WT/TPR/M/284  
24 September 2013  
(00-0000)  Page: 1/70  
Trade Policy Review Body 
16 and 18 July 2013    
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW 
EUROPEAN UNION 
DRAFT  RECORD OF MEETING 
Chairperson:  H.E. Mr. Shahid Bashir (Pakistan) 
 
 
Page 
1   INTRODUCTORY REMARK S BY THE CHAI RPERSON ...................................................... 2  
2   OPENING STATEMENT BY THE REPRES ENTATIVE OF THE EU ROPEAN UNION .............. 4  
3   STATEMENT BY THE DISCU SSANT ............................................................................... 8  
4   STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS........................................................................................ 11  
5   REPLIES BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND 
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 54  
6   CONCLUDING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON ........................................................ 69  
 
 
Note: Advance written questions by WTO Members and the replies provided by the European Union 
are reproduced in document WT/TPR/M/284/Add.1 and will be available online at 
http://www.wto.org/english/tr atop_e/tpr_e/tp_rep_e.htm . WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1  INTRODUCTORY REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON 
1.1.  The eleventh Trade Policy Review of the European Union was held on 16 and 18 July 2013. 
The Chairperson H.E. Mr. Shahid Bashir (Pakistan)  welcomed the delegation of the European Union 
headed by Mr Peter Balas, Deputy Director Genera l, Directorate-General for Trade; the rest of the 
delegation from Brussels; colleagues from the mission in Geneva; and the discussant, 
H.E. Mr Tim Yeend (Australia). 
1.2.  The Chairperson recalled the purpose of th e Trade Policy Reviews and the main elements of 
the procedures for the meeting. The report by the European Union was contained in document 
WT/TPR/G/284 and that of the WT O Secretariat in WT/TPR/S/284. 
1.3.  The European Union adopted the alternative timeline for its TPRB meeting. Questions by the 
following delegations had been submitted in writing at least four weeks in advance and had been 
transmitted to the delegation of the European Union: Switzerland; the United States; El Salvador; 
Colombia; Australia; Hong Kong, China; China; Ukraine; Argentina; New Zealand; Singapore; South Africa; India; Costa Rica; the Republic of Korea; Chinese Taipei; Japan; Chile; Norway; 
Brazil; Canada; Mexico; and Indonesia. The following six delegations submitted written questions 
after the four week deadline: Brunei Darussalam on behalf of ASEAN; the Dominican Republic; Pakistan; the Russian Federation; Turkey; Malaysia; Guatemala; Trinidad and Tobago; Ecuador; 
and Thailand. 
1.4.  The Chairperson congratulated the EU on it s enlargement to 28 Members, and Croatia on its 
recent accession. Even before it applied for membership in 2003 Croatia had started to undertake significant reforms, a process which continued during its accession negotiations as was noted by 
the TPR Body in its review of Croatia in 2010. 
1.5.  In the EU, the economic and financial crisis of the past few years has dominated 
developments and GDP growth has remained weak or even negative. The low level of domestic 
demand in many Member states is one of the main factors behind the subdued economic 
performance. At the same time trade, both imports and exports of goods and services, has continued to grow although the EU's share of world trade has declined as some other WTO 
Members' trade has increased even more rapidly. 
1.6.  In the EU, there were big differences in economic performance among member States, 
largely due to their exposure and response to the crisis. Hopefully, the measures taken at both the 
EU and member State levels should lead to an improvement in economic conditions and a more 
sustainable basis for growth in the near future. 
1.7.  The EU remains a vital pillar of the WT O and the multilateral trading system and the 
Chairperson was pleased to note in its report to the Trade Policy Review Body that the "WTO 
represents the multilateral bedrock of the European Union trade policy." But, as in the last TPR of 
the EU, there are concerns about the emphasis given to negotiating free trade agreements, including the on-going negotiations with Canada and the negotiations with the United States that 
started last week. 
1.8.  In the 2011 review, Members welcomed the EU's use of the Generalized System of 
Preferences to provide assistance to developing  countries and the Everything-but-Arms scheme for 
least-developed countries. However, some Members have indicated concerns about the reformed 
GSP scheme which was agreed in October 2012 and is to apply from the start of 2014. 
1.9.  Concerns about regulatory obstacles to market access were also raised in the last TPR and 
again in this one, particularly in relation to standards, technical regulations and sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures. At the last TPR, the EU was encouraged to use international best 
practices for transparency and to increase its co-operation with third countries. 
1.10.  Another issue raised in past TPRs of the EU is the Common Agricultural Policy and a recent 
development of interest to Members is the politic al agreement of 26 June 2013 on the reform of 
the CAP. No doubt Members would like to hear more details about what this will mean to agriculture in the EU and its impact on the world's markets. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.11.  Many other points have been made in the reports by the EU and the Secretariat, such as the 
complexity of some tariffs, implementation of the Services Directive, public procurement by 
Member states, and intellectual property. The Chai rperson looked forward to hearing a discussion 
of these and other issues and to delegations vi ews on developments over the past two years. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 4 - 
 
  2  OPENING STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 
(MR. BALAS) 
2.1.  It is with great pleasure that I am here today to represent the European Union at its eleventh 
Trade Policy Review meeting. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the acting Chair, 
H.E. Ambassador Shahid Bashir of Pakistan, who agreed to replace my EU colleague Joakim Reiter 
who usually chairs the TPRB, to the distinguished discussant, H.E. Ambassador Tim Yeend of Australia and to all Members participating in this review. Before diving into the substance of our 
discussions I would also like to acknowledge the hard and good work – as usual - done by the 
Trade Policy Review Division team. 
2.2.  First of all, let me note that the EU has recently enlarged so that it is the first time that 
Croatia is part of the EU Delegation to the TPR. We now have 28 Member States even if this is not 
yet reflected in the two reports before us as Croa tia’s accession was too recent to be reported in 
t h a t  c o n t e x t .  T h i s  i s ,  h o w e v e r ,  a n o t h e r  s i g n  that the EU, the current economic difficulties 
notwithstanding, remains a successful and attractive entity. 
2.3.  Moving to today’s meeting, the EU has embarked on the adventure of undertaking to follow 
the alternative timeframe – which we have warmly supported during the last review. We very much hope it will allow us to engage in good, more interactive discussions with all of you, and that 
other WTO Members will follow our example. 
2.4.  Indeed, we feel a particular responsibili ty for providing maximum transparency because of 
our position in the world trade. The EU is a top trading partner for more than 80 Members as the Secretariat reports. We are among the most open economies as reported by the Secretariat; and 
the figures confirm this: we are the first importer of agricultural products, we represent about 17% 
of the world trade in goods and more than a quar ter of trade in services, we have maintained a 
key role in world investment flows. All this despite the financial crisis and its unprecedented impact 
on the EU. Despite the hardship, we remain open and are committed to remain open. 
2.5.  The 1268 questions we received so far from 33 of the Members demonstrate the interest our 
policies raise. We have replied in writing and by the deadline to all the advance questions that we 
received on time. Furthermore, yesterday we have also provided written answers to all the 
questions which came late and which we received until the end of June. Among the many questions we received, some address European Commission proposals for future EU legislation. I would wish to clarify that these proposals are not, and cannot yet be considered as EU legislation. 
In replying to such questions we have therefore lim ited ourselves to explaining the proposals’ main 
objectives - as it is clear that we cannot yet know when, with what content, or even if they will eventually be adopted by the EU legislators.  
2.6.  Let me start with the EU’s economic situation which has improved quite a bit since the last 
EU TPR, even if our recovery is still very fragile. 
Macroeconomic outlook 
2.7.  At the time of the last EU TPR, the impact of the economic and financial crisis was still being 
strongly felt in the world economy and EU was se riously affected. Today, our economy is slowly 
emerging from the recession. Cyclical indicators provide some early and tentative signs of a modest recovery next year for the EU.  
2.8.  Since our last Trade Policy Review, considerable progress has been made to reduce the most 
urgent risks to the euro area and its financial mark ets. Nonetheless, efforts to facilitate adjustment 
and strengthen the European Monetary Union framework must continue and are actually 
continuing.  
2.9.  Firstly, several Members have raised questions on the Banking Union. Indeed, it is a top 
priority for the EU. A few weeks ago, the Eu ropean Council set out the next steps in the 
reinforcement of the European Monetary Union architecture and called for work to continue on all 
these issues in the run up to the December European Council. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.10.  Secondly, the EU is redoubling its efforts to combat unemployment that reached an 
unprecedented and unsustainable scale in some of our MS. 
2.11.  Thirdly, building strong, competitive, diversified industrial manufacturing capacities is of 
central importance for the EU’s competitiveness and job-creation potential. The renewed industrial 
strategy of the EU focuses on investment and innovation but also on mobilising all the levers 
available at EU level, notably the single market, trade policy, SME policy, competition policy, environmental and research policy in favour of European companies’ competitiveness. 
2.12.  Fourthly, the completion of the single  market and the continued attention paid to 
enforcement of competition rules in the EU are the solid foundations the EU also builds on.  
2.13.  Fifthly, the EU is committed to dramatically step up investment into new technologies and 
give Europe a competitive lead at a time wh en the speed of innovation and technological 
development has put the world on the edge of a further industrial break-through.  
2.14.  We believe that the way we conduct our trade policy will have an important impact on our 
path to economic recovery. 
2.15.  Indeed, trade is an engine for EU recovery. It has always been important but it is more 
crucial now than ever. As pointed out in the Secretariat’s report, in the coming years exports are expected to remain the main positive contributor the GDP growth in the EU.   
The EU in the world 
2.16.  We all have learnt the lessons of the Great depression. The EU is a firmly committed to 
openness and has resisted the protectionist tendencies which naturally reappeared in the context of the economic difficulties we have been facing in  the last few years. We are extremely vigilant at 
home and we will on the other hand keep on combatting new barriers faced abroad by our 
exporters. 
2.17.  Regarding trade in goods, while the Secretariat’s report stresses the rise of EU imports of 
fuels since 2009 it also documents impressive import growth in many other product categories – 
thereby underpinning that the EU has remained one of  the largest export destination for the rest of 
the world.  
2.18.  Regarding the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, a political agreement was reached 
on 26 June between the Commission, the EP and the Council. After formal adoption of the reform, the new CAP should be in place early next year. This reform continues in the direction set by the previous ones. We have increased the market orie ntation of European agriculture while improving 
the integration of environmental requirements and reinforcing support for rural development. 
Decoupled direct payments, which will remain the core of CAP spending, give freedom to farmers to produce to market needs while providing them wi th income support to ensure provision of public 
goods to the society. Under the new "greening" provision, a part of the direct payments will be 
linked to a farmer's compliance with sustainable agricultural practices beneficial to soil quality, biodiversity and the environment. The role of mark et measures will be maintained as a safety net 
for farmers in crisis situations. Rural development policy will focus on increasing competitiveness 
and promoting innovation of European agricult ure and rural areas. The package represents a 
strong EU response to the challenges which have been identified as key for the coming years such as food security, climate change, growth and jobs in rural areas.  
2.19.  I also take this opportunity to reaffirm the EU’s commitment to conclude the DDA as a 
whole in order to establish a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system. In that context the EU has offered to substantially improve market access conditions, to phase out all forms of 
export subsidies and to substantially reduce trade-di storting domestic support as part of an overall 
ambitious and balanced package. 
2.20.  Services sectors constitute the vital backbo ne of EU growth and recovery. This is why the 
EU, which is already quite open regarding trade in services as noted by the Secretariat in its 
detailed analysis of EU services markets, has embarked on the negotiation of several bilateral and WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 6 - 
 
  regional economic integration agreements and the plurilateral “Trade In Services Agreement”. The 
further deepening of the EU’s internal market in th at area could also lead to additional gains.  
2.21.  A number of Members have raised questi ons regarding the coexistence between existing 
Member States’ Bilateral Investment Treaties and EU-wide future investment agreements. From 
the outset, I would like to reassure you that, until there is any EU investment agreement with third 
countries, which is not the case yet, existing BITs will continue to apply. The EU's investment policy is focused on providing EU investors with both legal certainty and market access. The EU will 
therefore continue to aim at enhancing the overall level of liberalization with regard to market 
access for investment.  
2.22.  Progress was also made during the reporting period in the area of IPRs. Firstly, we have 
reached a political agreement in the EU on the creation of a unitary patent protection. Secondly, 
the EU has just adopted a Regulation concerning  customs enforcement of intellectual property 
rights that will become applicable next year.  
2.23.  Government procurement is a very important element in the EU economy and we received 
numerous questions on this subject. I hope everyo ne here is aware that WTO Members are offered 
a access to up to 85% of EU public procurement over the GPA thresholds values either via FTA 
commitments with the EU or within the GPA, su bject to a satisfactory level of symmetrical 
opening. This is quite a remarkable feature.  
2.24.  Generally speaking the EU ranks among the most open economies as was reported by the 
Secretariat. And in practice, this is also reflected by the modest ranking of the EU in terms of use of anti-dumping measures taking into account EU’s volume of trade and imports compared to the 
other major trading partners. 
2.25.  During the reporting period the EU has continued to attach much importance to the nexus 
between trade and development. The EU is the worl d’s largest donor in the area of Aid for Trade 
and we also remain one of the largest and most open importers of goods originating in developing 
countries. Furthermore, in parallel to carrying preferential negotiations with a great number of developing countries, the EU has reviewed its GSP scheme to ensure that its benefits would focus 
on those poor countries that need them the most.   
2.26.  The EU believes strongly that in an increasingly complex world where economic and trade 
integration grows, the only possible way to ensure sustainability and inclusive outcomes is through 
strong multilateral trade and investment rules. 
The EU and the multilateral trading system  
2.27.  EU has always been and will continue to be a firm supporter of the multilateral trading 
system.  
2.28.  Since the last TPR the EU has not spared its effort to strengthen the multilateral trading 
system and ensure that it adjusts to the quickl y evolving international environment. The EU’s 
priority is to ensure a successful 9th WTO Ministerial Conference in Bali later this year. 
Unfortunately, this is not something that the EU can do alone so we count on the active and 
constructive involvement of all WTO Members into making the Ministerial Conference a success. The EU firmly believes that a successful MC9, which sees agreement on Trade Facilitation and 
some agriculture and development issues, is a prerequisite for further work on the other parts of 
the DDA in the immediate future.  
2.29.  I am sure now that some of you already want to present counter argument and ask: are 
those FTAs consistent with EU’s ambition to strengthen the WTO and overcome the DDA impasse? 
2.30.  Let me tell you that this is not an "either…or " type of question for us. We will continue to try 
and move forward the agenda in the WTO. But we also make sure that we move ahead with our FTA agenda in a way that is fully compatible with multilateral liberalisation and rulemaking.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.31.  The EU is convinced that ambitious bilateral and regional agreements will send a clear signal 
of our joint willingness to open markets on goods and services as well as tackling complex regulatory issues. It may also pave the way to futu re multilateral negotiations in our Organization.  
EU follow up to last TPR chair remarks 
2.32.  The EU takes seriously the TPR exercise and took into account the remarks made at the end 
of our last review. I have already reacted to some of those, so let me still address a couple of other issues that were included in the Chairman’s conclusion in 2011.  
2.33.  We received many questions as to how th ird countries views can be taken into account in 
the early stages of our preparations of EU legislation. There are many ways for stakeholders in third countries to get their views heard during the development of EU legislation, in particular in 
the framework of the systematic Impact Assessmen t studies and during the EU wide consultations 
that are always made online prior to the release of any legislative proposal by the European 
Commission. These consultations are open to all interested parties. I am therefore pleased to note that these procedures are described in details in the Secretariat’s Report.  
2.34.  Regarding the degree of integration and harmon ization of rules, be it on TBT or SPS, let me 
recall that the EU has reached a level of integration that is remarkable and unprecedented in the world. The very few areas where we are not harm onized are those in general where subsidiarity 
applies within the EU in conformity with our Treaty. 
2.35.  In conclusion, let me say again even with the risk of repeating myself that I am looking 
forward with great interest to experience myself, after quite a number of TPRs that I have attended in my capacity as the head of EU delegation, how the alternative timeframe may induce 
more interactivity in our debates, which I very much welcome.   WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 8 - 
 
  3  STATEMENT BY THE DISCUSSANT (H.E. MR. TIM YEEND (AUSTRALIA)) 
3.1.  It is a great honour for me to be discu ssant at the eleventh Trade Policy Review of the 
European Union. We have already made a positive start with the excellent presentation from Peter Balas, and this comes on the back of the detailed and quality reports from the WTO Secretariat 
and the European Union. I would also like to join with others in welcoming Croatia to this Trade 
Policy Review as part of the EU delegation. 
3.2.  The on-going financial and sovereign debt crises have dominated political discourse in the EU 
since the last Trade Policy Review in 2011. While the EU economy started to recover in 2010 and 
2011, the worsening sovereign debt crises and a slowdown in global trade saw overall GDP in the EU decline again in 2012, by some 0.3%. Of co urse, economic performance between the various 
EU member States is widely varied. The effect of the crisis on some EU members has been 
profound, with enormous contractions in GDP leaving historically high levels of unemployment and 
government budget profiles that are requiring a fundamental rebalancing in terms of levels of 
public expenditure and government revenues. The lo ng-term challenges for these countries will be 
immense, although in most instances the impression now is that much of the hard work has at 
least been started and that we should start to see improvements starting over the next few years.  Other EU countries, those with more sustainable de bt profiles and higher levels of productivity, 
have fared better. But the challenges for Europe as a whole remain. 
3.3.  European countries have over the past few years taken some very difficult decisions and 
started the process of implementing a range of po licies and measures designed to help overcome 
these economic problems. While recovery will be long and drawn out, and for some individual EU 
countries also painful, there is at least the sense now that the corner has been turned – although 
much more hard work is still required for Europe to return to solid and sustainable levels of growth and prosperity. It is also worth emphasising that , despite the economic challenges facing the EU, 
there has been no retreat into protectionism. 
3.4.  On that note, I find it very encouraging that the EU has, in its own Report for this trade policy 
review, made such a clear point up front about the importance of trade for the EU’s economic 
recovery. We’ve heard this from Peter today and in just the second paragraph of its report, the EU 
also states that “(t)rade has never been more important for the European Union’s economy; it has become an important means of achieving much ne eded growth and creating jobs without drawing 
on public finances”. I couldn’t agree more. Time and again the facts have shown that trade has a 
positive impact during good times and bad. That is true for the biggest economies and the 
smallest, for the most advanced economies and the least developed. And that is why all of us in this room continue our efforts to make it easier for our businesses to participate in global markets 
and global value chains. 
3.5.  While much of the EU’s policy-making atte ntion in recent years has been focused on the 
broader economic and fiscal challenges, there have nevertheless been a number of developments 
in the EU’s trade policy regime that could be worth deeper consideration over the next two days. 
3.6.  To start, let me begin by noting that littl e has changed during the review period in terms of 
the EU’s tariff regime. Tariffs for agricultural products entering the EU remain significantly higher than for non-agricultural products. The average tariff on agricultural products stands at 14.8%, 
while for non-agricultural products it is only 6.5%. The average tariff rate for agricultural products 
has declined over the past five years, from 17.8 to  14.8%, although this is almost entirely due to 
the impact of higher global prices for agricultural products on the EU’s complex system of non- ad 
valorem  tariffs, rather than any tariff reform within the EU. Tariffs on meat, sugar and dairy 
remain considerably above the overall average tari ff for agricultural products. EU tariff reform, 
particularly in relation to agriculture, remains a key focus for many WTO Members. 
3.7.  Many WTO Members have also been closely watching developments in the negotiations for 
the next phase of the Common Agricultural Policy – or CAP – running from 2014-2020. The EU has undertaken solid reforms of the CAP over the past  decade to make the CAP less trade-distorting, 
and WTO Members have been hoping that the direct ion of such reform would be continued in the 
2014-2020 period. The recent announcement on 26 June of a political agreement for the new CAP 
was welcome, although a number of key elements of the CAP package linked to the EU multiannual budget were delayed until the broader budget pa ckaged was passed. An agreement on that budget WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 9 - 
 
