO responses could be developed by way  of disciplines that could facilitate 
mode 4 trade. The participants in the proposed seminar  or dedicated discussion could include 
experts and representatives from industry and the private sector, relevant inter -governmental 
organizations, academia and regulators.  
5.8.  India was open and looked forwar d to other Members' views and suggestion s on shaping the 
agenda for a discussion o f mode 4 barriers.  
5.9.  The representative of Nigeria  said that the Council had addressed  barriers to mode 4 in the 
past and that  discussion needed to be updated, for Members to consider what could be done to 
address those barriers. On India's suggestion for a dedicated discussion, he wondered how it 
would be structured, if presentations would be made and what role the Secretariat would play. Hi s 
delegation was always open to  holding seminars, which could help fill  knowledge gaps, but their 
objective needed to be clear, they had to add value to Members' deliberations and their structure 
needed to be clarified. He concluded that in principle he could support and saw value in India's  
suggestion , but needed more information in order to consider the proposal properly.  
5.10.   The representative of China  also expressed his delegation's preliminary support for India's 
suggestion for a seminar or a dedicated d iscussion on mode 4 barriers. He would  need to consult 
with his capital and would revert to the suggestion, but in a preliminary manner he could back the 
proposal in view of the fact that  China had similar concerns to those expressed by India. He 
encouraged the Council to deepen its discussion s of mode 4 barriers . It would be useful if the 
Secretariat could undertake further research on the issue, update relevant information and provide 
technical support to Members as requested.  
5.11.   By way of preliminary comments, the representative of Canada  was p leased to note that 
India had taken on board some of his delegation's concerns, in particular with regard to the "nam e 
and shame" approach it had taken to discuss mode 4 barriers, and was now engaging more 
constructively on the issue. He agreed that it was  important for the WTO to address regulatory 
measures that could undermine market access; in that regard, Members had begun a useful 
discussion in the WPDR the previous day and he looked forward to India's constructive 
participation in that process as well . Regulatory barriers were only relevant where market access 
existed in the first place, and the first step in any liberalisation process was providing market 
access to foreign service providers. Any kind of discussion  should start at the beginning  by 
addressing  mode 4 access and consideration of sectoral coverage of market access commitments.  
5.12.   The representative of Uganda  said that he had no instructions from capital or the LDC Group 
as a whole. Still, he noted that the LDC Collective Request covered mode 4 -related issues and that 
numerous  Members had noted the many challenges they faced with respect to that mode of 
supply. In the implementation of the waiver mechanism, LDC suppliers continued to face mode 4 -
related barriers. In that sense, any discussion th at would help bring evidence on the need to find 
ways and means to address those issues would be very welcome. He looked forward to reverting 
to the suggestion with firm instructions.  
5.13.   The representative of the European Union  explained that he could not off er any reactions at 
that meeting as it was the first time his delegation had heard India's proposal.  
5.14.   The representative of the United States  noted that India, who had just stated that it had no 
instructions on a written proposal, was now asking Members to accept an oral proposal. He was in 
a similar position to other delegations who had said that they had no instructions and  as such  
could not react to the proposal. He agreed to a large extent with the issues raised by Canada. If 
Members were going to move i nto a discussion o f barriers, then this should be open to all kinds of 
barriers, in all modes, while also addressing whether Members had undertaken commitments. His 
delegation had also experiences to share with regard to the problems its suppliers encounte red, S/C/M/128  
 
- 15 - 
 
  would welcome an opportunity and forum to discuss those in greater detail and did not see the 
need to restrict deliberations  to only one mode. If that was the direction in which Members wanted 
to take the CTS discussions, then a written submission on India's part would be the first essential 
step to really understand what was being suggested. He was not sure that such a discussion would 
necessarily be constructive but was open to having more details about what India was proposing.  