  framework was finalized two weeks ago, so WTO Members will again be watching developments 
closely to see how the CAP package is concluded. Most WTO Members will be disappointed if the new CAP does not continue with the process of redu cing the level of trade distorting agricultural 
subsidies, including pernicious export subsidies. I expect the CAP to be the subject of further 
discussion during this Trade Policy Review. 
3.8.  WTO Members have welcomed some of the EU’s  efforts to deal with problems of overfishing 
and illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. Reduction of trade and production distorting 
subsidies for the European fishing industry will be  an important element of this into the future.  
Numerous Members in their questions have also made reference to the new EU regulation 1026/2012, which allows the EU to take measures against third countries which allow non-sustainable fishing in a fishery shared with the EU. While the underlying objective of such a 
plan seems reasonable, Members will be interested to know that such extraterritorial measures are 
implemented in a manner consistent with WTO rules. 
3.9.  Work towards the single market in the EU  has progressed considerably over the past few 
decades and, as Pascal Lamy said during a speech in Brussels recently, having the most advanced 
level of economic integration is a strong advantage for the EU that other regions are still aspiring to. However, while good progress has been made, it is also true that the European project is still 
evolving. The OECD notes that the EU’s internal market remains fragmented in many areas and 
that strengthening the single market should be at the centre of EU policy action to boost growth. 
3.10.  The unfulfilled promise of a European single market also poses challenges for the EU’s 
trading partners. For example, there are numer ous areas where the EU has competence for 
establishing Europe-wide laws and regulations, while implementation is either the sole 
responsibility of member States or shared jointly with the EU. Where member States are responsible for laws, there can be a wide disparity between the way in which the laws are 
implemented and enforced. Take the areas of cu stoms procedures, where the EU has exclusive 
competence for customs policy and legislation, but implementation is done nationally. The time it takes to complete customs formalities can vary widely – from between 5-6 days for some EU 
members to 15-19 days for others – making it particularly challenging for businesses which trade 
with a number of EU countries. The Secretariat Report provides further information on some of the other challenges of customs administration between different EU member States. 
3.11.  There are numerous other areas where the competence and implementation of policies and 
laws between the EU and its member States can be inconsistent and confusing for other WTO 
Members. This includes areas such as technical regulations and SPS requirements, taxation and government procurement. Further views on these issues from Members and the EU over the next 
couple of days would be interesting. 
3.12.  Services is another area where solid work has been undertaken within the EU to increase 
competition and efficiency, but where further work is still needed. The EU Services Directive has 
now been transposed into national law in all EU member States but, as the OECD identified in its 
2013 Going for Growth review, further work is need ed to reduce administrative barriers to entry 
and ease the regulatory burdens that hinder cr oss-border trade. There should also be more 
effective implementation of policies to increase competition in transport, postal, 
telecommunications and port and energy related services. There has also been considerable work 
within the EU on financial services reform in the wake of the financial crisis, although, as the Secretariat Report notes, at least these reforms have not introduced new market access or 
national treatment limitations for foreign providers. Positively, while new prudential regulatory 
requirements have been introduced, many of th ese requirements also include the concept of 
equivalence for the supervisory and regulatory agencies of other countries. 
3.13.  EU rules on the publication of data relating to public procurement provide important levels 
of transparency, particularly for procurement above nominated thresholds. However, the Secretariat also notes in its report – and others have asked questions about – the large amount of procurement taking place below the threshold levels for detailed reporting. In 2008 this amounted 
to around 250 billion euros or 2% of EU GDP, and in 2010 for some EU members the level of 
government procurement above the threshold re presented less than 7% of total government 
procurement. This results in minimal transparency  for large amounts of government procurement, 
particularly at the sub-federal level. There may also be high levels of procurement by state-owned 
or state-controlled enterprises, although there is also limited public information about these WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 10 - 
 
  enterprises. Given the size of the public procur ement market in the EU, further transparency on 
public procurement would be welcomed by all WTO Members. 
3.14.  In terms of intellectual property, an in teresting development in the EU over the review 
period has been the creation of a European patent  with unitary effect. The current system requires 
patent holders to request validation in individual EU members States, a timely and costly process.  
Agreement on the new unitary patent system for the EU was reached in December 2012 and is due to come into effect in 2014. I know many WTO Members will be hoping the EU member States 
act quickly to undertake the necessary steps to  bring these new arrangements into force. 
3.15.  Given its place as one of the major players in the global trading system, the position the EU 
takes on trade policy issues remains highly import ant. While the changing dynamic in global trade 
has seen the growing importance and influence of other countries and regions – particularly the 
large emerging economies – the position of the EU  as the world’s largest trading bloc means it 
remains a central figure in the development of global, regional and bilateral trading rules. This role will continue in the foreseeable future. The EU is central to our work here in Geneva, across all 
pillars of the WTO’s mandate, be it negotiations, monitoring or the dispute settlement system. I 
particularly urge the EU to continue to play a leadership role in efforts to finalise a substantial package for WTO Ministerial Conference in Bali in December. 
3.16.  Likewise, given its place in the global trading system, the EU’s regional and bilateral 
negotiations have the ability to shape global tr ading rules. New FTA negotiations such as those 
between the EU and Japan and the EU and the US  will be watched closely. These types of 
agreements have the potential to have an impact well beyond the direct bilateral trading 
relationships, including here in Geneva. We encourage the EU and its negotiating partners to keep 
this in mind as these negotiations progress, including in the development of new rules that will foster a more open, predictable and fair trading system. 
3.17.  Before concluding, I want to note again that it has been a difficult period economically for 
the EU over the past few years and many of the challenges the EU has been confronting remain.  
The EU and the governments of its member States have implemented a large range of measures 
to help put the European economy onto a more ba lanced and sustainable path of growth into the 
future, but this will require commitment to seeing  out the relevant reforms for a number of years 
to come. Trade will remain an indispensable elem ent in the EU’s economic recovery. I hope that 
the recovery which is now underway will have be come more firmly embedded when we meet again 
for the next EU Trade Policy Review in two years’ time. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 11 - 
 
  4  STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 
SUISSE 4.1.  En raison de la proximité géographique et culturelle, ainsi que de son poids économique et 
politique, l'UE et ses 28 États membres sont, de loin, les principaux partenaires de la Suisse. 
L'année passée, plus de la moitié des exportations suisses étaient destinées à l'UE et 3/4 des 
importations en provenaient. En ce qui concerne le commerce de marchandises, la Suisse était en 2012 le quatrième partenaire de l’UE et constituait le troisième marché d’exportation le plus 
important pour les produits de l’UE.   
4.2.  Les règles de l’OMC forment bien évidemment la base des échanges commerciaux entre la 
Suisse et l’UE. A ce sujet, la Suisse souhaite relever le rôle actif et constructif de l'UE dans les négociations OMC et souligner notamment l'excellent travail et le grand dévouement de 
l'Ambassadeur Angelos Pangratis dans les travaux au sein de l'OMC et, en particulier, aussi dans le 
cadre des préparatifs de la 9ème Conférence Ministérielle OMC à Bali.  
4.3.  Outre les accords de l'OMC, l'UE et la Suisse disposent d'un édifice bilatéral constitué par près 
de 120 accords bilatéraux qui garantit un accès étendu et réciproque à leurs marchés respectifs. 
De même, il forme la base d’une collaboration étroite dans divers domaines politiques tels que la recherche, la sécurité, l’asile, l’environnement et la culture. 
4.4.  Du fait de l'intensité de nos relations, les difficultés dans la zone euro est susceptible d’avoir 
des répercussions importantes pour la Suisse. Bien que la crise de la dette se soit atténuée ces derniers mois, les pays du sud de la zone euro continuent de traverser une période difficile. Cette situation délicate a également des effets indirects sur la Suisse, notamment sur le plan 
commercial. Premièrement, en cas d’incertitudes croissantes, le franc suisse pourrait, en tant que 
valeur refuge pour l'euro, subir à nouveau de fortes pressions à la hausse. Deuxièmement, la demande de nos partenaires commerciaux de l’UE devrait stagner.  
4.5.  Nous souhaitons profiter de l'opportunité qui nous est offerte aujourd'hui pour aborder trois 
points qui nous préoccupent: 
4.6.  Premièrement, le début des négociations sur le commerce et l'investissement entre l'UE et les 
États-Unis a éveillé beaucoup d'intérêt en Suisse. Un tel accord entre deux Membres couvrant près 
de 50% du PIB et 30% des échanges de marchandises au niveau mondial pourrait avoir un impact considérable sur le système commercial multilatéral ainsi que sur les relations des Membres de l'OMC avec l'UE et les États-Unis. Nous espérons que la négociation et l'éventuelle conclusion d'un 
tel accord n'entamera pas l'engagement de l'UE en faveur du système commercial multilatéral. 
Etant donné la portée majeure de ce projet, il appartient aux deux parties qui le portent d'assurer que le régime qui en résultera soit compatible avec la structure internationale du commerce 
mondial - une structure caractérisée par un développement sans précédent de chaînes de valeurs 
ajoutée aux dimensions globales. Il importe dès lors que cet accord sur le commerce et l'investissement soit conçu comme un catalyseur d'initiatives multilatérales et qu'il se fonde sur un 
principe d'inclusion plutôt que d'exclusion. 
4.7.  Deuxièmement, le traitement des pays tiers prévu par la révision de la directive concernant 
les marchés d'instruments financiers ne manque pas de susciter certaines inquiétudes en Suisse. L'exigence d'établir une succursale dans l'UE afin d'offrir tous les services financiers par cette 
succursale constitue de facto  une fermeture du marché de l'UE à la plupart des prestations de 
services transfrontalières en faveur de clients privés.  
4.8.  Ce cloisonnement n’est pas dans l’intérêt des marchés financiers intégrés et globaux et limite 
la concurrence au détriment des investisseurs et des marchés de l’UE. De surcroît, l'exigence 
d'ouvrir une succursale dans l'UE n'est pas nécessaire pour garantir la protection des investisseurs, si deux conditions sont remplies: 
 s'il y a une surveillance effective par un pays tiers et les autorités de surveillance sont 
 entrées dans des accords de coopération, et WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 12 - 
 
   si les clients sont capables de faire prévaloir leurs droits de protection d'investisseur au 
 sein du régime juridique de l'UE. 
4.9.  La Suisse est dès lors de l’avis que les opérateurs économiques de pays tiers devraient être 
autorisés de continuer de fournir activement des services transfrontaliers aux investisseurs de 
détails dans l’UE. 
4.10.  Troisièmement, la Suisse s'inquiète de la manière dont certains États membres de l'UE 
appliquent des droits anti-dumping lorsque des produits, soumis à des droits anti-dumping de l’UE, 
sont utilisés comme composants dans la chaîne de valeur ajoutée d’un pays tiers qui n’est pas 
sujet à ces droits anti-dumping. Nous aimerions rappeler l'UE qu'une extension des mesures anti-dumping à des pays tiers sans enquête anti-dumping préalable contrevient à l'Accord Anti-dumping de l'OMC. La question écrite que nous venons de poser à ce sujet contient de plus 
amples informations sur un cas qui nous préoccupe. 
UNITED
 STATES   
4 . 1 1 .   T h i s  i s  a n  e x c i t i n g  a n d  w e l l - t i m e d  o c c a s i o n  f o r  u s  t o  h a v e  t h e  o p p o r t u n i t y  t o  h a v e  t h i s  
exchange with our EU colleagues, given the recent conclusion of the first round of negotiations of 
the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partners hip agreement, or "TTIP." The United States 
government values its trade and economic relation ship with the EU immensely; trade between our 
economies accounts for nearly half of global GDP and 30% of global trade. Each day, goods and 
services worth nearly US$3 billion are trade across the Atlantic. Our investment relationship reached nearly US$4 trillion in 2011. More than US$9 million is traded between us every five 
minutes. 
4.12.  Even so, we believe that the U.S.-EU econom ic relationship can be an even more productive 
source of trade, jobs, and growth. That convicti on prompted U.S. and EU leaders to launch the 
TTIP negotiations. 
4.13.  The United States and other WTO Member s have also benefitted from the EU's strong 
support, over many decades. For a rules-based multilateral trading system and for the steady reduction of barriers in successive rounds of multilateral trade negotiations. We and the EU believe 
that the TTIP can complement and enhance the trade liberalization that has occurred within the 
multilateral trading system. 
4.14.  We are pleased to note that most of ou r bilateral trade with the EU is unimpeded by 
significant trade barriers, and that the disagreements that we sometimes have on certain bilateral 
or multilateral issue do not interfere with our extensive cooperation on other issues. 
4.15.  We have concerns, however,  with EU trade and Investment policies in several areas. I would 
briefly like to highlight several of these concerns, many of which we have previously raised both in 
this forum and other bilateral and multilateral interactions. 
4.16.  First, the EU's barriers to our agricultural  exports remain a significant concern, both with 
respect to high tariff protection and non-tari ff barriers, including sanitary and phytosanitary 
measures that are based on science or risk assessment. For example, the EU prohibits the use of 
ractopamine in livestock production even though the EU has failed to put forward a valid risk assessment or compelling scientific evidence to su pport its measure and despite the existence of a 
relevant international standard setting maximum residue levels for beef and pork products. The EU 
also continues to restrict the importation and marketing of certain agricultural biotechnology 
products resulting in significant disruptions of trade. Because of these and other barriers, U.S. agricultural exporters have been unable to take  full advantage of the market access obligations 
agreed to by the EU during the Uruguay Round. 
4.17.  Second, other non-tariff barriers remain some of the most significant barriers to U.S. 
exports to the European Union. As we have consistently noted in the WTO TBT Committee, the 
United States has broad concerns about the EU's policies and procedures to develop and 
implement technical regulations, standards and co nformity assessment, as well as concerns about 
specific measures that affect a wide range of U. S. exporters in many sectors, including chemicals 
and wine. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 13 - 
 
  4.18.  The EU's regulatory and legislative proce sses also do not typically provide essential and 
meaningful opportunity for WTO Members and their stakeholders to comment on regulatory proposals. Further, we have concerns regarding th e apparent lack of mechanisms to ensure that 
stakeholder comments will be taken into account in final regulations. Our experience has been that 
internal deliberations within the Commission and among EU member States on draft regulatory 
proposals progress much too far before trading partners and their stakeholders can provide views on the proposed text. As a result, by the time the EU considers these views, it is often too late to 
influence the character of the regulatory proposal, even on matters that have enormous trade 
implications. 
4.19.  Next, with respect to specific sectoral concerns, we have asked the EU to clarify its 
approach to setting maximum residue limits for plant protection on products for which a 
registration is temporarily or permanently suspended on the basis of a specific hazard criterion. 
4.20.  In addition, as we have noted in the WTO Antidumping Committee, we remain disappointed 
with the manner in which the EU conducted its investigation into U.S bioethanol exports, which 
resulted in the imposition of antidumping duti es. The United States has raised a number of 
significant procedural and methodological issues during and after the investigation. These issues 
continue to raise concerns under the WTO Antidumping Agreement. 
4.21.  We would also like to reiterate our longstanding concern regarding the EU's subsidization of 
its fishing fleet and the impact the resulting excess capacity has on overfished fish stocks in both 
EU and international waters. We understand the EU is currently undertaking reform efforts of its Common Fisheries Policy. We urge the EU to enact real reform of its fisheries subsidies policies to 
complement its robust fisheries management practices. 
4.22.  Finally, inconsistent implementation of internal market rules continue to constrain trade for 
EU and foreign producers alike. We applaud the European Commission's efforts to eliminate 
lingering internal barriers to the free flow of g oods and look forward to hearing how the EU intends 
to address remaining barriers – including those that are not scientifically justified – to the free flow of goods at the EU and member State levels. 
4.23.  We would like to thank the EU for providin g answers to our written questions. We sought to 
address matters that we consider particularly important and for which we were unable to obtain answers independently. We hope that others will consider following the same approach in the future for all Members' TPRs. 
4.24.  In closing, the United States welcomes th is opportunity and is hopeful that our exchanges 
during the TPR will provide some perspective on wa ys that the EU's trade policy can help expand 
the benefits we have all gained from our trade with Member countries of the European Union. 
EL
 SALVADOR 
4.25.  De acuerdo a los informes presentados observamos que la política comercial de la Unión 
Europea continúa encaminada a reducir o eliminar gradualmente los obstáculos al comercio 
internacional, contribuir al desarrollo sostenible y aprovechar las oportunidades que brinda la 
globalización, indicándose que de cara crisis financiera mundial, el comercio continúa siendo un importante elemento para lograr el crecimiento de la economía de sus Estados miembros, coadyuvar a la creación de empleo y productividad entre otros relevantes. 
4.26.  Observamos a su vez, que ante la crisis, la Unión Europea adoptó importantes decisiones 
encaminadas a fortalecer su capacidad para superar la desaceleración económica y seguir avanzando tomando importantes decisiones tales como el establecimiento de una unión bancaria 
como mecanismo único de supervisión, una serie de nuevas medidas legislativas para mejorar la 
protección de los inversores y para consolidar su mercado único, a su vez continua brindado pasos concreto encaminados a la  liberalización del comercio en varias vías multilateral y bilateral. 
4.27.  A su vez, tomamos nota que el período objeto de examen se ha caracterizado por una serie 
de actividades legislativas encaminadas a fortalecer  la estructura jurídica de la Unión Europea, 
marco institucional, atención a la salud de sus ciudadanos, entre otros, iniciativas sobre las cuales reconocemos sus objetivos legítimos sin embargo deseamos expresar nuestra preocupación por WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 14 - 
 
  estas nuevas iniciativas que al momento de su aplicación práctica podrían afectar disposiciones del 
Acuerdo en materia de Propiedad Intelectual, al Acuerdo de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio, entre otros y, en dicho sentido y a manera de ejemplo, en el proceso de implementación del reglamento REACH, no obstante el ritmo ha sido  paulatino, aun guardamos preocupación sobre la 
implementación definitiva de este reglamento y no obstante, el sinnúmero de sesiones 
informativas, aun no tenemos claridad sobre las acciones que se podrían adoptar para prevenir perjuicios comerciales para los miembros en desarrollo al momento de la implementación y puesta 
en práctica de este reglamento, tomando en consideración el constante proceso de modificaciones 
de las reglas aplicables, algunas no disponible en el idioma castellano. 
4.28.  A su vez nuestra delegación se encuen tra preocupada por la carga excesiva que su 
cumplimiento implica para las PYME (impacto que es reconocido por la Comisión Europea en su 
Informe de febrero de 2013 sobre el funcionamiento del REACH), en dicho sentido nos unimos a 
las delegaciones que han formulado preguntas especí ficas sobre qué tipo de acciones ha adoptado 
o contempla adoptar para reducir la carga administrativa de las PYME de terceros países, que 
afectará las condiciones de competencia. 
4.29.  De acuerdo a los informes que han sido presentados, notamos con satisfacción que se están 
adoptando medidas, tanto a nivel de la UE como a nivel de los Estados miembros, para reducir los 
déficits públicos y mejorar la gobernanza económica y que la plena aplicación de esas medidas 
apoye la recuperación económica en 2013 y 2014. 
4.30.  La relación comercial de El Salvador con la Unión Europea goza de larga data y representa 
un impulso de los flujos comerciales y de inversión entre ambas regiones, teniendo en cuenta 
nuestros diferentes niveles de desarrollo, represen tando un nicho comercial no menos importante  
para productos estratégicos tales como el atún congelado, langostino entero congelado, caña de izote, entre otros productos, a su vez nuestro mercado ha reportado ya un crecimiento en el flujo 
comercial para aquellos productos tradicionales, gama que esperamos se aumenten 
considerablemente en los próximos años derivado de las gestiones realizadas por nuestras respectivas Autoridades encaminadas a maximizar los beneficios derivados del Acuerdo de 
Asociación del cual en conjunto con otros miembros de la región centroamericana, entrando en 
vigor en vigor el Pilar Comercial del Acuerdo a partir del 1 de Agosto del año en curso. 
4.31.  A su vez con el ritmo de implementación re querida, las relaciones políticas y programas de 
cooperación también esperamos se verán fortalecidos lo cual se traducirá en oportunidades 
comerciales y de inversión que conlleven en suma, a mejores condiciones de vida para nuestros 
ciudadanos. 
4.32.  “El Acuerdo de Asociación constituye un hecho histórico para el país y para la región 
Centroamericana y Europa ya que es el primer Acuerdo de su tipo, negociado de región a región. 
Este acuerdo representa una oportunidad comercial tanto nacional como regional. Para dimensionar la importancia de este Acuerdo se destaca la importancia de Europa para El Salvador, 
constituyéndose en el tercer mercado más importante después de Estados Unidos y 
Centroamérica”. 
4.33.  En el marco de las negociaciones multilaterales que se desarrollan en esta Organización, 
específicamente en el marco del Programa de Doha para el Desarrollo, la Unión Europea participa 
activamente en todas las discusiones y ha presentado propuestas en diversos órganos de la OMC, 
entre los cuales se encuentra las relativas a negociaciones sobre Propiedad Intelectual, Facilitación al Comercio, entre otros. De igual forma, no es propicio destacar su activa labor en los comités 
ordinarios de esta casa tales como el de obstáculos técnicos al comercio, medidas sanitarias y 
fitosanitarias, grupo de trabajo de transferencia de tecnología, entre otros.  
4.34.  El liderazgo de la Unión Europea es importante y podrá coadyuvar al consenso que los 
Miembros requerimos a fin de alcanzar resultados satisfactorios en la próxima Conferencia  
Ministerial a celebrarse en Bali, Indonesia, dada la importancia que le atribuimos al sistema multilateral de Comercio como piedra angular que regula el Comercio entre la comunidad de naciones. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 15 - 
 
  COLOMBIA 
4.35.   José Manuel Durão Barroso, Presidente de la Comisión Europea, en su Discurso sobre el 
estado de la Unión en septiembre de 2012 mencionó una frase que bien refleja el contenido de este examen: ”La realidad es que en un mundo interconectado, los Estados miembros de Europa 
no pueden por sí solos dirigir con eficacia el curso de los acontecimientos… la globalización exige 
más unidad europea. Más unidad exige una mayor integración”. 
4.36.   En efecto, los dos últimos años han representado un importante desafío al proceso de 
integración europeo que ha debido concentrarse en atender los efectos derivados de las crisis 
financieras. Un primer elemento importante a resaltar, que señala el informe de la Secretaría, es que han sido pocos los cambios en materia de políticas comercial y que dichos cambios no han acudido al proteccionismo como respuesta a la crisis. La Unión Europea siguió caracterizándose por 
ser una economía abierta, que aplica normas y procedimientos transparentes, si bien algunos 
sectores, en particular la agricultura, continúan teniendo un alto grado de protección 
4.37.   El mercado europeo ha resistido bien la crisis: en el período objeto de examen la UE 
continuó siendo el mayor bloque comercial del mundo, registrando un aumento tanto de sus 
importaciones como de sus exportaciones. El contar con una política comercial única y una legislación común en la mayoría de las esferas relacionadas con el comercio, son hechos que han 
contribuido a que el comercio desempeñe una función central en sus resultados económicos. 
4.38.  No obstante y a pesar del aumento del valor de sus exportaciones, su participación en el 
comercio mundial ha venido descendiendo al situ arse en 16,4% en 2011 en comparación con un 
17,5% en 2010 y un 18,4% en 2009. Lo anterior debido, entre otras causas, a la diversidad de 
estructuras económicas al interior del bloque.   
4.39.   Las políticas recientemente adoptadas por la UE han permitiendo reducir la deuda pública 
como porcentaje del PIB de la mayoría de los Estados miembros de la UE, de un -6,5% en 2010 a 
-4,4% en 2011, aunque ha sido a un ritmo más lento que en el período anterior. Esta situación ha 
contribuido a una creciente tasa de desempleo a nivel del bloque, al pasar de 9,7% en 2011 a 10,5% en noviembre de 2012, si bien la situación no es homogénea entre los Estados miembros.  
4.40.   En cuanto a la política comercial de la UE, queremos resaltar del Informe de la Secretaría 
varios hechos significativos:  
 La UE y sus Estados miembros continúan siendo uno de los principales proveedores de 
 ayuda para el comercio. 
 
 Las medidas sanitarias y fitosanitarias están armonizadas, como lo está también la 
 legislación de la UE sobre requisitos técnicos. No obstante, en algunas esferas sigue 
 habiendo importantes diferencias entre los Estados miembros. 
  En materia de Propiedad Intelectual (PI), se creó una patente europea con efecto unitario y 
 se estableció un marco unificado para promover los productos agrícolas y los productos 
 alimenticios de calidad mediante indicaciones geográficas.   Se dispone de poca información oficial a nivel de la UE sobre las empresas de propiedad o 
 bajo control estatal, las cuales tienen significativos efectos en el comercio y la inversión. 
 
 Debido a las diferencias de notificación entre los Estados miembros de la UE, no es claro 
 cómo se realiza la contratación pública por debajo de los umbrales establecidos en la  legislación de la UE y en el Acuerdo sobre Contratación Pública. 
 
4.41.   En resumen, el proceso de integración sigue av anzando en sus distintas esferas, pero en la 
medida que avanza se aprecian con mayor claridad las diferencias subsistentes entre sus 
miembros. A nuestro juicio, este es el principal desafío a futuro para la Unión Europea: cómo afrontar la diversidad de estructuras económicas al  interior del bloque, frente al objetivo común de 
un mayor bienestar de la sociedad.   WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 16 - 
 
  4.42.   Y viene bien al respecto recordar en este punto las palabras de Robert Schuman: "Europa no 
se hará de una vez ni en una obra de conjunto: se hará gracias a realizaciones concretas, que creen en primer lugar una solidaridad de hecho". 
AUSTRALIA 
4.43.  Australia and the EU enjoy a significant trade relationship. The EU’s 28 members together 
constitute one of Australia's top five trading partners, with total two-way trade of over AUD$81 billion in 2012. The EU is Australia’s largest source of foreign investment and the most 
common overseas destination for Australian investors. 
4.44.  Australia recognizes the difficult economic cl imate the EU has been operating in since its last 
Trade Policy Review. Australia acknowledges the re forms the EU has adopted and hopes to see on-
going support for further growth. 
4.45.  Australia notes recent reforms to the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy; but more is needed.  
Financial support to farmers remains high and the CAP continues to distort significantly farm production in Europe. The recent political agreement on the CAP package appears to allow EU 
member States to increase their use of coupled payments. 
4.46.  Australia considers the declining use of export subsidies by the EU is welcome, but the 
continued application of some export refunds remains a concern. Export subsidies have long been 
recognized as among the most damaging of trad e measures, and export subsidies on agriculture 
undercut the interests of developing country agricultural exporters. Australia sees no justification for the on-going use of export subsidies by any WT O Member. They seem particularly ill-advised in 
a context of on-going budgetary pressure across the EU. 
4.47.  Australia acknowledges the impasse in the Doha Round negotiations, but notes its on-going 
interest in improving market access for agricultural products globally and, in this context, addressing the EU’s frequently prohibitive tariffs and quotas in this sector.  -Australia notes the 
EU’s responses on this point, which provide no justification for high EU tariffs other than that the 
EU has the right to impose such tariffs under WTO rules. 
4.48.  Australia appreciates the EU’s intention to clarify the rules for third-country access to the EU 
government procurement market. Australia welcomes assurances that current levels of market 
openness will remain, including for countries like Australia, which have open government procurement markets, but no formal arrangement with the EU. 
4.49.  The EU’s efforts to harmonize its internal  market and to ensure a transparent regulatory 
system are commendable. However, there are areas of inconsistent application of EU regulations 
across EU member States, including implementati on of the EU services directives. Full and 
consistent implementation of EU regulations will have a positive impact for EU member States as 
well as for trading partners. 
4.50.  Some EU technical regulations impose restri ctions on the processing of products imported 
from outside the EU which are not applied to equivalent products produced and transported within 
the EU. One example is the transformation of still wine to sparkling wine. Australia urges the EU to 
address national treatment issues in existing and new EU regulations to ensure that imported and 
locally-produced goods are treated equally. 
4.51.  Australia notes the EU’s responses to Aust ralia’s questions about its ambitious FTA agenda, 
including its negotiations with the United States and Japan. FTAs among major economies have 
the potential to have a significant impact on global trade, and Australia urges the EU to pursue its negotiations in a manner that supports the multilateral trading system. 
4.52.  Australia understands the EU is aiming to include a chapter in all new FTAs providing for the 
protection of geographical indications. Australia urges the EU not to seek commitments that would 
prevent third countries from freely trading products with names that are widely understood to be 
common or generic. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 17 - 
 
  4.53.  Turning to the Geneva agenda, Australia  commends the EU’s deep commitment to the 
multilateral trading system. Australia welcomes th e efforts the EU has been making to achieve a 
meaningful package for MC9 and encourages the EU to  continue to play an active leadership role 
here in the lead-up to Bali. 
4.54.  Australia is pleased to be working closely with the EU and other WTO Members in driving 
negotiations on the Trade in Services Agreement. Australia shares the EU’s interest in achieving a high-ambition outcome for this agreement, which will support the multilateral trading system. 
HONG
 KONG,  CHINA 
4.55.  The cultural and economic ties between Ho ng Kong and Europe are very close. More than 
1 600 European companies have operations in Hong Kong, including one-fifth of the city’s 150 licensed banks. From Hong Kong, services exports and investment are well established in the 
EU in such key sectors as telecommunications, publ ic transport, logistics, waste management and, 
more recently, wine-making. 
4.56.  I am sure that Hong Kong, China and the EU  will continue to build on our close relationship. 
4.57.  Turning to the specific aspects of the EU’s  trade policies, we commend its recognition of the 
benefits of trade facilitation and welcome its facilitation measures. It is now possible to complete customs formalities at the port of arrival when the destination is in another member State. The 
European Commission also initiated in February 2012 a plan further to streamline its existing 
customs procedures by, for example, replacing pape r-based procedures with electronic ones. Such 
moves are clearly still necessary, when the time taken to clear customs can be measured in weeks. 
4.58.  On tariffs, we commend the EU for having bound all its tariff lines, of which around one 
quarter are duty free. However, we note that  about 11% of the EU’s tariff lines are non- ad 
valorem . We encourage the EU further to liberalise its tariff regime to facilitate international trade 
by transforming its non- ad valorem  tariffs to ad valorem  and eliminating the tariff peaks. 
4.59.  The EU’s agricultural sector remains consid erably protected. Its average applied tariff rate 
for agricultural products is 14.8% in 2013, nearly four times the rate for non-agricultural products.  
The tariff can be as high as 197%. Most of the EU’s non- ad valorem  tariff lines, which on average 
offer higher protection, are on agricultural products. The tariffs are also complex and seasonal for certain products. It is disappointing that the Common Agricultural Policy reforms for post-2013 will not directly address market access conditions into the EU. We encourage the EU to show 
leadership through continuous liberalization of its agricultural sector for the benefit of traders and 
consumers. 
4.60.  We are glad to note that 14 of the EU's anti-dumping measures that had been in place for 
more than a decade expired or were removed du ring the Review period. Hong Kong, China is 
firmly against the use of unwarranted anti-dumping measures, the elimination of which, in our view, is a positive action to check the growth of  protectionism. We urge the EU to review the 
necessity of keeping the remaining one hundred or  so anti-dumping measures and to exercise 
restraint in the imposition of new ones. 
4.61.  As regards SPS, the EU enacted in 20 11 the Commission Regulation No. 284/2011, which 
lays down specific conditions and detailed procedures for imports of polyamide and melamine 
plastic kitchenware originating in or consigned from, among others, Hong Kong, China. We 
consider that the measure may constitute discrimination on international trade because it affects all consignments from Hong Kong regardless of their origin, but not those from other re-exporting 
ports. We urge the EU to conduct an early review  of the Regulation with a view to adopting less 
trade-restrictive measures to fulfil its health and safety objectives. 
4.62.  The EU’s foreign investment policy has re mained largely unchanged since the last Review 
but the EU is in the process of developing and implementing a comprehensive investment policy.  
We noticed that some EU member States mainta in FDI prior authorisation procedures. We hope 
that the EU, in developing its new comprehensive investment policy, will further introduce facilitating measures that will encourage FDI and address anomalies. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 18 - 
 
  4.63.  The documentation shows few significant changes in most trade-related policy areas during 
the Review period. Perhaps that is due to the short two-year interval but probably it is more to do with attention being elsewhere – the response to the financial crisis. Protectionism has not loomed large, but the continuing highly fragile state of banks throughout the EU is leading to a strangling 
of the incipient recovery and growth. Unemployme nt in the Euro area is over 12% – in some 
countries over 25%. Most unemployment is amongs t the young. This is a terrible situation and 
must be the focus of attention. 
4.64.  On a general point, I would like to express our appreciation to Ambassador Pangratis and 
his able team for their very positive engagement in our efforts to take forward the negotiations for a positive result at the Bali Ministerial. 
CHINA 
4.65.  Let me start by congratulating the EU for its recent enlargement with Croatia becoming its 
28th Member. The EU’s importance in the global econ omy and trade is widely recognized by all. In 
spite of serious challenges encountered, the EU, as  a single entity, remains the largest economy, 
trade blog, recipient and supplier of FDI in the world. Therefore, its policy and performance not 
only affects the EU’s member States themselves, but also has profound implications to its trading partners in the rest of the world. 
4.66.  It is obvious that the EU experienced the most challenging time during the past few years 
due to the weakening global environment and th e aggravation of the sovereign-debt crisis. 
However, we are pleased to note that the EU has taken a series of measures that could result in some positive economic outlooks in 2013 and 2014. It is particularly commendable that during the 
review period, the EU largely maintained open and transparent trade policies. We call on the EU to 
continue its efforts in order to bring its economy back on track and therefore contribute to economic recovery globally. 
4.67.  China commends the EU for its firm commi tment to the multilateral trading system, and 
shares the EU’s view that “MC9 must deliver tangible results that would constitute the first step on the road towards the conclusion of the Doha Round”. We will continue our close and constructive 
cooperation with the EU team here led by Amba ssador Pangratis and his colleagues to make the 
upcoming MC9 a successful one.  
4.68.  That being said, let me turn to a few specifics of the EU’s trade policies and practices. 4.69.  Firstly, the EU remains a frequent user of  anti-dumping measures. While taking note of the 
on-going initiative of modernization of the EU’s trade defence instruments, we have serious 
concerns that the Chinese products are always the major target. According to our calculation based on Table A3.4 of the Secretariat Report, the measures targeted at Chinese products account 
for more than 40% of the total measures imposed from 2008 to 2012. What worry us more is that 
the unfair targeting against Chinese products by the EU is showing an upward trend, which increased from 37.5% in 2008 to 47% in 2012. The recent provisional duty imposed on Chinese 
photovoltaic products, which is the largest trade remedy case against Chinese products affecting 
trade value amounted US$ 20 billion and 500,000 wo rkers, once again brought our attention to 
the rationality and fairness of the EU measures. As highlighted on several occasions, China is firmly opposed to the abuse of trade remedy measures as a form of handy trade protectionist tool. 
We will continue bilateral dialogue with our counterpart with a view to exploring solutions 
acceptable to both sides.   
4.70.  Secondly, as the Secretariat Report stated , although there are a large number of duty-free 
lines and the average MFN tariff is quite low at 6.5%, some sectors, particularly agriculture, 
r e m a i n  r e l a t i v e l y  w e l l  p r o t e c t e d .  A r o u n d  1 1 %  o f  n o n - ad valorem  lines, as well as the use of 
seasonal duty and Meursing Table make the tari ff system more complex, and afford higher 
protection than ad valorem rates. The on-going reforms have brought down the total level of 
support to the agricultural sector, but they have not affected market access conditions and tariffs remain higher than those on non-agricultural products.   
4.71.  Thirdly, TBT and SPS are persistent causes of concern. During the last review, many 
Members complained about the EU’s TBT and SPS regimes for creating unnecessary obstacles to WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 19 - 
 
  trade. Since then, some progress has been achieved , but it still has room for further improvement. 
Specifically, China would like to call upon the EU to expedite its work so as to provide fair treatment to Chinese poultry products.  
4.72.  Fourthly, we note from the Secretariat Repo rt that the EU has 33 FTAs, and is negotiating 
with other six partners. While respecting each Memb er’s right to negotiate FTAs, we sincerely hope 
that the EU continues to prioritize the multilateralism in its trade policies, as committed in its Government Report.  
4.73.  China and the EU are important partners to each other, both bilaterally and multilaterally. 
The 27th Session of the China-EU Trade and Econ omic Joint Committee just concluded in Beijing 
last month, in which both sides recognized the importance of our relationship and agreed to enhance cooperation in order to bring our bilateral trade and economic relations to a higher level. 
UKRAINE 
4.74.  Needless to say that the European Union is an important trading partner for Ukraine. We are 
delighted to state progressive expansion of our relations with the EU, trade being a very natural 
part in it. Volume of trade today has reached a pre-crisis indicators nevertheless still there is a 
considerable negative trade balance mainly due to trade in non-agricultural goods, which is the evidence of a greater level of ope nness of Ukraine rather than EU's. 
4.75.  We are committed to build our relations on trust and constructive dialogue, which we hope 
will yield mutual lasting benefits and sustainable relations. And we have good and inspiring examples – our agricultural producers are entering  the EU market after having fully complied with 
a number of regulatory requirements of the EU. 
4.76.  The EU remains a global player and biggest trading bloc and should take the lead in many 
aspects. Ukraine highly appreciates EU's adherence to the WTO principles of openness, transparency and commitment to multilateralism. On the other hand, EU has a wide range of TRAs 
and negotiates new ones, which we believe are complementary to the multilateral fundamental 
principles. 
4.77.  Taking this opportunity we would like to acknowledge the efforts taken in negotiating DC 
FTA with Ukraine now pending signing. We are confident this agreement will strengthen legal 
framework for sustainable trade and investment . Ukraine much relies on the development 
potential this agreement bears. 
4.78.  We also note with satisfaction the exte nsion of the GSP regime, which will benefit our 
businesses and trade with EU. 
4.79.  Ukraine attaches specific importance to EU  policies and practices, some of them being our 
trade concerns as they are long-standing barriers and remain measures distorting trade and 
competition, such as: 
 High agricultural tariffs, subsidies for some agricultural products and high level of domestic 
 support; 
 Trade distorting mechanism of entry prices; 
 SPS and TBT regulatory framework is too complicated and often seem to lack scientific 
 justification. 
4.80.  So there is room for improving and fine-tuning the policies and practices especially in light 
of EU enlargement. We welcome Croatia's EU memb ership and hope the overall predictability and 
transparency of trade will only improve. 
4.81.  They have recently been new developments on international arena, which will definitely 
have consequences for multilateral trading system – EU and US have mandated negotiations on 
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 20 - 
 
  4.82.  These negotiations will be closely watched internationally and in WTO. Ukraine is already 
taking much interest in how these negotiations will evolve, since basically they will not be about tariff reductions – they will be about setting a "n ew global standards" and equivalence of policies 
new "transatlantic market place" dimension. 
ARGENTINA 
4.83.  La Unión Europea, agrupación regional que se ha ido extendiendo con el paso del tiempo 
hasta llegar actualmente a los 28 miembros, con la reciente inclusión de Croacia, ha sido 
tradicionalmente uno de los mercados más importante para la Argentina.  
4.84.  La relación bilateral se ha caracterizado históricamente por ser intensa y constructiva, 
optimizando aquellos aspectos de mutuo interés. El comercio entre Argentina y Europa es históricamente relevante, y ya existía mucho antes de la creación de la Comunidad Económica 
Europea hace medio siglo.  
4.85.  La Unión Europea es actualmente nuestro segundo socio comercial, luego del MERCOSUR, 
constituyendo el 14,3% de nuestro comercio exterior (2012). Por su parte, la Argentina representa 
el 0,2% del comercio comunitario global. A su vez, las empresas de la UE hacen de dicha región el 
principal inversor extranjero en Argentina y participa en diversos proyectos conjuntos de cooperación bilateral.  
4.86.  No obstante ello, es de señalar que en el periodo analizado (2011-2013), el comercio 
bilateral con la UE sufrió fluctuaciones como consecuencia de la aplicación de distintos instrumentos de política comercial por parte de la UE y algunos de sus Estados Miembros,  restringiendo el acceso de nuestros bienes a ese mercado, lo cual no se condice, tal como pregona 
la UE, con la promoción de un sistema de comercio internacional libre, justo y abierto. 
4.87.  Mientras que en el año 2011, las exportaciones desde la Argentina a la UE y las 
importaciones desde la UE a nuestro país crecieron a una tasa promedio anual similar próxima al 
23%, en 2012 las estadísticas muestran una caída abrupta de nuestras exportaciones a dicho 
mercado, superior a 20%.   
4.88.  Esta tendencia decreciente de las exportaciones argentinas a la UE se profundizó en el 
primer semestre de este año y si la tendencia se mantiene las exportaciones argentinas a la UE 
serán en 2013 un 35% inferiores a las exportaciones en 2011. Una porción significativa de esta disminución se explica directamente por medidas comerciales europeas de neto corte proteccionistas, como las impuestas particularmente al biodiesel de origen argentino, obstáculos 
técnicos y otras barreras arancelarias y no arancelarias, que han proliferado en los últimos años en 
la UE. 
4.89.  En contraste, pese a las críticas que enfrenta nuestra política comercial por parte de la UE, 
las importaciones en Argentina de origen europeo mantienen una tendencia alcista, registrando un 
aumento del 5,6% en 2012 y un crecimiento superior este año, en el orden de 8% en el primer semestre del año. Este desempeño positivo se mantiene en años, 2012 y 2013, en los cuales la 
economía de Argentina sufrió el impacto de la crisis internacional, creciendo a un ritmo menor al 
que venía haciéndolo. 
4.90.  Esto indica a las claras que mientras el mercado argentino ha estado abierto a los productos 
europeos no ocurrió lo mismo en el sentido inverso y es de estimar que el próximo año de 
mantenerse estas políticas en la Unión Europea los números serán peores, teniendo en cuenta que 
Argentina no podrá exportar bajo el Sistema Generalizado de Preferencias (SGP), dada la modificación que la UE le ha realizado a este es quema preferencial, perjudicando a países como el 
nuestro. 
4.91.  Nos llama la atención que, en su Informe,  la UE pregone la importancia de “fomentar un 
comercio libre, justo y abierto” y de “combatir todas las formas de proteccionismo, también en lo 
que se refiere a las barreras comerciales no arancelarias”, cuando sus acciones muestran un 
rumbo distinto. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 21 - 
 