5.15.   The representative of  Australia  said that her delegation was very interested in intensifying 
work on services and ensuring that Members had substantive discussions in the Council and all its 
subsidiary bodies. In that respect, her delegation was open to considering any proposa l from 
Members to get into more detailed discussions on services trade -related issues, in any mode. She 
called for more information to be submitted by India, in writing, regarding its proposal, particularly 
on the suggested format and proposed agenda for d iscussions, to transmit to capitals and facilitate 
consultations of the timing and content of any such future  work.  
5.16.   While noting that he had no instructions, the representative of Switzerland  indicated that his 
delegation had traditionally had an open atti tude and that mode 4 was essential if Members 
wanted to arrive at a successful negotiating outcome in services. He would be interested in better 
understanding India's proposal . There was good potential in engaging in such discussions , so as to 
prepare for MC11 with a number of subjects that would reflect the interests of the Membership at 
large.  
5.17.   The representative of Nigeria  also called for greater precision on India's proposal in terms of 
issues for discussion and suggested way s forward.  
5.18.   The representative  of Turkey  said that mode 4 had been the most neglected area of the 
services negotiations and was the least committed mode. The expansion of mode 4 trade would 
have overall positive effects on the growth of trade, employment, inward foreign investment and 
capital and human capital transfers. Against that background, his delegation  would  always  
encourage  mode 4 discussions in the CTS and would be happy to contribute to any relevant 
activities that the Council decided to hold, whether  in the form of a seminar  or a d edicated 
discussion.  
5.19.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made and revert to 
this item at the following meeting.  
5.20.   The representative of the United States  wondered about the exact scope of the agenda item 
to which the Co uncil would revert, noting that the nature of the discussion was changing. It was 
difficult for delegations to prepare for that agenda item as its focus kept shifting. If India had 
moved on from discussing its initial submission and was now making a differ ent suggestio n for a 
seminar or d edicated discussion, th en the item should be closed and India should suggest a new 
one. He could not agree to revert to an agenda item whose meaning was not clear.  
5.21.   The representative of India clarified that her delegation' s initial submission had suggested 
an update to the Secretariat Background Note on mode 4 and  she would have been very happy if 
that suggestion had been agreed to. India had had to change the course of the discussion under 
that item because certain Members  had expressed their total reluctance to agree to such an 
update, all the while  other papers were being updated even without discussion or approval by the 
relevant Committee. She stressed  that the mode 4  agenda item had evolved because her 
delegation had w anted to take into account and respond to Members' requests to try to be 
constructive. India definitely wanted to retain that item on the agenda. As had been suggested by 
many Members, her delegation would revert  to the Council with further details, taking  into account 
the comments heard , and would consult bilaterally to submit a written proposal.  
5.22.   The representative of  the United States  first asked for some clarification on what had 
happened with regard to the suggested update  of the Secretariat e -commerce paper, an update 
that India had blocked  in the past . The way the WTO worked was on the basis of consensus, and 
this a pplied in all instances and not  only when India was trying to block the update of a paper. In 
terms of the mode 4 agenda item, he reiterate d that he did not understand what the item meant 
anymore and, as such, even if it were retained, he would not be able to prepare to speak to it. It 
would not be helpful to the Council to retain items that lacked any context.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 16 - 
 
  5.23.   The representative of India noted that her delegation had never objected to the updating of 
the Secretariat e -commerce note in document JOB/GC/73. She recognised that it was necessary 
for her delegation to table a written proposal, but stressed that there was no need for India to 
obtain  consensus to make a proposal. She had noted all the comments that had been made and 
had already indicated that her delegation would revert with a detailed proposal; it needed no 
consensus to do so.   
5.24.   The representative of Brazil  clarified that his delegati on had requested an update of the e -
commerce Backg round Note in document S/C/W/68,  rather than the note  in document JOB/GC/73.  
5.25.   The Chairman  suggested that the item be kept on the agenda and that consultations be held 
to clarify how to deal with it.  
5.26.   It was  so agreed . 
6  ITEM F – RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TRADE IN SERVICES  STATISTICS  
6.1.  As he had indicated at the June meeting, the Chairman  had asked the Secretariat to make a 
presentation to the Council on recent developments in trade in services statistics. An item t o that 
effect had therefore been added to the agenda.  