  4.92.  Mientras la UE buscan abrir mercados para la colocación de sus excedentes - muchos de 
ellos fruto de una política de subsidios que ya se ha criticado en este foro en diversas oportunidades - siguen obstaculizando notoriamente el ingreso de las importaciones, particularmente de aquellas provenientes de países en desarrollo. 
4.93.  El acceso a los mercados agrícolas fuertemente reglamentados de la UE sigue 
representando un desafío considerable. Como indica el Informe de la Secretaría, todavía hay algunos sectores en la UE, en particular agricultura, que siguen estando “bien protegidos, a veces 
mediante aranceles complejos o estacionales”, que siguen siendo significativamente superiores a 
los aranceles aplicados a los productos no agrícolas.  
4.94.  En adición, persisten mecanismos de protección no arancelarios, una compleja 
administración de los contingentes arancelarios y la presencia de estándares privados que 
continúan causando disrupciones en los flujos comerciales. 
4.95.  Por ello, no es de extrañar que en las últimas reuniones de los comités de obstáculos 
técnicos al comercio y de medidas sanitarias y fitosanitarias (en junio 2013), las preocupaciones 
comerciales específicas planteadas por los Miembros que involucraban a regulaciones o medidas de 
la UE representaron casi el 35% del total de las preocupaciones comerciales abordadas en tales encuentros. Un porcentaje que en lugar de dismin uir ha ido en aumento en los últimos tiempos. 
4.96.  Apreciamos y valoramos que la UE haya reiterado, conforme se menciona en su Informe, su 
firme compromiso con la OMC y la Ronda de Doha , y que se manifieste “convencida de que es 
necesario lograr un resultado satisfactorio en la Novena Conferencia Ministerial de la OMC, en diciembre 2013, y de que esa Conferencia Ministerial debe producir resultados tangibles” con miras 
a una pronta conclusión de la Ronda de Doha.  
4.97.  No obstante ello, lamentamos que al citar los posibles acuerdos o “resultados tangibles” que 
podrían alcanzarse en Bali se limite a un Acuerdo sobre Facilitación del Comercio, que actualmente 
beneficiaría solo a los exportadores de productos manufacturados y de alta tecnología, es decir, a 
los países desarrollados. Con relación a otros posibles acuerdos, la UE hace mención a “un componente de desarrollo, así como determinadas cuestiones, de alcance limitado, relacionadas 
con la agricultura”.  
4.98.  Nos preocupa el “alcance limitado” que la UE le quiere dar a todo acuerdo en el sector 
agrícola y lamentamos su poco o nulo interés en adoptar compromisos en materia de competencia de las exportaciones, dejando transcurrir 2013 sin una mención a la eliminación de las 
subvenciones a las exportaciones, acordado en la Ministerial de Hong Kong de 2005, todo ello a 
pesar de la generosa propuesta del G-20 de mayo pasado. 
4.99.  Cabe recordar que el estancamiento de las negociaciones de la Ronda de Doha implica 
también el incumplimiento del compromiso de la Ronda Uruguay de la continuación del proceso de 
reforma de las políticas agrícolas con el fin de “reducir sustancialmente la protección y la ayuda”. Evidentemente, una de las políticas agrícolas que debe hacer una “reforma fundamental” es la de 
la Unión Europea incluido por su alcance global.  
4.100.  La reforma fundamental sólo puede alcanzarse mediante el cumplimiento del mandato de 
las negociaciones agrícolas de la Ronda de Doha, es decir, la Declaración Ministerial de Doha, la Decisión del Consejo General del 1/8/2004 y la Declaración Ministerial de Hong Kong de 2005. No 
existe ningún otro camino.  
4.101.  Resulta posible alcanzar un posible acuerdo que sea equilibra do y tenga particularmente 
en cuenta el componente de desarrollo que dio origen a esta Ronda, y cuyo núcleo debe ser 
necesariamente la agricultura, que representa más del 60% de las exportaciones de los países 
más pobres del planeta. 
4.102.  Esperamos que la UE, al igual que otros Miembros desarrollados, se esfuercen en cumplir 
con el mandato sin postergación de las necesarias reformas en este sector para terminar con las 
inequidades comerciales del siglo último. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 22 - 
 
  4.103.  En este contexto, dado que se trata de sectores fundamentales para los países en 
desarrollo, que no están debidamente desarrollados en el Informe de la Secretaría, presentaremos preguntas adicionales relativas a las subvenciones al algodón y a la pesca.  
4.104.  Finalizando, y al tiempo de reiterar nuestro reconocimiento por esta nueva oportunidad de 
intercambiar elementos de juicio y consideraciones sobre las Políticas Comerciales de la Unión 
Europea, permítanos señalar una vez más la relevancia de este ejercicio de transparencia en todos sus aspectos y desear éxito a las autoridades comunitarias en este undécimo examen de su 
política comercial. 
NEW
 ZEALAND 
4.105.  New Zealand has a strong and broadly-based relationship with the EU. As our fourth 
largest trading partner, the European Union remains a significant and highly valued economic 
partner for New Zealand. Accordingly, New Zealand takes an active interest in the European 
Union’s trade and investment policy.   
4.106.  We note that with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the Commission now has 
competence for investment policy in addition to trade. We look forward to understanding more 
around how this will be carried over into prefer ential trade agreements and in the longer term 
under the multilateral trading system. 
4.107.  A significant development in the EU’s tr ade policy since the last trade policy review, not 
only for the EU but indeed for all WTO Members, has been the launch of its negotiations towards preferential trade agreements with the United States and separately Japan. We are now in a situation where three of the world’s top five econ omies are negotiating preferential deals between 
themselves. 
4.108.  It is in this context that we particularly  appreciate the EU’s public commitment that these 
agreements will serve as “building blocks” rather than “stumbling blocks” to the multilateral 
trading system. In this regard, we look forward to hearing more about how this will be achieved in 
practice, including around what practical measures the EU will be seeking to introduce into both negotiations to ensure that both agreements support the WTO process. 
4.109.  As a general point, New Zealand would like to reiterate the importance of consultation and 
transparency in the development and introduction of trade-related measures. It is critically important that the notification of regulations that may affect trading partners is conducted in a timely fashion and before implementation to allow partners the chance to understand them fully 
and to help industry adopt processes to ensure compliance. Such consultation should occur at an 
appropriate and early stage so that the views of third countries such as New Zealand can not only be considered but also taken into account in policy development. 
4.110.  New Zealand considers that it is important to take into consideration the impact of 
regulations on third countries when looking at  implementation and the phasing in of new 
requirements. As a southern hemisphere agri -food exporter, New Zealand operates in a 
counter-seasonal environment to Europe and im plementation plans tailored to European 
production seasons can have an adverse impact on producers such as New Zealand given our respective production cycles.   
4.111.  In previous reviews, New Zealand has expressed concerns about aspects of the Common 
Agricultural Policy. New Zealand recognizes and commends the on-going efforts of the EU to 
reform the CAP and joins others in encouraging the EU in the direction of greater market orientation and reduction of distortions to international trade. The reintroduction of coupled 
payments in the recently concluded CAP reform package was disappointing in this regard and lay 
contrary to the generally positive direction CAP refo rms have been tracking over the past 10 years.  
New Zealand has raised a number of questions around the reform of the CAP including how it sees 
the CAP evolving so as to improve competitiveness in the face of growing worldwide demand for 
food, as well as the “greening” of direct payments to farmers. 
4.112.  New Zealand is pleased to note that the EU's use of agricultural export subsidies has been 
much reduced since a spike in 2009. New Zealand expects that this encouraging trend will WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 23 - 
 
  continue and, recalling that export subsidies are the most damaging form of agricultural support, 
we encourage the EU to consider accelerating  the process towards elimination of all such 
subsidies. There also remains considerable scope for improvements in market access for agricultural products and it remains our assessment that the EU retains a significant number of 
prohibitive tariffs on highly traded products. In  this regard, we commend the OECD and WTO on 
their recent analytical work on trade in value-added and note in particular their findings in respect of the negative economic effects of agricu ltural tariff barriers on EU producers. 
4.113.  We also remain concerned about inconsistencies in relation to protection for geographical 
indications in the EU, particularly when compar ing the process and treatment of terms protected 
through the EU Regulations with terms protected through bilateral agreements. While interested parties have access to an objections process for terms to be protected under EU Regulations, such 
an objection process is not always in place for GIs that are protected in the EU via bilateral 
agreements. Yet the effect on third parties' ability to use certain terms in the EU market is the same. We acknowledge the procedural improvements made in this regard in recent EU agreements 
and we urge the EU to continue in this direction to ensure that it provides for robust objections 
processes for all terms that it intends to protect in its territory, regardless of the means through which these terms receive protection. 
4.114.  Like the EU, we understand and find im portant the intersection between trade and the 
environment and the need to ensure that these are mutually reinforcing processes. In this context, 
we are watching closely and with considerable interest the EU’s on-going work to develop a common methodology for the environmental footprint of products and organisations and the 
development of accompanying labelling standards. We have appreciated the measured and careful 
way in which the Commission continues to involve third parties directly in the consultations – and would encourage it to continue that open dialogue. We would also encourage other Members to be 
involved in this process. All WTO Members fully understand the challenges the EU is grappling with 
in this regard, including striking the right ba lance between a transparent and non-discriminatory 
set of measures that does not become a de facto  barrier to trade; while securing proven 
environmental benefits and the consumers’ right to be informed. 
4.115.  New Zealand has some concerns about el ements of the reform of the Common Fisheries 
Policy, currently under negotiation, principally around the nature and level of subsidies provided to the European fishing industry. Of particular note  is the consideration being given to reinstating 
subsidies for vessel construction and purchasing, engine replacement, and temporary cessation of 
fishing. We note that overfishing and overcapacity persist at high levels in EU fisheries, and that the EU fleet fishes the high seas around the world and in the EEZs of many other Members. We 
therefore take this opportunity to recall the im portance we attach to the on-going process 
underway in the WTO and UN on fisheries subsidies, including the call by world leaders last year at Rio+20 to refrain from introducing, extending or enhancing subsidies that contribute to 
overcapacity and overfishing.  
4.116.  I would conclude by noting that New Zealand recognizes that the EU’s trade policy remains 
a broadly open and market-orientated one. We would expect no less from the world’s largest economy, which, like New Zealand, depends on a well-functioning multilateral trading system. Like 
the rest of the world, we look to the EU to continue to play a central role in leading the way both in 
support of the swift conclusion of the Doha Round and, more generally in the continued liberalisation of international trade. Economies li ke ours understand that an export-led recovery 
represents an important tool in the ‘tool box’ we are all using to emerge from the Global Financial 
Crisis, particularly given the proven links between increased trade and job creation.   
4.117.  More particularly, we work closely with  the EU in the WTO context and elsewhere and 
appreciate the constructive engagement we enjoy with EU colleagues both here in Geneva and in 
Brussels. We look forward to this cooperation continuing into the future. 
SINGAPORE 4.118.  Singapore enjoys strong economic ties with  the EU and also warm ties with its individual 
member states. The EU is our second largest trading partner. In the 10 years from 2002 and 
2012, bilateral trade doubled from US$44 billion to US$82 billion. EU Foreign Direct Investment stock in Singapore stood at US$150 billion in 2011, while Singapore was the EU's ninth largest WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 24 - 
 
  investor. Over 9,300 EU companies have operations in Singapore which serves as their gateway to 
Asia. Our bilateral ties are set to strengthen further with the substantive conclusion of the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (EUSFTA) in December 2012. As the first FTA that the EU c o n c l u d e d  w i t h  a n  A S E A N  m e m b e r ,  w e  b e l i e v e  t h a t  t h e  E U S F T A  w i l l  h a v e  a  p o s i t i v e  k n o c k - o n  
effect for the other bilateral FTAs that the EU is  currently negotiating with our ASEAN partners and 
help foster closer links betw een Southeast Asia and Europe. 
4.119.  Despite the challenging economic outlook, we are glad to note that the EU has maintained 
overall openness and transparency of its trade and investment regime, resisting pressures to 
impose trade restrictions. We are also encour aged by the EU’s economic outlook, with the 
economy projected to stabilise and possibly pick up in 2014. This could in part be attributed to the wide range of policy decisions adopted by the EU, including a further strengthening of institutional 
settings, additional structural reforms of the fina ncial and other critical sectors, and exceptional 
monetary support in the Euro area. We look forward to improved economic governance as a result of the so-called "Six-Pack" put in place since December 2011, as well as a good outcome to the 
“Europe 2020” growth strategy. The continued recove ry of the EU economy, as the world's largest 
trading bloc, is critical to all of us. 
4.120.  Amidst a challenging and increasingly comp lex global economy, the world looks to the EU, 
now more than ever, to continue to be outward-looking, and lead in upholding free trade policies.  
It is essential for the EU to ensure that its trade practices reflect its philosophy which highly values free and open trade. We welcome the EU's effort s to implement a system of electronic customs 
procedures with centralised clearance by 2020. The Secretariat Report cites efforts such as the 
first project of the Single  Window is expected to be in place by 2014. Such  measures will no doubt 
be welcomed by traders who will be true benefi ciaries of the Trade Facilitation agreement which 
members are working hard to deliver at MC9.  
4.121.  At the same time, we note that some of the trade reforms that the EU is pursuing may 
increase rather than reduce trade barriers. Fo r example, the reform of the EU’s Generalized 
System of Preferences (GSP) could be less trade facilitative for products exported by countries 
without a Free Trade Agreement with the EU. Other areas of concern to our traders include: 
(1) the EU’s complex decision making process on trade and investment matters; (2) the EU’s burdensome customs procedures and practices; (3) the EU’s stringent measures on SPS, technical regulations and conformity assessment; and (4) the EU’s approach to determining tariffs for 
processed agricultural products. These concerns are reflected in our written questions to the EU. 
We hope to see future improvements so that such barriers are further removed and business is facilitated.   
4.122.  I would like, in closing, to acknowledge the role which Ambassador Angelos Pangratis and 
his team play in our collective work in Geneva, including on the DDA. We share the EU’s goal of a meaningful outcome at MC9 in Bali. We therefor e appreciate the constructive engagement, and 
look forward to the EU’s continued contributions in the months ahead 
INDIA 4.123.  The global financial crisis, followed by the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis in quick 
succession, have subdued economic growth in the EU, impacting not just the EU member states 
but also its trading partners. Despite implementing a range of policies aimed at tackling the crisis, 
the EU’s economic situation remains fragile as reflected by a contraction in its GDP in 2012 and a lowering of its growth projection for 2013 by the IMF. As the world’s largest economy and biggest 
trading block, it is natural that developments in the EU have a far-reaching influence on global 
economic stability and world trade. 
4.124.  Being India’s largest trading partner with a bilateral trade of over US$ 100 billion, we have 
been following developments in the EU with great interest. Our bilateral trade, which grew 
positively in 2010 and 2011, has suffered a decline of nearly 7% in 2012-13. Given the close and rapidly growing links between our economies, we ha ve an inherent stake in the EU’s performance 
and hope that it will be successful in making an early and sustained recovery.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 25 - 
 
  4.125.  It is also our expectation that the EU’s in volvement in the TTIP will not militate against its 
commitment to the multilateral trading syst em. We share the EU’s commitment towards a 
successful conclusion of the DDA and hope fo r a fair and balanced outcome at Bali.  
4.126.  Despite its economic difficulties, we apprecia te that the EU is actively assisting developing 
countries and LDCs through its significant contributions to aid for trade and ODA, as well as 
extension of DFQF market access and GSP preferences.     
4.127.  The Indian delegation has posed several questions to the EU on its trade policies and 
practices, and is grateful for the replies received. We would, however, like to highlight a few areas 
which call for improvement and consideration: 
(i) Although the EU’s average MFN tariff is low with several duty free tariff lines, sectors like 
 agriculture remain highly protected by complex and other forms of non- ad valorem  tariffs, 
 tariff peaks and tariff escalation. Agricultural subsidies, including export subsidies and 
 decoupled income support, continue to remain areas of concern. 
(ii) The EU’s highly complex taxation system, with wide variations between its member States, 
 increases the compliance costs for economic operators. Similarly, while SPS measures and 
 technical requirements are largely harmonized at the EU level, significant differences in the  non-harmonized requirements persist among member states, impeding the free movement 
 of goods.  
(iii) India has in the past expressed concern over th e fixing of arbitrary Maximum Residue Levels 
 (MRLs) at the level of determination for certain chemicals without adequate scientific  evidence or risk assessment. This acts as  a trade barrier to exports and transgresses 
 provisions of the SPS Agreement. We have noted that a full review of MRLs for Carbendazim 
 is underway in which relevant Codex MRLs will also be considered. We look forward to the  results of this review.    
(iv) We note the adoption of Regulation No. 608/201 3 in June 2013 amending the EU Regulation 
 No. 1383/2003 concerning customs enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights which had  impacted our pharmaceutical consignments in transit to Africa and Latin America. While we 
 are still studying the implications of this amended regulation, it would be useful to know how 
 it will help in dealing with the risk of illegitimate seizures of generic medicines at the border  during transit.    
(v) The February 2013 review of the REACH Regulation, imposing certain registration, testing 
 and certification requirements on exporters of chemicals, acknowledged the financial and 
 administrative costs for small and medium enterp rises. In this context, we look forward to 
 reviewing the working plan being developed by the EC together with ECHA (European 
 Chemical’s Agency) to assist SME’s meet their REACH obligations.  
(vi) The EU’s new GSP scheme that will become applicable from 2014 suspends tariff preferences 
 for some beneficiary countries in certain product categories, which would impact not just the 
 beneficiaries that have graduated but also other beneficiaries in that regional group due to 
 regional cumulation. The new GSP scheme could also have implications for countries not  having an FTA with the EU. 
(vii) With regard to the Emission Trading Scheme (E TS), while enforcement of the aviation tax on 
 emissions has been temporarily suspended unt il the 2013 ICAO General Assembly, the ETS 
 for intra-EU flights is putting pressure on airlines to furnish data failing which mandatory  penalties may apply.    
4.128.  Before concluding, Chair, my delegation would like to express its appreciation for the 
positive role played by Ambassador Pangratis in working towards a successful Bali Ministerial.   
COSTA
 RICA 
4.129.  Felicitaciones a la UE por el ingreso de Croacia, con lo que el proyecto europeo sigue 
creciendo. Desde su inicio, uno de los pilares de este gran proyecto que es la Unión Europea, ha WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 26 - 
 
  sido la búsqueda de la unidad económica, con una sola política comercial y una legislación común 
en la mayoría de los temas relacionados con el comercio, que se ha extendido también a la inversión extranjera directa.  
4.130.  Efectivamente, el comercio internacional ha jugado un papel fundamental en la UE como 
principal fuente de crecimiento de su economía y es un elemento crítico en momentos como los 
actuales, en que si bien empieza a dar signos de re cuperación, sigue siendo afectada por la crisis.  
4.131.  Costa Rica reconoce la importancia que la UE asigna a la OMC y al sistema multilateral de 
comercio. Agradecemos el trabajo y el liderazgo mostrado por la UE en temas de interés de esta 
organización como el examen del Entendimiento de Solución de Diferencias, la facilitación del comercio, la ampliación del ITA, el comercio electrónico y su interés en buscar avances también en la esfera de los servicios, a través del Acuerdo Internacional de Servicios y de que estos avances 
puedan ser incorporados a la OMC y apoyen el sistema multilateral de comercio. También debe 
resaltarse el compromiso de la Unión Europea y sus Estados miembros con el programa de Ayuda para el Comercio 
4.132.  La Unión Europea es nuestro segundo socio comercial; fue el destino del 18% de nuestras 
exportaciones y representó el 7% de nuestras importaciones. Nuestro comercio total con la Unión Europea ha seguido creciendo de manera sostenida a un ritmo promedio de 9% anual en los 
últimos 10 años, pasando de 1,652 millones de dólares EE.UU en el año 2002 a 3,302 millones de 
dólares EE.UU. en el 2010.  
4.133.  Nos complace la entrada en vigor, para Costa Rica y otros países de Centroamérica, el 
área comercial del Acuerdo de Asociación entre la Unión Europea y Centroamérica, prevista para el 
1° de agosto próximo. Con esto culmina el anhelo de muchos años de estrechar nuestros lazos 
entre ambas regiones. 
4.134.  Quisiéramos reconocer la apertura y la transparencia de su régimen de comercio e 
inversión y sus esfuerzos para no ceder al proteccionismo en respuesta a la crisis. Sin embargo, 
nos sigue preocupando el impacto comercial de sus reglamentos técnicos, por lo que alentamos, entre otras cosas, los esfuerzos de la UE en materia de evaluación de la conformidad y aceptación 
que lleve a una mejora de estos procedimientos. Seguimos con atención los cambios introducidos 
en la Política Agrícola Común, que como han señalado otros, representan ciertos progresos, como la reducción de las subvenciones a la exportación, en la dirección de fomentar el establecimiento de un sistema de comercio agropecuario equitativo y orientado al mercado. Sin embargo, el sector 
agrícola sigue altamente protegido y todavía falta mucho por hacer para reducir y eliminar las 
distorsiones que lo afectan.  
4.135.  Un tema adicional que nos inquieta son los cambios a la clasificación arancelaria de 
productos que en ocasiones ha aplicado la UE y que alteran unilateralmente las condiciones de 
acceso a los mercados para nuestros productos.   
4.136.  También seguimos con interés los desarrollos de las negociaciones recién iniciadas de un 
Tratado Transatlántico entre la UE y EEUU. 
4.137.  Costa Rica presentó varias preguntas a la UE que abarcan su régimen de inversiones, el 
IVA, la utilización de los contingentes arancelarios y la reforma de su sector financiero, entre otros temas. 
KOREA 
4.138.  Let me start with bilateral relations. As of 2012, Korea is the tenth largest trading partner 
for the EU while the EU remained Korea's third largest trading partner. The bilateral trade volume 
reached US$100 billion in 2011. On the investment front, the EU’s total stock of investments in 
Korea reached US$67.4 billion in 2012. What is encouraging is that all of this data demonstrates that the EU and Korea have made genuine efforts to further liberalize trade and investment even 
in time of the financial and economic difficulties. I would like to also note that Korea and the EU 
celebrated the 2nd anniversary of the Korea-EU FTA on 1st July of this year, and indeed we look forward to the strengthening of the partnership.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 27 - 
 