6.2.  A representative of the Secretariat  explained that he would structure his intervention along 
four main areas of work in trade in services statistics: production and dissemination, technical 
assistance,  specific projects, and new areas the Economic Research and Statistics Division was 
looking at.  
6.3.  Starting with statistics production and dissemination, the Secretariat leveraged resources 
with other international organisations (UNCTAD, ITC)  for producing a  "Geneva dataset". This joint 
dataset results from the close cooperation between the WTO, UNCTAD and the ITC in collecting, 
compiling and jointly disseminating data series. The dataset covered annual data, based on the 6th 
edition of the Balance of Payment s Manual, and was available from 2005 to 2015. Quarterly 
time-series, available starting with the first quarter of 2005, are produced with UNCTAD, and, as 
of the second quarter of 2016, with added participation by the ITC. On the WTO side, monthly 
statisti cs were also compiled. For the first time, the new WTO "World Trade Statistical Review", 
which replaced the traditional annual publication International Trade Statistics, traditionally 
released in October, had been published in July in electronic format an d in paper version in early 
September. Its analytical content had been extended and the number of analytical tables reduced, 
although the complete set of data was still available online. The publication provided the latest 
trends in global trade in goods a nd services, gave information about detailed service sectors in all 
economies, regions and economic groups. The publication was complemented by new "Trade 
Profiles", to be released on 28 October, which will include indicators on services trade for 
Members,  Observers , as well as other economies. In addition to those products, a World Trade 
Outlook indicator had been released in July and forecasts for 2016 and 2017 were also produced.  
6.4.  For recent developments, trade in commercial services for 2015 had decrease d by 6% at the 
global level, with construction and transport the most affected sectors, and telecom, computer and 
information services relatively least affected. In terms of quantitative indicators, he noted that 
while world exports of travel services had fallen by 5%, for instance, international travellers 
worldwide had increased. This pointed to an exchange -rate effect on the growth rates. The 
relatively higher resilience of services compared with goods trade is also reflected in quarterly 
numbers; the fi gures for the second quarter of 2016 were forthcoming.  
6.5.  When it came to data availability by main Balance -of-Payments sector, he indicated that, in 
simple count terms, North America, Europe and Asia were the regions with the most frequent 
reporting of detai led data. Certain sectors, such as "other business services" or "personal, cultural 
and recreational services", were more challenging in terms of obtaining detailed information at the 
sub-sectoral level. When it came to Foreign Affiliate Statistics (FATS),  the situation was even more 
uneven, in that it was essentially only OECD member countries that reported FATS data. There 
was also a bigger time lag in FATS compared to the BOP statistics, with the last available year for 
FATS being mostly 2013.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 17 - 
 
  6.6.  Turning to  technical assistance, the Secretariat, over past years, had been very involved in 
the conceptual development of the Manual on Statistics in International Trade in Services and the 
associated Compilers Guide. Now, the focus had shifted to operationalizatio n. For instance, in 2015 
it had organized a large seminar for the Middle East. Guidance was usually sought to address 
technical difficulties, such as how to capture new types of services, how to disaggregate sectoral 
information, for instance for professio nal services and how to collect data by partners, by modes of 
supply and FATS statistics. To address those issues, the Secretariat had developed, with UNCTAD 
and UNSD, an e -learning course, which helped ensure that participants all had the same level of 
knowledge, thus, organizing training seminars on specific aspects. For instance, in November this 
year, a WTO course on trade in services statistics for LDCs would be held in Geneva. It was WTO -
sponsored and would focus on service sectors of particular trade  interest to LDCs. Sessions would 
focus on concrete challenges in data collection and compilation as identified by participants in a 
pre-course questionnaire; experts from national statistical authorities and international 
organisations would be present at  the seminar to respond to questions and try to find solutions. 
There would also be roundtable discussions with LDC delegates to exchange information on specific 
service sectors and data needs for those sectors. A more general course was also being planned  in 
2017 for developing countries and the Secretariat would be approaching delegation s through an 
invitation letter early next year.  