  4.139.  As the Secretariat has noted, the focus of EU policy over the past two years has been 
centered on recovering from the financial crises, and there have been relatively few changes to trade policies, laws, or institutions. However, it is encouraging to note that there has been no retreat to protectionism is, in itself, a positive sign, particularly given the fact that the EU is the 
world’s largest economy.  
4.140.  On this note, Korea has closely followed the EU’s efforts to streamline and improve its 
trade-related legal system to facilitate the trade and investment. Korea also welcomes the EU’s 
reform objectives in the financial service sector to improve the stability of the financial institutions 
and markets. It is also notable that with th e “blue print” of May 2011 put forward by the 
Commission, the EU carries out a comprehensive process of reviewing and improving the existing IPR regime to boost creativity and innovation.  
4.141.  Let me turn to the economic and trade policies of the EU. I have two comments among 
others. 
4.142.  First, as the Secretariat noted, given the fact that public procurement represents a large 
proportion of GDP in the EU, we would like to see the EU provide more clarity and details of 
information on how procurement is carried out.  
4.143.  Second, although the EU is a highly inte grated economic unit, in many areas of the EU 
competence, it is the member State which is responsible for implementing the law. Thus, as is 
pointed out by the discussant and many others, I hope that the EU should pay closer attention to the trade-related practices at the level of member States in order to ensure the clarity and efficient implementation of the EU’s trade policies. 
4.144.  With regard to the trade framework, the EU, as a founding Member of the WTO, has 
actively participated in the multilateral trading system. At the same time, the EU has concluded 33 FTAs with other countries, and is negotiating with many others including the US and Japan, and 
committed to the success of DDA. I am sure that all these efforts will be carried out for 
complementing and strengthening the multilateral trading system. We compliment the EU’s ardent efforts for maintaining its status as a leading international trading partner. 
SEPARATE
 CUSTOMS  TERRITORY  OF TAIWAN,  PENGHU,  KINMEN  AND  MATSU 
4.145.  Bilaterally, due to the impact of financ ial turmoil and the economic slowdown in the EU, 
the amount of two-way trade between the EU an d the separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, 
Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu in 2012 was US$48 billion which had a significant drop of 7.36% from 
the previous year. Although the EU’s share of the world trade is declining, the EU, it still remains 
the largest trading bloc and a leading economy in the world. We hope that EU’s economy can recover as soon as possible and we would like to see it resume its role as the engine of economic 
growth. 
4.146.  Therefore, we would like to urge the EU to continue addressing the financial and economic 
crisis by implementing some key crisis resolution approaches and mechanisms to tackle the 
economic downturns. We are pleased to see those macroeconomic policies have been taken to 
reduce public deficits and improve economic go vernance. According to the Secretariat’s Report, 
the full implementation of those measures is expected to support economic recovery this year and next year. We expect that such recovery will benefit WTO Members.  
4.147.  We are pleased to note in the Report that the focus of EU policy over the review period has 
been on the financial crises, and there have been relatively few changes to trade policies, laws or institutions in other areas. One positive sign is that there seems to have been no retreat into 
protectionism.  
4.148.  However, there are some aspects we are concerned.  4.149.  Specifically, in agriculture, although ther e was no major change during the review period, 
the EU’s reforms have not affected market access conditions and tariffs remain higher than on 
non-agricultural products and in some cases these tariffs are complex and seasonal.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 28 - 
 
  4.150.  In addition, TBT is still a concern to members. During the last review, many members 
complained about the EU's TBT regime for creati ng unnecessary obstacles to trade. During this 
review period, members continued to raise concerns in the TBT Committee over a number of measures adopted by the EU. It is important for the EU to consider carefully the potential trade 
impact of its regulatory environment, including its high regulatory standards regarding food and 
product safety, so as to ensure that its technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures do not create unnecessary obstacles. Th e same could be said for its SPS measures. In 
the area of SPS measures, we seek for further clar ification on the SPS requirements for plants of 
different risk categories such as tissue culture plants in sterile condition versus field grown plants. 
4.151.  In the area of Opinion of European Se curities and Market Authority (ESMA), we are 
concerned that the new published Opinion 2101/721 will create impediment for members to 
participate in the EU financial services sector. With respect to foreign Direct Investment, what 
policies the EU may consider adopting to deal with  the impact of the financial turmoil are needed 
to be further clarified. In the area of negotiatin g a bilateral agreement, we wish to know how the 
EU may move the negotiations forward.  
4.152.  We appreciate the EU's clearly stated commitment to preserving and strengthening the 
multilateral system and a successful outcome from the MC9 would constitute the first step on the 
road toward the conclusion of the Doha round. 
JAPAN 4.153.  While the risk of re-emergence of European debt crisis has been reduced, and, hence, the 
world economy is showing a few signs of improvemen t, the European economy itself has been in a 
weak situation overall because of the recessions and low growth in various EU member states, 
given the remaining influence of the debt crisis. In order to solve the European debt crisis, it is essential for the EU to make efforts not only to stabilize the financial market in the short term, but 
also to continue to engage in solving the structural challenges for the mid- and long terms, for 
example, through the establishment of the fiscal union as well as the banking union, and the encouragement of economic growth. Among others, reform effort for the early establishment of 
the banking union is crucial. 
4.154.  Regarding trade and trade-related policies, we have three general points and four specific 
points.  
4.155.  The first general point is on the WTO. Japan greatly appreciates that, for decades, the EU 
has contributed to maintaining and strengthening th e multilateral trading system led by the WTO. 
The EU has been playing a leading role in negotiations in the WTO, committing strongly to the Doha Round in particular. We expect the EU to make enhanced contributions on other 
negotiations, in particular for ITA expansion, wh ere the position of the EU appears to be less 
ambitious as a leading player. With the continuing cooperation with the EU, Japan will exercise its leadership role to maintain and strengthen the multilateral trading system towards the 9th 
Ministerial Conference, which will take place in Bali this coming December. 
4.156.  Second, on FTAs. Since the last review , the FTA between the EU and Korea has entered 
into force. The EU has also initiated its active engagement on FTA negotiations with other countries including the U.S. Japan highly commends the EU’s positive attitude to trade 
liberalization, in particular, the commencement of FTA negotiations with JAPAN. Japan also hopes 
that FTAs to be concluded by the EU with other members will complement the multilateral trading system. 
4.157.  Third, on the resistance to protectionism. Japan appreciates that the EU has not adopted 
protectionist policies since the global financial crisis in 2008 and European fiscal crisis in 2010. In order to sustain economic development, it is im portant that not only the EU but also all other 
countries refrain from introducing protectionist measures. 
4.158.  Now, let me turn to the four specific points.  4.159.  First, on the intellectual property. Given the fact that different patent systems have been 
operated by the individual EU member States, which have been considered as burdensome by WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 29 - 
 
  users, Japan welcomes the recent decision of the EU to create a new patent system “unitary 
patent with unitary effect” among the 25 EU member States. We also welcome the signing of the agreement on a Unified Patent Court. We are looking forward to the new unitary patent system and strongly expect that it will be operated in a proper manner and will continue to be improved. 
4.160.  Second, on the government procurement. The structure of the EU’s government 
procurement system consists of the relevant EU  directives and the regulations implemented by 
each EU member State based on the EU directives . Although they constitute a single regional 
regulatory structure; on the ground, due to the complexity, it appears that the two separate layers 
of regulations exist on a parallel fashion. In addition, as mentioned in the report by the Secretariat, a considerable proportion of the pu blic procurement takes place below the thresholds 
set out in the EU laws and the WTO Government Procurement Agreement. Overall, the structure 
appears to be less transparent and more complicated than appropriate for foreign participants. We 
would like to study carefully the EU’s answers responding to our questions on this matter. 
4.161.  Third, on aid for trade. The EU and its member States have been actively promoting 
support for developing countries, to enhance business environment, in various places in the world, 
including in Asia and Africa. As a major contributor of AfT, Japan appreciates the close cooperation with EU in this regard.  
4.162.  Fourth, on improving the business environment. Pursuing a better environment is always 
useful for attracting more investment. Japan hopes that the EU and member States will continue to make their efforts to improve their business environment, through a dialogue with foreign business communities. We would like to invite the attention to issues such as licensing procedures 
as well as operations for issuing VISAs, where foreign business communities have raising strong 
concerns for improvement. 
CHILE 
4.163.  Chile y la Unión Europea (UE), tienen una  estrecha relación económica Comercial que se 
basa en un Acuerdo de Asociación (AA) suscrito el año 2002, en Bruselas, que entró en vigor en febrero de 2003, y que abrió las puertas a Chile a una de las mayores economías del mundo, 
generado amplias oportunidades para el crecimiento y desarrollo económico de nuestro país. 
4.164.  Sin embargo, la relación bilateral con la UE se remonta varios años atrás, cuando en 1967 
la Comisión Europea estableció su primera delega ción en América Latina, en Santiago de Chile. 
4.165.  El AA abarca los pilares políticos, comercial (que incluye entre otros el comercio de bienes, 
de servicios, inversiones, propiedad intelectual, medidas SPS, TBT, defensa comercial) y, 
finalmente, un pilar de cooperación.   
4.166.  Como resultado de lo anterior, la UE fortaleció su importante rol como socio comercial para 
Chile; desde la entrada en vigencia del Acuerdo hasta el año 2012, el crecimiento promedio anual 
del intercambio comercial bilateral ha sido de 12%. En el año 2012, el intercambio total fue de US$ 22.606 millones, cifra que representa el 14% del total intercambiado por Chile con el mundo. 
4.167.  Las exportaciones a la UE, en el año 2012, representaron el 15% del total de los 
embarques de Chile al mundo, llegando a 11.970 millones de dólares EE.UU., con una contracción 
del 17%, respecto al año anterior debido a la crisis. 
4.168.  En cuanto a las importaciones, en el año 2012, ascendieron a más de 10.000 millones de 
dólares EE.UU., con un incremento de 3%.  
4.169.  La Inversión Extranjera Directa (IED) de la UE representa un 33,7% del monto total 
invertido en Chile desde 1974. El sector electricidad, gas y agua concentró cerca de un tercio de 
dicha inversión. 
4.170.  Asimismo, el 17,1% de los capitales provenientes de la UE fueron destinados al sector 
minería, y a continuación, las principales inversiones del bloque europeo son en los sectores 
comunicaciones y servicios financieros, que representan el 13% del total invertido por la UE en 
Chile. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 30 - 
 
  4.171.  Por su parte, las inversiones chilenas en la Unión Europea ascendieron a 9.400 millones de 
dólares EE.UU., en el stock acumulado al año 2012, lo que representa un 12,8% del total invertido por Chile en el Mundo. Un 67% del stock invertid o por Chile en la Unión Europea corresponde al 
sector industrial, mientras un 32,7%, al rubro servicios. 
4.172.  Sin perjuicio de las cifras señaladas, el ri tmo en el intercambio entre Chile y la UE ha sido 
menor al que quisiéramos debido al impacto de la crisis económica por la que atraviesa la EU. 
4.173.  Otro importante aspecto, que vale la pena destacar, es que producto de la crisis económica 
ha aumentado el ingreso a Chile, por razones labora les, de ciudadanos de la UE. Según cifras del 
Departamento de Extranjería y Migración entre el año 2010 y 2011 hubo un incremento del 5% en el otorgamiento a ciudadanos de la UE de vi sas temporales sujetas a contrato de trabajo. 
4.174.  Finalmente, Chile saluda de que a partir del 1° de julio pasado, Croacia sea el miembro 
número 28 de la UE. Asimismo, le desea éxito a Litu ania en la Presidencia del Consejo Europeo, el 
que se ha propuesto como meta para su período: el reforzamiento de la Unión Económica y Monetaria y, la creación de la Unión bancaria para permitir la estabilización financiera. 
NORWAY 
4.175.  The European Union is by far Norway’s most important trading partner, representing 64% 
of Norway’s imports and 80% of our exports in 2012.  
4.176.  The agreement on the European Economic  Area (EEA) is the cornerstone of Norway’s 
relationship with the EU.  
4.177.  Needless to say, developments in the EU an d the Euro area are very important for Norway.  
4.178.  Although the economic crisis in Europe ha s been branded financial, or fiscal, there is no 
doubt that long lasting trade imbalances have been a significant part of the problems. 
4.179.  Furthermore, unemployment figures and idle capacities are clear signs that Europe’s 
economic crisis is lingering on. We are concerned that considerable segments of the younger 
generations do not get a foothold in productive employment.  
4.180.  The EU has introduced a series of laudable measures to counteract the imbalances, and to 
prevent further crisis to occur.  
4.181.  In times of austerity, there will often be pressure for the introduction of protectionist 
measures. We are pleased to observe that the European Union has not yielded to such pressure.   
4.182.  Both the EU’s and the Secretariat’s Report s confirm the EU’s deep commitment to a strong 
multilateral trading system.  
4.183.  These are interesting times in the days of trade policy, not only here in the WTO but also 
on the various regional arenas. Being a close neighbour and truly integrated in the EU’s single market, the recently initiated talks on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) 
are of special interest to Norway. We will follow the developments closely and with great interest.  
4.184.  We particularly noted a recommendation in  the final report of the High Level Working 
Group setting up the negotiations, namely that the US and EU reach bilateral agreement on 
globally relevant rules and regulations that coul d contribute to progressive strengthening of the 
multilateral trading system. As a medium-sized economy, relying heavily on the multilateral 
trading system, Norway is obviously worried about a situation where key players negotiate trade rules outside this system.  
4.185.  On trade remedies, we commend the EU for being one of the few WTO Members applying 
the lesser-duty rule in a systematic manner. This is why we raised a question related to the possible future non-application of the-lesser duty rule in certain anti-dumping cases. We would, 
however, point out that we did not fully understand the answer. With respect to our question 
related to anti-dumping, reference is made to distorting subsidies as a possible reason for non-WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 31 - 
 
  application of the lesser-duty rule. A further refere nce is made to an example of a possible need to 
counter export restrictions. We would appreciate if the EU could elaborate on its reasoning. 
4.186.  Fisheries is another topic of – not surprisingly – particular interest to Norway. Except for oil 
and gas, fish is the single largest ex port item from Norway to the EU.  
4.187.  Norway notes an increased demand for seafood in Europe and the fact that the EU’s own 
seafood supplies are no longer sufficient to satisfy the needs of the Union’s industry or consumers. Norway welcomes the EU’s efforts in improving its own resource base through reforms of the 
Common Fisheries Policy.  
4.188.  However, we encourage the EU – in line with its broader trade policy objectives – to 
facilitate increased trade in seafood. With an average tariff of around 11 per cent for fish and fish products, tariff escalation, broad use of bilateral TRQs, autonomous quotas and end-user 
requirements, we believe there is room for impr ovements in the EU trade regime for seafood.  
4.189.  After the introduction of EU-catch certificates in 2010, Norway observes that importing 
countries are increasingly demanding, or are in process of demanding catch documentation. In 
recent months we have experienced that China, Ukraine and Japan have all required catch 
documentation for imports from Norway. The content and scope of these certificates tend to vary and complicates trade.  
4.190.  We are concerned about the possible development of a catch documentation “jungle”, 
creating considerable “red-tape” for exporters who have to take into account an increasing variety of documentation schemes.  
4.191.  Consequently, Norway believes it is high time to discuss common rules for catch 
certificates, taking appropriate and balanced acco unt of the needs of both exporting and importing 
countries.  
4.192.  Trade relations between Norway and the Eu ropean Union are in general conducted in a well 
regulated, predictable and cordial manner. But all rules have exceptions.  
4.193.  The ban on trade and sale of seal produc ts imposed by the EU is an unfortunate example 
of disturbances in our otherwise excellent tradin g relations. Norway, believes that the measures 
are inconsistent with WTO rules on several grounds, and is pursuing the case in the DSB.    
4.194.  I raise this here to emphasize the value of the multilateral trading system that we have 
developed over the past 60-odd years. The dispute settlement system is an invaluable element of this system. We have a forum where disputes can be solved in a timely, factual and non-political 
manner. 
4.195.  The EU is an important and active player  on the multilateral stage, and an important 
trading partner for most of us. We are confident that  this review will be useful both for the EU and 
other participants.  
BRAZIL 4.196.  Brazil welcomes the opportunity to participate in this 11th Trade Policy Review of the EU, 
with whom we have had a strategic partnership si nce 2007. The EU continues to be Brazil’s largest 
trading partner, with bilateral trade amounting to US$96.5 billion in 2012, approximately 21% of our foreign trade. The pattern has remained the same since the last review: with a few exceptions, Brazil exports mostly raw materials and imports manufactured goods. 
4.197.  Brazil is the fifth largest foreign investor in the EU, with US$88 billion in stock. The EU, in 
turn, provides almost half of all FDI in our country, with US$240 billion. 
4.198.  Brazil recognizes and welcomes the strong commitment shown by the EU to the 
strengthening of the WTO and the Multilateral Trading System. Its responsibilities, then, shall be 
commensurate to its position as the world`s largest economy and top trader.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 32 - 
 
  4.199.  Against this backdrop, we hope this exer cise helps identify areas where the EU’s trade 
policies can achieve further progress, for the sake of its member countries and for the benefit of the international economic environment. 
4.200.  One first note relates to the launching of the TTIP negotiations between the EU and the 
US. Like many, we express our hope that the partnership can become a building block, and not a 
stumbling block for the Multilateral Trading System.  
4.201.  On the multilateral front, we welcome the recent steps to reform the Common Agricultural 
Policy, which we hope will be consistent with the goal of diminishing distortion and make it more 
market-oriented. However, European producers co ntinue competing unfairly with farmers from the 
developing world, and this situation is unlikely to improve markedly any time soon because the CAP reform 2014-20, like earlier versions, will not directly address market access conditions. 
Tariffs, tariff quotas and agricultural  safeguards will remain untouched.  
4.202.  In the agricultural sector: (i) export subsidies granted for sugar, dairy products poultry meat, beef and pork remain a 
 central concern for Brazil. We invite the EU to continue phasing out its scheduled export 
 subsidies commitments and to support the G- 20 proposal on export competition under 
 consideration for Bali. 
(ii) coupled payments are being discontinued an d the less trade-distortive Single Farm 
 Payments progressively account for a larger share of domestic support. However, the  accumulation of different types of support to some commodities remains a concern.  Likewise, market price support schemes still burden consumers with large and unnecessary 
 transfers of resources to producers.  
(iii) the level of border protection for agricultural products is about four times higher than that 
 for non-agricultural products. Tariff peaks can reach over 100% for frozen meat and sugar 
 and 300% for concentrated milk. Besides, the EU’s tariff structure for agricultural goods is 
 characterized by a significant range of qu ota regimes and by access biased towards raw 
 products, to the detriment of higher value-a dded processed food products. With respect to 
 the beef quota administration provided for in the Commission Regulation No. 810/2008, we 
 urge the EU to apply strict scientific criteria as regards our beef exports.  
4.203.  Now let me turn to other areas of concern. During the review period, EU regulations in SPS 
and TBT continue to impose trade restrictions on Brazilian exports. In SPS, the EU has not 
implemented the CODEX standard related to ractopamine, disregarding the SPS Agreement.  
4.204.  In TBT, during the review period, concerns were raised with respect to EU regulations on 
registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction of chemicals, as well as on Renewable 
Energy, Medicinal Products for Human Use, honey containing GMO maize and Wine and Grape 
Juice Certification.  
4.205.  My delegation notes the EU’s intent to ensure compatibility between its trade policy and 
sustainable development objectives. We note that environmental measures shall not become a 
disguised barrier to trade. Environmental stan dards and labelling schemes for environmental 
purposes must always be implemented with transp arency, be based on the best available scientific 
data, and not more trade restrictive than necessary to reach the stated policy objectives. 
4.206.  In that context, Brazil has been closely following the discussions to EU regulations on the 
“promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources”, on the “Sustainable Consumption and Production” and “Sustainable Industrial Policy” proposals and on the “Single Market for Green 
Products Initiative”. 
4.207.  Turning to trade in services, the Secretariat Report stresses that a few member States of 
the EU have not yet ratified the “EU-25” services schedule, thus leaving unresolved the 
negotiations under GATS Article XXI, following the accession of Bulgaria and Romania. This adds 
legal uncertainties to European commitments under the GATS. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 33 - 
 
  4.208.  We urge the EU to consider the systemic consequences of the plurilateral services 
negotiations currently underway. At the present stage, it potentially disturbs the balance of the GATS text, bypassing development provisions therein and weakening potential multilateral trade-offs within the Doha Round. We shall not let the plurilaterals be a “momentum breaker” after 
Bali. 
4.209.  On a different note, Brazil welcomes the on-going efforts towards financial regulation and 
banking supervision integration within the EU in the present context of financial and sovereign 
debt crises. The idea of setting up a banking union is especially welcomed. In addition, actions to 
incorporate Basel III guidelines into European law will seemingly lay the groundwork for the smoother functioning of EU’s financial markets. 
4.210.  Let me conclude by thanking the EU for its replies to Brazilian questions and expressing 
Brazil’s appreciation to the contribution of the EU delegation to the on-going negotiations on the 
Bali Package.  
CANADA 
4.211.  Permettez-moi de vous présenter quelques commentaires sur la situation économique de 
l’Union européenne, de noter quelques sujets comme rciaux qui nous préoccupent, et de vous offrir 
quelques aspects majeurs de nos relations bilatérales avec l’Union européenne.  
4.212.  One of the advantages of speaking later in the morning is the opportunity to endorse the 
thoughtful observations of many others beginning  with your own introduction, Mr. Chairman. It 
was quite right to start with the macroeconomic context, not so much because we should be expansive here and move into the territory of the IMF and OECD and their reviews, but because 
given the size and sheer weight of Europe in the global economy, it is so clear that if we are to 
spur increased trade and economic activity there has to be a path to stimulate demand that should accompany the necessary fiscal consolidation in Europe. That kind of rebalancing is to the benefit 
not only of Europe but to all of us around the world. 
4.213.  Admittedly, the European Union, and especially the Euro area, has been experiencing a 
deeper and longer recession than expected. We’re reassured by the fact that financial market 
stress in the Euro Area has diminished. Decisive policy actions, such as the European Central 
Bank’s announcement of its Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) programme, have helped to stabilize financial markets and raise confidence in the viability of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). However, the decline in financial markets st ress has not translated into economic growth or 
encouraged bank lending to the private sector.   
4.214.  Canada, therefore, continues to suppor t more timely and decisive actions to boost 
confidence and reduce uncertainty, which will in turn support growth and job creation in the 
near-term, while implementing credible medium-term fiscal consolidation plans to address fiscal 
sustainability concerns. In particular, Canada encourages the EU to swiftly put in place a single banking supervisor, followed by a single bank  resolution mechanism and a deposit guarantee 
scheme. These necessary prudential reforms are the key to fostering global financial stability and 
enhancing global investor confidence, which we can all agree are important drivers of increased trade in financial services and beyond.  
4.215.  With this in mind, Canada joins other WTO Members in seeking assurances that such 
reforms take into account the interests of foreign financial service suppliers established in the EU. 
Reforms should not discriminate against foreign financial institutions. Reforms should also seek to minimise the impact on these entities, including the form by which they have established.  
4.216.  Equally important are the ambitious structural reforms of the Eurozone economies with the 
goal of increasing long-term growth and ensu ring prosperity. As my Norwegian colleague 
emphasized, finding lasting employment for the significant number of unemployed, especially for 
the even larger number of unemployed youth, is an urgent priority.   
4.217.  As Europe tackles these many domestic challenges, upholding its commitment to free 
trade remains essential. We applaud the European  Union's continued support for a strong global 
trade regime, as evidenced through its sustained engagement here at the WTO, and particularly in WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 34 - 
 
  the lead up to Bali, as well as through other multilateral and bilateral trade initiatives. The reports 
being considered today further demonstrate that the European Union remains engaged actively in promoting opportunities for enhanced trade and investment to support global growth.  
4.218.  However, we also believe the European Union could do more. While disagreements affect 
only a small fraction of Canada-EU trade and investment, but they represent practices that we 
think hinder or threaten Canadian business access to the European market.   
4.219.  First, uneven implementation of harmonized regulations across the European Union and 
the lengthy regulatory development process are continued sources of preoccupation.   
4.220.  Second, as just mentioned by Brazil, under the banner of the legitimate objectives of 
protecting human, animal, and plant health as well as the environment, which Canada and the EU share, we are concerned that too often, measur es proposed or adopted are not science-based.  
Nor do they meet the test of “not more trade-restrictive than necessary”.  
4.221.  For example, the proposed treatment of Canadian oil sands products under the EU Fuel 
Quality Directive’s implementing measures are not based on sound science and would single out 
one source of fossil fuels for discriminatory treatment while giving preferential treatment to crude 
oil imports with similar greenhouse gas emission profiles. We hope that the considerable input provided by both EU and non-EU stakeholders du ring the European Commission’s consultations on 
the matter will be fully factored in its future decisions.   
4.222.  Other measures that lack a scientific basis include the European Union’s policies and 
decisions regarding genetically modified organisms, and its ban on ractopamine. 
4.223.  We urge the European Union to develop and implement its policies in a manner that does 
not erect unnecessary obstacles to international trade. Both Canada and the EU have much to gain 
by ensuring the free and uninterrupted flow of goods and services. 
4.224.  It is in this context that Canada and the European Union are close to concluding 
negotiations on a 21st Century trade agreement that will add to the economies of both countries 
while maintaining our support for the multilateral trading system. 
4.225.  In closing, I congratulate the European Union on its resolve to restore confidence and 
growth since the onset of the financial crisis.   
MÉXICO 4.226.  Desde el comienzo de la crisis financiera en 2008 y hasta ahora, la UE ha estado en el ojo 
del huracán, por lo cual es de esperarse que el enfoque en su política y el tema recurrente en 
estos últimos dos años esté relacionado con cómo atender las deficiencias que salieron a relucir en 
estos tiempos turbulentos. Desde su último examen  en esta casa, los Estados Miembros de la UE 
han tenido que enfrentar grandes retos para atenuar los efectos de las crisis, la reducción de su 
desempeño económico y el descontento público.  
4.227.  La mayor economía del mundo inició una recuperación en 2010 que parecía promisoria. En 
esta reunión se ha señalado varias veces que esa recuperación no se ha consolidado y que los 
pronósticos apuntan a un lento crecimiento económico de solo el 0,1% en el conjunto de la UE en 
2013 y a una contracción del 0,3% de la economía de la zona del euro. Las disparidades entre las economías de los miembros se han acrecentado y varias de las economías de la UE muestran desequilibrios importantes.  
4.228.  Sus capacidades de respuesta han sido importantes, pero necesitan ir más allá que hasta 
ahora, por lo que destaca la necesidad de cerrar la brecha en la competitividad y productividad de las diferentes economías de sus miembros. Las dificultades por las que atraviesa la UE podrían ser 
la mejor llamada a emprender acciones y reformas que le permitan transformarse en una 
economía regional más competitiva y más homogé nea, así como retomar el camino hacia un 
mayor crecimiento económico que reduzca los altos niveles de desempleo y sacrificio de una 
proporción significativa de su población. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 35 - 
 
  4.229.  Los tiempos de crisis traen consigo retos significativos y oportunidades excepcionales, 
siempre y cuando se tenga la firmeza necesaria pa ra empujar reformas importantes. Parte de la 
respuesta se encuentra en fomentar la innovación , el espíritu emprendedor y la movilización de 
talento para regenerar la competitividad de los mercados europeos. La otra parte es movilizar los 
recursos necesarios para hacer crecer la demanda agregada. 
4.230.  Reconocemos la gran cantidad de medidas que han sido adoptadas para estabilizar y 
reforzar el marco institucional, así como las recientes decisiones de política encaminadas a mejorar 
la gobernanza económica de la UE, en especial el nuevo mecanismo que permite un mejor 
monitoreo macroeconómico y fiscal. 
4.231.  Constatamos una vez más el importante rol que tiene el comercio en la economía de la UE. 
De la misma manera, el comercio de la UE tiene un gran impacto en la economía mundial. Las 
perspectivas económicas para 2013 y 2014 indican que el comercio comunitario no crecerá 
significativamente. Sin embargo, reconocemos los esfuerzos para evitar caer en las presiones proteccionistas y mantener el grado general de apertura y transparencia de su régimen de 
comercio e inversión.  
4.232.  La Unión Europea es uno de los Miembros de la OMC con mayor número de acuerdos de 
libre comercio, uno de los cuales entró en vigor durante el período de examen (Corea), mientras 
completó dos negociaciones con Singapur y Ucrania. Entre las noticias más sonadas en los últimos 
meses en lo que se refiere a TLCs, está el anuncio del inicio de las negociaciones para establecer la Alianza Transatlántica de Comercio e Inversión (TTIP, por sus siglas en inglés)  entre la Unión Europa y los Estados Unidos de América. Si bien el comercio bilateral entre la UE y EEUU (2,3% 
del comercio mundial) no es mucho mayor al bilateral entre México y EEUU (1,8%), la realidad es 
que el TTIP se convertiría en la asociación más gran de de todos los tiempos, pues el comercio total 
de EEUU y la UE representa cerca de una tercera parte del comercio mundial. El TTIP ha generado 
expectativas respecto a ser el catalizador que requiere el sistema multilateral para reengancharse 
en las negociaciones multilaterales, tal como lo fue en su momento el “innovador” NAFTA para la Ronda de Uruguay. Sin duda el TTIP será diferente a cualquier acuerdo comercial, pues intentará 
abordar barreras detrás de la frontera y establecer normas y prácticas de calidad superior. La 
pregunta es cómo traducirlas en un fortalecimiento del sistema multilateral del comercio, para lo que EEUU y la UE tienen gran responsabilidad. Aunque otros comparten esa responsabilidad, se requiere mostrar un liderazgo que hasta el momento ha faltado. Sería bueno que ese liderazgo se 
retomara en estos momentos en que el éxito de Bali está en juego. Reconocemos los esfuerzos 
que Angelos y su delegación realizan en Ginebra. 
4.233.  Entrando a cuestiones específicas, vemos con interés la refundición del Código aduanero. 
No obstante, todavía preocupa la falta de aplicación uniforme de los procedimientos aduaneros, ya 
que en la práctica existen discrepancias en la implementación que incluso han llevado a solución de diferencias. Además, resulta fundamental en términos de certeza jurídica, que las decisiones 
que tome la autoridad aduanera de un miembro sean vinculantes para todos los Estados 
miembros. 
4.234.  Tomamos nota de la ausencia de cambios sustantivos en su política comercial desde su 
último examen, en particular en lo referente a los aranceles, donde no se han registrado 
modificaciones significativas a los aranceles aplicados. A pesar de registrar una disminución en el 
arancel NMF promedio en 2013, la protección a la  agricultura sigue siendo elevada, con 14,8%. 
Esto ubica a la UE en el lugar 84 en relación a los restantes 131 miembros de la OMC. Asimismo, 
los aranceles complejos, estacionales y matriciale s, por ejemplo los que resultan de un cálculo que 
toma en cuenta el porcentaje de ciertos ingredie ntes presentes en el producto a importar, crean 
confusión y hacen menos predecibles las condiciones de importación. Por ejemplo, aún no nos 
queda claro el arancel que deberá pagar el jarabe de agave proveniente de México.  
4.235.  México da la bienvenida los esfuerzos que se han venido realizando para reformar la PAC 
2014-2020, buscando una mayor orientación hacia el mercado. Esperamos que conduzca a la reducción de apoyos distorsionantes de la producción y el comercio y la eliminación de los 
subsidios a la exportación. Sería bueno consolidar en la OMC los avances que se logren. 
4.236.  Quisiéramos conocer un poco más sobre cuál será la metodología de cálculo que se 
utilizará para estimar los montos de los apoyos que permitirán homologar los pagos a nivel WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 36 - 
 
  regional y al interior de los estados miembros en  materia de convergencia interna de los apoyos 
directos. 
4.237.  Aunque hay que ir todavía más lejos, es de notar los esfuerzos para mejorar la 
transparencia y competencia en todos los rubros. No es de sorprender que los mayores esfuerzos 
de reforma durante el período de examen se han concentrado en los servicios financieros para 
abordar problemas estructurales que salieron a relucir en la crisis. Hacemos notar específicamente las acciones encaminadas a la creación de una unión bancaria, el establecimiento de autoridades 
supervisoras europeas, requisitos más estrictos en materia de capital para los bancos y las 
compañías de seguros, y la creación de instrumentos que permiten la participación de terceros países. También seguiremos con interés la evolución de la creación de un impuesto sobre los servicios financieros en algunos Estados miembros, aunque no estamos seguros de sus bondades.  
4.238.  Por último, no me queda más que agradecer las respuestas a las preguntas elaboradas por 
México, así como exhortar a la UE a continuar su compromiso con el sistema multilateral de comercio. 
INDONESIA 
4.239.  Indonesia regards its trade and investment relations with EU as very important. 
Indonesia-EU total trade within the last five years (2008-2012) has showed a trend of 8.53% 
increased with total trade in 2012 reached US$32.1 billion or decrease of 2.6% compared to 2011 
which amounted to US$33 billion. Indonesia's export to EU in 2012 reached US$18 billion or decreased by 12.1% compared to 2011 which amounted to US$20.5 billion. While Indonesia's import from EU for the period of 2012 recorded in the amount of US$14.1 billion or an increase of 
13.1% compared to the same period in 2011 which amounted to US$12.5 billion. Indonesia and 
EU cooperation has been more flourished since the conclusion of Comprehensive Partnership Cooperation Agreement (PCA) in 2009. Both parties have implemented several projects and 
collaborations to a strategic level. Indonesia and the EU have also undertaken scoping exercise to 
determine the range of cooperation under an ambitious Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). Indonesia believes that our economic partnership will continue to grow in the 
future. 
4.240.  Despite these strengthened economic relati ons, there are some areas of EU’s policies on 
which Indonesia would like to express its concerns. We have submitted a number of specific written questions to clarify individual points on these issues and we thank the EU delegation for 
providing the answers. We would like to  highlight some of them as follows: 
 EU’s policy to promote the use of energy from renewable sources, as stipulated in Directive 
 No. 2009/28/EC, has the potential to discriminate against Indonesian biofuel sourced from 
 palm oil (in this case, to enjoy the benefits the Directive’s offers). Indonesia is interested to 
 hear from the EU on the origin of the default value of 35% of Green House Gas saving  emission for biofuel sourced from feed-stocks.  Furthermore, Indonesia seeks EU’s rationale 
 and scientific evidence in determining that saving emission from palm oil is lower than other 
 sources such as rapeseed and sunflower. 
 Current development also shows that palm oil products face a continuing pressure by certain 
 European industries products. As campaign against palm oil products are increasing, 
 Indonesia seeks the assurances of the EU that EU’s policy on the trade of palm oil products 
 is consistent with the WTO principles and not merely a part of unfavourable campaign 
 against palm oil, which has proven to  be more productive than rapeseed. 
 Indonesia is also concerned with EU’s policy on antidumping investigation practice 
 particularly on imports of fatty alcohols from Indonesia. The policy failed to treat Indonesian 
 exporters’ related sales office abroad as a single economic entity with their producers or 
 exporters. It is conducted even though there is a European Court of Justice’s jurisprudence 
 regarding the treatment of single economic entity that supports our exporters’ position. We  hope that the EU will evaluate its policy on this matter to bring more predictability for our  exporters. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 37 - 
 
   In the efforts of fighting illegal logging and deforestation globally, Indonesia and the EU 
 have worked together in an ambitious agreement on sustainable timber trade titled the  Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade – Voluntary Partnership Agreement (FLEGT  – VPA). We fervently believe that this agreement is an important tool to fight illegal logging 
 comprehensively. We have a concern that there are attempts to exclude certain area in this 
 agreement. Indonesia seeks the assurances  of the EU that agreement on trade and 
 sustainability such as FLEGT-VPA will be co mprehensive and reject territorial exclusion. 
BRUNEI
 DARUSSALAM  ON BEHALF  OF ASEAN 
4.241.  ASEAN continues to value the European Union’s contribution to our economy, as the EU is 
ASEAN’s second largest trading partner, accountin g for around 11% of ASEAN trade. On the other 
hand, ASEAN as a whole represents the European Union’s third largest trading partner outside 
Europe. Total trade between ASEAN and the EU grew by 12.6%, amounting US$234.8 billion in 
2011. Furthermore, in terms of foreign investment stock, from 2000-2009, the EU companies have invested approximately an annual average of €9.1 billion, currently making the EU the largest 
investor in ASEAN countries. 
4.242.  At the Twelfth Consultations between ASEAN Economic Ministers and the EU Trade 
Commissioner in March 2013 in Hanoi, Viet Nam, the Ministers adopted the ASEAN-EU Trade and 
Investment Work Programme for 2013-2014, to improve two-way trade relations and investment 
as well as support broader integration within ASEAN and between ASEAN and the EU. The Ministers also reaffirmed their commitment to strengthen cooperation between the two regions including the possibility of resuming negotiatio ns of an ASEAN-EU Free Trade Agreement, upon 
realisation of the ASEAN Economic Community by the end of 2015. At the sidelines, the ASEAN-EU 
Business Summit, established in 2011, was held and continued to attract business people from both regions and provide the opportunity for public-private sector dialogue.  
4.243.  ASEAN also appreciates the EU’s financial assistance to trade-related regional projects, 
such as Enhancing ASEAN FTA Negotiating Capaci ty Programme and ASEAN Regional Integration 
Support Programme (ARISE). 
4.244.  ASEAN is impressed with the EU’s record of multilateral economic and trade performance 
as illustrated in the Secretariat Report. Despite the fact that its share of world trade is declining due to other countries’ more rapid growth, the EU remains to be an open economy with trade in goods and services outside the EU accounting for over 33% of GDP in 2011. The EU continues to 
maintain a high standard of transparency of tr ade rules and procedures and has not retreated to 
protectionist policies even though it has been under the pressure of the financial crises. 
4.245.  ASEAN understands that both the EU and its member States are taking steps so as to 
reduce public deficits and improve overall economic  governance in the region, and we would like to 
express our full support and look forward to the im provement of the regional financial situation in 
the future. 
4.246.  Against the progressive cooperation between ASEAN and the EU, there are some areas of 
concern by ASEAN Member States under respective WTO Committees and we hope that these issues can be resolved through continued engagement and/or via bilateral consultations. We appreciate the cooperation that exists between us and hope this continues, resulting in mutually 
beneficial outcomes for all Parties.  
4.247.  ASEAN would particularly like to thank Ambassador Angelos Pangratis and his Geneva 
team for their diligent efforts and constructive  e ngag e me nt with ASE AN  M emb e rs , and  we  look  
forward to continuing the meaningful cooperation towards Bali. 
REPÚBLICA
 DOMINICANA 
4.248.  La Unión Europea es un importante socio comercial para la República Dominicana, a través 
del Acuerdo de Asociación Económico con los Países del CARIFORO, del que la República 
Dominicana forma parte. En el período 2008-2012, la República Dominicana recibió Inversión Extranjera procedente de la Unión Europea por un monto de poco más de 2 mil millones de dólares 
EE.UU., principalmente en los sectores de bines raíces, comercial, comunicaciones y turismo. En el WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 38 - 
 