6.7.  In terms of specific projects, the Secretariat was trying to leverage resources. It was 
developing with the OECD an interna tional benchmark dataset for bilateral trade by main service 
sectors. It was using existing data as much as possible and had adopted an open approach, 
exposing the data to national data compilers, obtaining feedback and working it into the dataset. It 
would try to apply the same approach to a dataset on trade in services by mode of supply which 
was just starting to be developed and was funded by the EU. Ideally, in the future, the two 
datasets would be combined to arrive at an analytical dataset available f or research on trade in 
services by mode of supply and by partner.  
6.8.  Moving to new areas, ICT services and ICT -enabled services were the object of a partnership 
under the aegis of UNCTAD. UNCTAD will develop pilot surveys which will be implemented in four 
developing economies in 2017. Cross -border e -commerce transactions were another new area of 
work, where the Secretariat had started to work with other organisations trying to identify which 
part of e -commerce transactions were cross -border and how to m easur e them. Though there is a 
big interest on the part of all stakeholders, being from the public or private sector, the key was to 
understand how best to advance public -private partnerships to get relevant information, given 
anti-trust and confidentiality con siderations. Indicators will be developed both on the supply and 
demand side, by looking at how to amend existing enterprise surveys and household surveys to 
get information on the business -to-business and business -to-consumer facets of e -commerce. 
Busines s-to-business e -commerce is estimated to account for the biggest share of e -commerce.  
6.9.  The representative of China  expressed his gratitude to both the Secretariat and the Chairman 
for the update. He called on the Secretariat to notify Members periodically o n statistical 
developments and undertake further analysis of trends and emerging challenges that could help 
facilitate Members' discussions.  
6.10.   The representative of Nigeria  was also thankful for the presentation and acknowledged the 
challenges arising from s tatistics in the area of services. He sought two clarifications. First, did the 
Secretariat have any partnership or engagement with national statistical offices? Second, how 
would developing economies be chosen for the pilot surveys on ICT services and ICT -enabled 
services?  
6.11.   Responding to Nigeria's questions, the representative of the Secretariat  explained that the 
Secretariat worked with other international organisations and via their respective constituencies 
was in contact with national compilers. For ins tance, the OECD Working Party on Goods and 
Services statistics invited not only countries from within the region but also other important 
players outside the region. With respect to the pilot surveys, he indicated that UNCTAD would 
carry out this process. The results of that work would become available as soon as the project was 
finalised. In general, apart from the Compilers Guide previously mentioned, the inter -agency task 
force on international trade statistics (convened by WTO and OECD) was trying to de velop an 
online database holding the economies' individual experiences in that domain with the aim of 
helping Members implement the Manual.  S/C/M/128  
 
- 18 - 
 
  6.12.   The Chairman  thanked the Secretariat, concurred with China about the importance of the 
information shared and the wo rk undertaken and suggested that the Council take note of the 
statement made and that such an update become a yearly feature on the Council's agenda.  
6.13.   It was so agreed . 
7  ITEM G – OTHER BUSINESS  
7.1.  A representative of the Secretariat  explained that the Secretari at had been following the 
practice of sending advance copies of services documents by email to delegations. As the 
composition of delegations changed over time, there was a need to keep the  list of addressees  up-
to-date, both to ensure that messages were a ddressed to the right person  and to avoid the list 
becoming too long because of obsolete email addresses. He therefore asked that delegations 
kindly communication to the Trade in Services and Investment Division the contact email 
addresses that should be a dded and those that should be deleted.  
7.2.  Noting that it was the last services meeting for Ms Pant, the representative of India, the 
Chairman  said that the Membership had appreciated her personal and professional qualities and 
extended his best wishes to her in her future endeavours. The representative of India, Ms Pant, 
thanked the Chairman, the Secretariat and her colleagues for her fruitful experience in  the services 
area and in the WTO more generally.  
7.3.  The meeting was adjourned . 
__________