  año 2012, la República Dominicana exportó casi 780 millones de dólares EE.UU., e importó 
1,816 millones de dólares EE.UU. desde la Unión Europea.   
4.249.  En este su undécimo examen de su política comercial deseamos felicitar a la Unión 
Europea, ya que el informe de la Secretaría expresa que es una economía abierta y transparente 
que constituye el mayor bloque comercial del mundo. También se explica que a pesar de la gran 
diversidad de sus Estados miembros en cuanto a economía, sistema jurídico e instituciones públicas, es una unidad económica muy integrada, con una sola política comercial y una legislación 
común en la mayoría de las esferas relacionadas con el comercio, lo cual es muy positivo.   
4.250.  También deseamos felicitarles porque no se ha buscado refugio en el proteccionismo, a 
pesar de la seria crisis financiera y económica que atraviesa. Sin embargo, la situación económica en la Unión Europea sigue siendo muy preocupante. El informe de la Secretaría de la OMC indica 
que en 2012, tras el empeoramiento de la crisis de la deuda soberana en algunos Estados 
miembros y la reciente desaceleración del comercio mundial, el PIB de la UE experimentó una contracción del 0,3%. El consumo privado, ya débi l en 2011, siguió viéndose limitado por el lento 
crecimiento de los ingresos de los asalariados y por tasas de inflación relativamente altas. El 
incremento del ahorro por precaución de los hogares, como respuesta a la creciente incertidumbre provocada por el resurgimiento de la crisis de la deuda soberana, también contribuyó a limitar el 
consumo privado. En 2012 se registró una reducción del consumo público, en consonancia con los 
esfuerzos de consolidación fiscal en curso. El aumento de las exportaciones netas, principal motor del crecimiento del PIB en 2011, no bastó para compensar la caída del consumo privado 
4.251.  Además, el nivel de desempleo sigue siendo elevado, en un contexto de persistentes 
diferencias entre los distintos países. Los bajos e inestables resultados del PIB, unidos a la 
incertidumbre provocada por la agudización de la crisis de la deuda, se han reflejado en una creciente tasa de desempleo a nivel de la UE. El número de desempleados ha seguido una 
tendencia ascendente durante tres años y ha alcanzado recientemente un máximo histórico de 
26,1 millones aproximadamente (el 10,5% de la mano de obra de la UE en noviembre de 2012, frente al 9,7% en 2011). Todo esto acompañado de altas tasas de inflación, de 2011 a 2012, la 
inflación de los precios de consumo siguió estando determinada por los aumentos de los tipos de 
los impuestos indirectos en varios países de la UE. Por otra parte, la subida de los precios de los alimentos y el petróleo y la repercusión de la reciente depreciación del euro (en la zona del euro) han contribuido a una inflación relativamente alta . Además, a pesar del reducido aumento de los 
costes laborales en un contexto de elevado desempleo y del moderado crecimiento del consumo, 
se ha registrado una importante inflación de los precios al productor (del 2,7% en 2012), debido al efecto del incremento de los precios de la energía. 
4.252.   En el informe se indica que se están adoptando medidas, tanto a nivel de la UE como a 
nivel de los Estados miembros para reducir los déficits públicos y mejorar la gobernanza económica, y se espera que la plena aplicación de esas medidas apoye la recuperación económica 
que se espera en 2013 y 2014. Sin embargo, el reciente informe de julio del Fondo Monetario 
Internacional titulado “Perspectiva de la econom ía mundial” indica que en el 2013, las economías 
de la zona euro seguirán en recesión, con una baja de -0,6%, y el aumento estimado en 1% para el 2014 será menor al proyectado inicialmente; resultando más pronunciado para España e Italia, 
cuyas previsiones han sido a la baja. El FMI dice que España no crecerá, sino que caerá del -1,4% 
proyectado en abril de este año a -1,6% para el cierre de 2013; en tanto que para Italia la baja estimada ha sido menor, de -2,4% a -1,8%.  Estos datos causan gran preocupación, por lo que la 
Unión Europea debe redoblar sus esfuerzos para tratar de salir de esta situación. En palabras de la 
Directora del FMI, Sra. Cristine Lagarde, y cito: “El reto exige una respuesta política completa: limpiar el sistema bancario, pero también completar la unión bancaria de forma rápida, apoyar la 
demanda desde el punto de vista fiscal y poner en marcha las reformas estructurales necesarias”. 
4.253.  En el área comercial se han producido pocos cambios desde la realización del último 
examen. No ha habido cambios importantes en los aranceles. El sector agrícola continúa estando protegido, mediante aranceles complejos o estacionales, los cuales les instamos a cambiar en 
aranceles ad valorem . En cuanto los procedimientos aduaneros, se siguen haciendo avances hacia 
un sistema de procedimientos electrónicos con despacho de aduana centralizado, a nivel de la UE, cuyo plazo final es el 2020. Se espera que el prim er proyecto de la “ventanilla única” se establezca 
en el 2014. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 39 - 
 
  4.254.  Una importante preocupación se refiere a las barreras no arancelarias, en particular los 
obstáculos técnicos al comercio, los cuales si guen estando muy extendidos. En este sentido, 
saludamos la entrada en vigor en la UE de un acuerdo sobre evaluación de la conformidad y aceptación que armoniza la legislación de los requisitos técnicos, sin embargo instamos a la UE a 
seguir haciendo esfuerzos en este sentido, a los fines de no crear obstáculos innecesarios en 
particular al comercio proveniente de los países en desarrollo. A este respecto, deseamos mencionar la preocupación que nos ha causado, y que hemos señalado en el Comité OTC, la 
directiva de la UE para la regulación de los productos derivados del Tabaco, la cual consideramos 
que no cumple con las disposiciones del Acuerdo OTC de la OMC.  
4.255.  Tomamos nota, que durante el período objeto de examen, en el área de los derechos de 
propiedad intelectual (DPI) la UE continúa un impo rtante proceso de reforma con el fin de pasar a 
un marco global coherente y equilibrado. En tre los elementos más importantes podemos 
mencionar la creación de una patente europea con efecto unitario que permitirá a futuros titulares de derechos solicitar la concesión de un título de patente que otorgue protección uniforme y sea 
automáticamente válido en los 25 Estados miembros participantes, el establecimiento de un 
sistema unificado de solución de litigios en materia de patentes, el establecimiento de un marco unificado para promover los productos agrícolas y los productos alimenticios de calidad mediante  
denominaciones de origen e indicaciones geográficas. Les felicitamos por estos esfuerzos y le 
instamos a continuarlos. 
4.256.  El informe de la Secretaría menciona que la sobrepesca sigue constituyendo un grave 
problema para la UE, ya que las capturas permisibles totales han excedido por lo regular de los 
límites sostenibles, por lo que les sugerimos acelerar las reformas pendientes en esta área.  
4.257.  En el área de los servicios, es importante mencionar las reformas encaminadas hacia la 
creación de la Unión Bancaria. Los objetivos de esta reforma son cuatro: el primero es la creación 
de una unión bancaria mediante un mecanismo de supervisión único, un sistema europeo de 
garantía de depósitos y un marco europeo de resolución de los casos de quiebra para los bancos; el segundo objetivo es la reforma de las instituciones y los mercados financieros, para aumentar la 
estabilidad, mediante el establecimiento de autoridades supervisoras europeas, requisitos más 
estrictos en materia de capital para los bancos y las compañías de seguros, y disposiciones específicas en materia de agencias de calificaci ón crediticia, auditores, mercados de valores y 
derivados, y prácticas comerciales especulativas que puedan dar lugar a una volatilidad excesiva 
de los mercados; el tercer objetivo es el fortalecimiento de la responsabilidad del sistema 
financiero ante los consumidores; y el cuarto es el establecimiento de un impuesto sobre los servicios financieros en algunos Estados miembros. Esas reformas, dada la crisis financiera por la 
que se atraviesa,  son muy positivas, y les sugerimos su continuación y plena aplicación. 
4.258.  La República Dominicana ha presentado algunas preguntas a la UE, sobre los tipos de 
preferencias otorgados en los diferentes Acuerdos de Asociación Económica, cuyas respuestas 
esperamos con interés. 
PAKISTAN 4.259.  EU is the world’s largest trading block, and one of the most open and transparent 
economies, despite great diversity among the member states, thus ensuring the integrity of a 
single market. It is the world’s largest recipient and supplier of FDI, and has more than 1,100 BITs 
between the EU member States and third countries . Although mitigating the financial crisis has 
been at the centre of its policies, its trade has continued to increase, without retreating into 
protectionism. In 2011 and 2012, the ECB has provided large scale stimulus. The European 
Economic Forecast has projected that the EU ec onomy would stabilize in 2013 and pick in 2014. 
4.260.  The EU has announced its growth strategy “Europe 2020” focusing on the objectives of 
smart and green growth, job creation, boosting innovation and the digital economy, higher 
education, training and lifelong learning, and poverty reduction in Europe.  
4.261.  The EU has average MFN tariff of 6.5%. However, agriculture remains to be relatively 
highly protected, leading to a demand for CAP reform. It has some complex and seasonal tariffs 
and different member States have different ra tes for VAT and excise duties. Corporate and 
personal taxation systems and rates of tax also vary widely among the states, which leads to WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 40 - 
 
  additional compliance costs. Public procurement is  a large portion of GDP in the EU, but as noted 
by the Secretariat, there is opacity regarding procurement below the threshold because of differences in reporting among member States. It is also noted that technical obstacles to the free movement of goods within the EU are still wide spread. Overfishing remains a serious problem as 
EU’s total allowable catches regularly breach sustainable level. The Secretariat considers that there 
are several reasons why future trade policy reviews of the EU should pay closer attention to trade 
related practices in the member States.  
4.262.  The EU has 33 FTAs with other countries and has completed technical negotiations on two 
FTAs and is also engaged in negotiations with anot her six entities. It is also engaged in negotiating 
the TPP and TTIP.  
4.263.  For the EU, the WTO represents the mult ilateral bedrock of the EU trade policy for 
enforcing rights under the WTO rules. It has all al ong displayed a keen interest in preserving the 
integrity of the MTS by tabling several proposals in nearly all areas, and vigorous participation in negotiations, reflecting a strong interest in open markets and strong regulatory frameworks. 
Outside WTO, it also reinforces the development agenda through its GSP, GSP plus and EBA 
scheme. We consider that being the largest trading block, the EU is charged with a responsibility 
to the MTS. 
4.264.  The EU has demonstrated its commitment to promoting a multilateral agenda for trade and 
development (e.g. pursuing the Doha Round and the LDC package), promoting market access for developing countries (e.g. GSP), EPAs, working towards sustainable development through a green 
economy (e.g. liberalisation of green goods and services, financing and public–private 
partnerships), and developing more focused, targeted and coordinated Aid for Trade. The future 
policy direction of the EU includes GSP reform, new rules of origin to improve complementarily between trade and development, enhancing investment provisions in trade agreements to enhance 
FDI, market access to certain services sector for the LDCs, and concluding EPAs with interested 
ACP countries. EU has also launched an initiative to modernize trade defence instruments. 
4.265.  EU is Pakistan’s largest trading partner, and a source of over one-fifth of Pakistan’s total 
exports. Trade between the two countries has been  growing although the trade balance continues 
to be tilted in EU’s favour. EU and Pakistan have a strong bilateral relationship. A new framework agreement: EU-Pakistan 5 year Engagement Plan has been signed in March 2012, covering several areas including political cooperation, security, trad e, energy and other sectoral cooperation areas.  
A new government has assumed office recently in Pakistan which has ambitious plans of bringing 
about economic turnaround. We hope to witness reinvigorated engagement by the EU to help steer Pakistan towards a renewed path to economic recovery. 
TURKEY 
4.266.  The global economic crisis has accelerated the shift in economic power away from 
developed countries towards emerging economies, as was mentioned in the EU Report. However, 
as the Secretariat Report also clearly underlines, the EU remains the largest trading bloc in the 
world. The EU's trade volume in terms of both exports and imports continued to increase in the 
review period albeit with a declining share due to faster growth in other countries. This continued increase in the EU's trade volume is a vital element for the expansion of the global economy. 
4.267.  For Turkey, like for many other countries, the EU remains the biggest trading partner. In 
2012, the total trade volume between Turkey and the EU was around US$147 billion, which still 
constitutes about 37-38% of our total trade despite having fallen from a high of more than 50% in 
recent years. But Turkey is also an important tr ading partner for the EU. Turkey is the EU's 5th 
biggest market with a 4.5% share of its exports,  and 7th biggest supplier of its imports with a 
2.7% share. The EU's third biggest trade surplu s is with Turkey which shows that trade with 
Turkey is a factor helping the EU emerge from th e economic crisis that it faces. With a 71% of 
share in total inward investment flow, the EU is also the main source of FDI for Turkey. 
4.268.  Because of this critically important interdependence with the EU, the developments in the 
economy of the EU have multidimensional effe cts on Turkey's economy and trade structure. 
Therefore, we attach great importance to the deve lopments and to the review process of the EU's WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 41 - 
 
  trade policy. And naturally, we look forward to a speedy recovery of the EU economy because that 
is in our interest as much as that of the EU itself. 
4.269.  As we all know, during the period under review, the continuing sovereign debt crisis, as 
well as fiscal and monetary problems have been at the top of EU governance agenda. The EU is 
currently struggling to meet a double challenge. Firstly, there are weaknesses in the real economy 
despite improvements in the financial markets. Secondly, the performances of the different national economies including within the Euro-zone continue to show important disparities. 
4.270.  However, we are very happy to observe that both the EU institutions and national 
governments have taken serious measures to tackle the financial and economic crisis. We look forward to seeing the positive impact of these measures on the real economy in the period ahead. 
4.271.  The Single Market remains the EU's most important vehicle for growth and job creation. 
Improvements that have been made in several areas that are relevant to the functioning of the 
Single Market should help the EU emerge from the crisis. 
4.272.  Regarding trade policy measures, the Secret ariat Report emphasizes that, there have not 
been any major changes to tariffs or market acce ss generally in the EU. Although the average MFN 
tariff is 6.5% and there are large numbers of duty  free tariff lines, some sectors, particularly 
agriculture remain highly protected. However, few countries trade with the EU on an MFN basis 
due to the considerable number of preferential agre ements that it has with other countries as well 
through its GAP schemes. 
4.273.  The Secretariat Report also underlines that during the review period there was no major 
change in the EU's agricultural policy. Nevertheless, as a result of reforms and higher international 
agricultural prices, the total level of support to the agricultural sector has declined over the past 
few years. However, according to the Secretaria t Report, the EU's reforms have not altered the 
high, seasonal and complex tariff structure in this sector. 
4.274.  Coming to the multilateral front, the EU Government Report underlines several points in 
this regard including the importance of th e WTO as the bedrock of EU trade policy. 
4.275.  As everyone knows, Turkey is linked to the EU through a Customs Union, a unique 
arrangement that has no equivalent between the EU and another one of its WTO trading partners 
and that covers industrial goods and processed agricultural products. The Customs Union requires Turkey to apply the EU's common external tariff in  those products and align itself with the EU's 
preferential trade policy, not always and easy task . It follows from that relationship that despite 
occasional divergences of view Turkey will continue to work closely with the EU for the 
strengthening of the multilateral trading system. We strongly value the EU's firm commitment to 
the successful conclusion of the Doha Negotiations . We agree with the EU that concluding the DDA 
process requires efforts from all the participants in the negotiations. 
4.276.  I should also like to me ntion that Turkey appreciates the fact that despite the very deep 
economic and financial crisis from which it has been suffering during the period under review, the 
EU has not adopted protectionist policies and that its use of trade defence measures has been 
relatively limited. 
MALAYSIA 4.277.  The EU is a significant market for Malaysia as it provides a viable access into the strategic 
market of the Euro zone. The EU is also an important source of foreign direct investment and 
transfer of knowledge and technology for Malaysia. From January to April 2013, Malaysia's total trade with the EU amounted to €10.7 billion, an in crease of 5% for the corresponding period in 
2012. Exports were valued at €4.9 billion with imports valued at €5.8 billion.  
4.278.  Malaysia and the EU are currently in the midst of negotiating a Free Trade Agreement 
while at the same time the country is still enjoying trade preferences under the EU Generalised 
Scheme of Preferences. Malaysia has been a reci pient country of the EU GSP since 1971. Yet this 
arrangement is due to expire at the end of this year with the introduction of the EU's new GSP, 
which excludes upper middle economies like Malaysia. Given that the EU-Malaysia Free Trade WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 42 - 
 
  Agreement may not be concluded by then, this clearly introduces a certain degree of legal 
uncertainty in the mind of both the Government and European and Malaysian businesses. Therefore, we appreciate any clarification on the initiatives that have been taken so far or which 
one will be in the near future to remedy this situation. 
4.279.  One of Malaysia’s main export to the EU  is palm oil, which constitute 11.6% of total 
exports in 2012.  
4.280.  Malaysia is highly concerned on the treatment of palm based biofuel under the EU 
Renewable Energy Directive (RED). Palm based bi odiesel is given a lower default value compared 
to biodiesel from other competing raw materials such as rapeseed oil. This disadvantages market access for palm based biodiesel to the EU.  
4.281.  Malaysia has undertaken research on the greenhouse gas or GHG emission savings on 
palm based biodiesel and the results indicate a hi gher GHG emission savings compared to the EU 
assessment under the RED. In addition, we have also submitted technical data to both the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission and the Commission itself and urge for serious 
consideration to be given to the data. Revision of  default values of palm based biodiesel based on 
the data given will provide further market opportunities for Malaysian biodiesel producers.  
4.282.  We need to once again stress that the demonization of Malaysian palm oil and biofuels 
originating from the same MUST stop. The EU, in her ambitious pursuit of energy and climate 
targets, should not overlook the fact that palm oil is an essential part of the livelihood of Malaysian farmers, most of whom are micro small-holders. In addition, it should be noted that crop-rotation is already in place in Malaysia, as part of our sustainable agricultural practices, and this 
contributes significantly to our food-biofuel balance. 
GUATEMALA 4.283.  Habiendo dicho lo anterior, es importante manifestar la enorme importancia que reviste 
para nosotros las relaciones comerciales con un bloque económico y comercial tan importante 
como lo es la Unión Europea. Ello se hace más evidente con la reciente firma del Acuerdo de Asociación entre la Unión Europea y Centroamérica. 
4.284.  En 2012, las importaciones guatemaltecas desde la Unión Europea alcanzaron 
1,094 millones de dólares EE.UU. mientras que las exportaciones de Guatemala hacia los países europeos representaron 653 millones de dólares EE.UU. Estamos seguros que estas cifras incrementarán sustancialmente en la medida en qu e se implemente el Acuerdo de Asociación entre 
ambas regiones. 
4.285.  Por otro lado, nos complace observar que, a pesar de la desafortunada crisis que han 
atravesado los países de la Unión Europea en los últimos dos años, como lo indica el informe de la 
Secretaría, no hayan tomado medidas que atenten contra el comercio de bienes y servicios desde 
la perspectiva del proteccionismo. Esto no solo es loable sino digno de destacar en esta oportunidad. 
4.286.  Guatemala ha formulado una serie de preguntas relacionadas con el examen de política 
comercial de la Unión Europea, las cuales han sido trasladadas oportunamente y de antemano agradecemos sus respuestas a las mismas. 
4.287.  Entre los puntos abordados en nuestros cuestionamientos podemos mencionar la 
preocupación por el alcance que tendría la facultad que poseen los países que conforman la Unión 
Europea para establecer medidas unilaterales que puedan afectar al comercio. 
4.288.  Adicionalmente, se menciona en el informe de la Secretaría la adopción de parte de la 
Unión Europea de medidas de sostenimiento de mercado interno, lo cual puede impactar en el flujo 
comercial con terceros al tener como uno de  sus objetivos la reducción de la oferta. 
4.289.  Otra preocupación que ha sido abordada es el hecho de que hayan casos concretos en los 
que el mercado de contratación pública de la UE puede estar cerrado para los licitadores WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 43 - 
 
  extranjeros de terceros países, según la Directiva sobre servicios públicos y la Directiva de 
Defensa. 
4.290.  En términos generales, reconocemos los esfuerzos de la Unión Europea en importantes 
áreas y esperamos que estos esfuerzos vayan progresivamente alcanzando los objetivos que se 
han planteado. 
TRINIDAD  AND  TOBAGO 
4.291.  Trinidad and Tobago values its longstanding ties with the European Union that extend 
across historical, cultural and economic spheres. These strong ties have without a doubt fuelled 
our vibrant trade relationship, in which the EU is Trinidad and Tobago’s second largest trading partner. The cornerstone of our trading relationsh ip is the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) 
signed in October 2008. The Agreement, which covers the areas of Services, Investment, Goods 
and Development cooperation has the potential to contribute significantly to Trinidad and Tobago’s 
and all member States of the Caribbean Forum’s (CARIFORUM) integration into the Multilateral Trading System.   
4.292.  In his opening remarks this morning, Deputy D-G Balas stated that the EU attaches great 
importance to the nexus between trade and developm ent. Trinidad and Tobago can attest to this. 
The EU is also a reliable development partner, o ffering important support to Trinidad and Tobago’s 
efforts for achieving sustainable development. Initiatives related to this support include, inter alia , 
(1) allocation of 16 million euros for the Enabling Competitive Business in Trinidad and Tobago programme, which is aimed at supporting the Government’s effort to diversify the economy into one that is less dependent on the energy sector and (2) allocation of over 75 million euros to 
strengthen our Agricultural strategy, which is aimed primarily at increasing local food production.  
4.293.  The EU’s commitment to partnering with developing countries and LDCs to promote their 
economic growth and development is also highli ghted by the fact that the EU is the largest 
provider of Aid for Trade in the world and is th e greatest importer of goods from developing 
countries (as the Deputy D-G shared with us this morning).   
4.294.  With regard to its macroeconomic policies, Trinidad and Tobago commends the EU for the 
range of strategies it has adopted to promote growth and economic recovery. These include, 
among others, the renewed Industrial policy that seeks to step up investment into new technologies and give Europe a competitive lead in the new industrial revolution; emphasis on small and medium enterprises (SMEs) as engines of growth and revitalization; and the Single 
Market Act-II, which proposes 12 levers and key actions to promote growth, employment, social 
cohesion and confidence. 
4.295.  I wish to focus on the EU’s commitment to the Multilateral Trading System. Many are 
calling this commitment into question in light of the ambitious free trade agreements it is 
negotiating across the globe, not least among them the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the United States, which would be the biggest bilateral deal ever 
negotiated.  t is with this in mind that my delegation welcomed the statement in the EU’s Report 
that the “WTO is the multilateral bedrock of the EU Trade Policy”. In addition, we noted its statement that the 9th Ministerial Conference “must deliver tangible results to preserve and strengthen the Multilateral Trading System”. In this regard, Trinidad and Tobago hopes that the EU 
would show leadership and compromise on key issues of interest to developing Members, 
particularly, the weakest and most vulnerable, namely Food Security, the Development issues and Special and Differential treatment in Trade Facilitation. 
ECUADOR 
4.296.  El Ecuador y la Unión Europea han creado en los últimos años normativa en materia 
comercial, que han tenido por propósito la consecución de objetivos de desarrollo al mismo tiempo 
que los alinea con sus compromisos internacionales multilaterales. La intervención gubernamental 
en el sistema bancario luego de la crisis fue una muestra de la importancia que tienen los espacios de política pública cuando se trata de conciliarlos con objetivos de desarrollo nacional o, en este 
caso, regional. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 44 - 
 
  4.297.  La importancia de la Unión Europea como destino de las exportaciones del Ecuador es 
indiscutible. La participación de la UE en las importaciones del Ecuador pasó del 9% en 2010 a 10% en 2011 y 11,5% en 2012. Por su parte, las exportaciones del Ecuador se concentraron en la UE de la siguiente manera 13% en 2010 a 12 % en 2011 y 10% en 2012, lo que evidencia una 
reducción de la concentración de nuestras exportaciones en ese mercado. 
4.298.  Los principales destinos de exportación para los productos ecuatorianos en la UE fueron 
Italia, España, Alemania y Reino Unido. 
4.299.  El arancel promedio consolidado por la UE es actualmente del 6,5%; donde los productos 
no agrícolas reciben una protección que promedia el 4,4% y llega a un máximo de 26%; por su parte los productos agrícolas reciben una protección que rodea el 15% y llega a un máximo cercano al 200%. Lo que es elevado para un Miembro desarrollado. En adición, la Unión Europea 
mantiene aranceles específicos o compuestos para más de 300 partidas, dentro de las cuales 
productos como el azúcar son objeto de complejo s aranceles técnicos cuya protección rebasa el 
100% en términos ad valorem . Aprovechamos esta oportunidad para invitar a la Unión Europea 
para que, en la medida que sus políticas públicas lo permitan, convierta sus aranceles a términos 
ad valorem  conforme al principio de simplificación ya los objetivos de la Ronda de Doha. 
4.300.  Si bien en agricultura, los programas de ayuda desvinculados de los precios o de la 
cantidad de producción han ganado terreno respecto de otras medidas causantes de mayor 
distorsión, los niveles de ayuda total siguen siendo cuantiosos y disuaden a los agricultores de países en desarrollo de su actividad productiva al excluirles de la posibilidad de competir en un marco igualitario. 
4.301.  Todavía se puede observar progresividad arancelaria en el comercio NMF así como en el 
comercio preferencial unilateral. Mientras las mercancías semielaboradas pagan un arancel promedio del 4,9%, las mercancías elaboradas enfrentan un arancel de 7,3%. Esto mantiene la 
brecha en los términos de intercambio con países en desarrollo quienes se ven relegados a la 
provisión de materias primas. 
4.302.  La adopción de estrictas normas técnicas y de rígidas medidas en materia de inocuidad 
alimentaria plantea graves problemas de acceso para los productos provenientes de países en 
desarrollo. La proliferación de estándares privados en ambas áreas han creado una nueva serie de barreras que escasamente se basan en estándares internacionales de organizaciones reconocidas; y que deben franquear los exportadores a pesar de sus altos costos a fin de ingresar al mercado 
europeo. 
4.303.  Ecuador hace votos por que este examen de las políticas comerciales de la Unión Europea 
sirva para mejorar el acceso a su mercado, en especial para productos agrícolas provenientes de 
países en desarrollo; para que se revise los programas de estímulo y ayudas internas; así como 
para rexaminar sus normas técnicas y medidas sanitarias y fitosanitarias. 
THAILAND 
4.304.  The European Union is Thailand’s fourth largest trading partner. From 2010-2012, our 
trade value averaged at US$39.8 billion per year. In 2012, we traded at approximately US$41.8 billion, a slight decrease from 2011. The Euro pean Union is also Thailand's second largest 
investor. 
4.305.  Thailand has developed a solid bilateral rela tionship with the European Union over the past 
years. Senior officers of the two sides have met to discuss important issues of mutual concerns on a regular basis, with the last being held in Bangkok in September of last year.   
4.306.  One notable event early this year has been the conclusion between Thailand and the 
European Union of a Framework Agreement on Part nership and Cooperation. Last month, Thailand 
and the European Union began negotiations to strengthen the bilateral trade relationship on 
market access of goods and services, investment, and other areas. Thailand is looking forward to 
continuing its positive dialogue with the European Union. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 45 - 
 
  4.307.  Business people of the EU and Thailand have also established good trade and commercial 
relationship through the Thailand-EU Business Council and different councils and committees with several EU Member States.  
4.308.  Within a multilateral trade perspective, the European Union has shown leadership and 
actively participated in the WTO. Now with 28 member States, the European Union has proven to 
be a highly integrated economic model, demanding a high level of coordination among its member States in the area of trade and economic policy . Thailand wishes to congratulate the European 
Union for its efforts to introduce transparency into its trade rules and procedures, and its support 
of the multilateral trading system, especially at this challenging time for global economic and financial system. 
4.309.  Thailand would like to express some conc erns regarding the complexity of the European 
Union’s taxation system and technical regulations, including SPS measures. We would like to urge 
the European Union to simplify these systems so th at market operators can fully enjoy the benefits 
of trade. We would also like to express our co ncern about the European Union’s export subsidies 
on sugar remains. Thailand will continue to follow closely the situation of the European Union’s 
sugar export policy. 
BARBADOS 
4.310.  The European Union has been recognized as the world largest trading block and the world’s 
largest economy. We note that since its last revi ew, the block has registered increases in both its 
import and export trade as a group. 
4.311.  However, like many of the world’s economie s, the EU has been negatively affected by the 
2008 global economic crisis. The EU Secretariat’s Re port credits the causes of the financial crisis 
to, among other things, a lack of fiscal reform amidst easy access to credit and low borrowing costs. This was aggravated by a decline in competitiveness in some EU member States owing to 
the relatively sudden increases in their unit labour costs and real effective exchange rate. Despite 
the fact that the EU experienced a fall in growth , higher rates of unemployment and that the more 
severely affected EU economies experienced down grades of their banks and governments, it has 
been reported that the EU has not retreated to protectionism. Barbados therefore commends the 
EU on its resistance to protectionism and notes their efforts to remedy the effects of the crisis by reducing public deficits and improving on economic governance. 
4.312.  We note the EU’s commitment to the multilateral trading system as is evidenced in its 
engagement within the various WTO negotiating fora. We would also wish to commend the EU on 
the work it has done within its integration movement as, despite stresses, it has become a model for the entire world. Although the financial crisis  has brought to the fore some of the economic 
differences amongst EU countries, it has also highlighted some of the benefits of such a complex 
integration block. From the report, we have seen that the main export market for the EU continues to be its member States and in 2010. More generally, two thirds of the EU’s trade in goods and 
services takes place within the EU and the EU is  identified as the world’s largest supplier and 
recipient of FDI. As the EU member States seek to deepen their integration, it is expected that the EU will negotiate more expansive treaties but we expect that they will continue their commitment 
to the multilateral trade system. 
4.313.  We note that the future outlook for the EU in 2013 reveals that current trends will persist. 
But we have noted the preparation of a growth strategy. We therefore wish the EU well in the implementation of its growth strategy “Europe an 2020”, which is aimed at achieving growth 
through the establishment of national targets in the areas of employment innovation, education, 
social inclusion and climate/energy across the EU member states. Strong growth in the EU is beneficial to the world.  
4.314.  Barbados shares a particularly significant relationship with the EU as a group, through the 
ACP and also bilaterally with individual countries of the EU. In this regard, Barbados and the EU 
share strong cordial relations with each other at the international, bilateral and national level. The extent of the relationship is wide and includ es elements of policy, trade and development. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 46 - 
 
  4.315.  In 2008 Barbados and our sister countries that comprise the Caribbean Forum 
(CARIFORUM) and the EU signed the CARIFORU M-EC Economic Partnership Agreement – a 
comprehensive trade and development agreement. This agreement redefined the relationship which existed between the CARIFORUM countries and the EU as the trade relationship between the 
parties is now governed by a reciprocal agreement.  Barbados is in the process of implementing the 
provisions of the EPA both at the national and regional levels with the aim of increasing the competitiveness of our products with export potential to bolster foreign exchange earnings. 
4.316.  In light of Barbados’ situation as an op en, small and vulnerable economy, Barbados’ trade 
with the EU continues to be concentrated in a few products and with a few EU member States. Traditionally, the United Kingdom has attracted the largest share of Barbados’ merchandise exports within the EU and this continued to be the case during the 2010-2012 review period. In 
2012, 75% of Barbados exports to the EU entered the UK market. Similarly, the concentration of 
EU import in Barbados originated in the UK. As our main trading partners continue their slow recovery from the crisis, so too has Barbados’ tourism trade which continues to be negatively 
impacted by the global economic crisis and the ensuing recession.  
4.317.  We commend the EU on its contributions to Aid for Trade (AfT) and ordinary development 
assistance (ODA) for developing countries and applaud the EU for being the largest donor to both 
of these technical assistance and cooperation programmes. The EU’s contribution amounted to 
more than 50% of the global contributions of OD A and 32% of AfT contributions. This is highly 
commendable. 
4.318.  Barbados looks forward to working with the EU on ways at making cooperation and 
technical and financial assistance more efficient and effective as we seek to further integrate into 
the multilateral trading system. 
4.319.  I would like to take this opportunity to give credit to the role which the EU Ambassador 
Angelos Pangratis, has played in the WTO and in the Geneva process. He often brings much 
needed balance to our deliberations. 
BÉNIN 
4.320.  Suite à l'adoption et la mise en œuvre des mesures de gouvernance économique et 
financière initiées par les instances européennes dans le cadre de la gestion de la crise économique et financière, l'économie de l'Union européenne enregistrera un taux de croissance de 1,5% en 2014. 
4.321.  Tout en saluant les efforts de redressement économique ainsi déployés, la délégation du 
Bénin forme le vœu que ces bonnes perspectives économiques se poursuivent. 
4.322.  La délégation du Bénin souhaite également que l'Union européenne poursuive sa 
contribution aux travaux de négociations commerciales multilatérales du Cycle de Doha, pour 
conforter la dimension de développement qui doit aller de pair avec celle commerciale. 
4.323.  Au titre du secteur spécifique des négociations sur le coton, le Bénin et les autres pays 
co-auteurs de l'Initiative Sectorielle en faveur du Coton exhortent l'Union européenne et les autres 
grands acteurs impliqués à imprimer l'élan et l'engagement nécessaires en vue de l'atteinte des objectifs fixés. 
4.324.  La délégation du Bénin remercie l'Union européenne pour l'assistance technique et 
financière qu'elle accorde à la République du Bénin dans ses efforts de lutte contre la pauvreté et 
pour la réalisation des Objectifs du Millénaire pour le Développement (OMD). 
VIET
 NAM 
4.325.  We are all aware that the European Union has faced the sovereign-debt crisis and 
economic slowdown for the years under review. In  this situation, the EU has adopted important 
decisions to strengthen its capacity to overcome such challenges. We believe that this TPR session 
will be helpful in providing us an overall picture of measures put into place during the crisis and 
how these measures contribute to the improvement and recovery of the EU's economy. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 47 - 
 
  4.326.  In recent years, the trade and economic  relationship between Viet Nam and the EU has 
developed significantly. Bilateral trade between Viet Nam and the EU has sharply increased from 
US$4.1 billion in 2000 to US$29.1 billion in 2012. Last year, the EU gained the first position of destination for Vietnamese exports and became the second biggest trading partner of Viet Nam. 
Our major exports to the EU's market include garm ents and textile, footwear, coffee, seafood and 
computers. In terms of investment, by May 2013, the EU had 1338 on-going projects in Viet Nam with registered capital at US$17.293 billion. In 2012 only, the EU members have invested 140 new 
projects in Viet Nam with registered capital at over US$1.03 billion. The EU's investment has been 
focused on industries with high technology and recently targeted on service sector. 
4.327.  Viet Nam and the EU are very keen to fu rther enhance our economic and trade relationship 
which is already flourishing. The signing f the Partnership and Co-operation Agreement (PCA) 
between Viet Nam and the EU in 2012 evidences ou r strong commitment to such an enhancement. 
In addition, Viet Nam and EU has also launched a free trade negotiation with the ambition of concluding a comprehensive agreement that incl udes not only market opening commitments but 
also other trade related issues like investment, environment, competition, sustainable 
development, etc. 
4.328.  Taking this opportunity we would like to ex press our high appreciation of the preferential 
market access provided by the EU through the Ge neralized System of Preferences to developing 
countries including Viet Nam. We encourage the EU to further open its markets to our exports which will considerably contribute to the bilateral trade volume increase. 
4.329.  We welcome the EU's commitment to the successful conclusion of the negotiations within 
Doha Development Agenda. More than that, we would very much like to see a more active role of 
the EU at the upcoming WTO Minister Conference in  Bali and in the multilateral trading system as 
well. 
4.330.  The first trade policy review of Viet Nam under WTO will take place on 
17-19 September 2013. We wish to receive comprehensive interests from the EU as one of our most important trading partners about Viet Nam's recent trade policy developments since Viet 
Nam's accession to the WTO in 2007 and warmly welcome any questions from the EU on related 
issues. 
ICELAND 4.331.  Iceland is certainly one of the 80 countries that count the EU as its most important trading 
partner. In 2012, around 75% of the value of our merchandise exports went to the EEA; the 
number was 45% for our imports. These figures are even higher today since they do not account for Croatia, which became an EU member ea rlier this month. Congratulations Croatia. 
4.332.  But our relationship goes much deeper than mere trade. Next year we celebrate the 20th 
anniversary of our full participation in the EU in ternal market, where we cooperate on a host of 
issue through the EEA Agreement. 
4.333.  Iceland is also a candidate country to the EU. And while our accession process is currently 
under review, I would like to reiterate my government's strong commitment to strengthening our relationship, not least in the field of trade. 
4.334.  Iceland appreciates the role played by the EU at the multilateral trading level. The EU is 
our natural ally on many issues in the WTO, and we look forward to continue our excellent 
relations on a broad range of issues. (Here I could mention the ITA negotiation round, TISA, the GPA, etc.). 
4.335.  Since the last Trade Policy, the EU has had its hands full with the financial and sovereign 
debt crises. We are certainly no stranger to dealing with the effects of the financial crisis, and we f o l l o w  t h e  E U  p r o c e s s  v e r y  c l o s e l y .  W e  u r g e  t h e  E U  t o  c o n t i n u e  t a k i n g  s t e p s  t o  r e d u c e  p u b l i c  
deficits and improve economic governance. The right balance of reforms will pay off in the long-
term, and we are heartened to see better growth projections in the coming years. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 48 - 
 
  4.336.  I would also add that despite low growth rates in recent year – along with other worrying 
trends such as high unemployment in certain member states – we commend the EU on refraining from using protectionist measures as a policy tool. 
4.337.  But we did not come here just to offer compliments and congratulations. Like all close 
partners, we have occasional disagreements and points of friction that require our attention, and 
when it comes to trade, the TPR is the appropriate forum to raise them. 
4.338.  But we will limit our remarks and questions to one issue today: namely fish. 
4.339.  First, Iceland remains concerned with the Regulation passed last year on certain measures 
in relation to countries allowing non-sustainable fishing for the purpose of the conservation of fish stocks. The scope of the Regulation, if applied, would put the EU in breach of its international obligations. Iceland remains committed to finding a fair and equitable solution to the current 
mackerel dispute. But we will also respond thro ugh all available legal means should the EU apply 
some of the broad range of provisions available to them in this Regulation, including in the WTO. 
4.340.  Second, Iceland is troubled by the recent treatment of international cargo in certain EU 
p o r t s .  T h e  t r a n s h i p m e n t  o f  w h a l e  m e a t  t o  t h e  J a p a n e s e  m a r k e t  i s  i n  f u l l  a c c o r d a n c e  w i t h  
international law and we question the legal basis for stopping the shipment. 
4.341.  Third, we are closely following the reform  of the Common Fisheries Policy and are pleased 
that the overall onus is on more sustainable and longer term management. We especially support 
the discard ban. However, we are concerned that efforts to overcome overcapacity and overfishing 
will fall short if practices such as subsidies for fleet renewal continue. Could the EU elaborate on the current state of play regarding trade distorting practices such as subsidies to their fisheries 
fleet? 
4.342.  The launch of free trade negotiations between the EU and the United States has the 
potential to impact all WTO Members in significant ways; even more for Members dependent on 
these two markets like Iceland. We will follow de velopments closely and reiterate our wish to be 
consulted throughout the process. 
NIGERIA 
4.343.  Nigeria notes that the European Union Trade Policy is always an event of special attention 
and importance to the entire Membership of the WTO, since EU is the biggest trading partner of 
many of the WTO Members. In that regard, Nigeri a welcomes EU’s further Trade liberalization and 
measures that are aimed at implementing the EU Trade Policy that would ensure transparency, 
openness and increased trade. We also note that the focus of the EU in the past two years has 
been on the financial crisis and there have been relatively few changes to its trade policies, laws or institutions in other areas since its last trade policy review. We agree with the Secretariat report 
that there has been no retreat into protectionism, which is a positive sign of EU’s economy. As 
indicated the causes of the crisis were lack of appropriate fiscal reforms in a context of easy access to credit and low borrowing costs relative to economic growth for government and the private 
sector which resulted in unsustainable levels of private and /or public sector debt and some banks 
exposure to such debt. A related factor that exacerbated the crisis was a decline in competitiveness in some member states as their unit labour cost and real effective exchange rates rose relatively quickly’. In this connection, we welcome the steps being taken by both the EU and 
member States levels to reduced public defi cit and improve economic governance. The full 
implementation of the measures is expected to support economic recovery in 2013 and 2014.   
4.344.  My delegation notes from the Secretariat Report that in terms of Customs procedures, the 
EU has been steadily moving towards an EU-wide system of electronic procedures with centralized 
clearance, with ultimate deadline of 2020. Single authorization for simplified procedures became more widely used during the review period. As further stated for goods coming from outside the 
EU, it is now possible to complete customs formalities at the post of arrival when the destination is 
another member State while an “Entry Summary Declaration” may now be lodged at the destination instead of at the point of first entry. And the first project of the single window is expected to be in place in 2014. These measures will help to streamline and low transaction costs 
and we therefore encourage the EU to continue to adopt and to implement similar measures, WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 49 - 
 
  including the enforcement of objective practices and procedures for clearance of goods in transit 
throughout the EU. 
4.345.  In the area of IPR, we note that the EU is continuing with a comprehensive process of 
reviewing and developing the existing body of legislation in order to move towards a coherent and 
balanced overall Framework. We have learned th at the EC has prepared a draft regulation to 
implement an international protocol to prevent bio-piracy (the Nagoya protocol). Nigeria would like to know the status of genetic resources, in part icular, non-European genetic resources already in 
European collections. It would also be interesting, if the EU could shade light whether the draft 
regulation contains any requirement for patent applicants to disclose the origin of biological materials and traditional knowledge used in their inventions, prior informed consent and benefits sharing arrangement with the countries of origin and relevant local communities.    
4.346.  The EU and its member States are among the leading providers for Aid for Trade. In this 
context, Nigeria welcomes the EU joint strategy on Aid for Trade in 2007. The strategy aims to 
support developing countries to better integrate into the rules based world trading system and to 
use trade more effectively in promoting the overreaching objective of eradicating poverty. We 
commend the effort of the EU and its member States for providing annual report on Aid for Trade spending and implementation. This effort is an indication of the transparent manner that the EU 
has been providing Aid for Trade.  
4.347.  Nigeria attaches great importance to its bilateral trade relations with the European Union 
which have been progressively expanding over the years through several initiative on issues of 
mutual interest and the friendship of our peoples. The relations has been characterized by 
cooperation and trust between our leaders, and we look forward to our countries making a strong 
steady progress in addressing the important issues that would make the World a better and more secure place to live. Nigeria along with other countries in the ECOWAS region are presently 
engaged in negotiations on an EPA with the EU in  order not only to deepen the existing level of 
corporation but to established a mutually beneficial trading arrangement that is consistent with our economic interest and levels of development. We therefore, continue to look forward to an 
enduring partnership with the EU that is ge ared towards assisting Nigeria and other ECOWAS 
countries to deepen their regional integration initiatives and successfully address the development challenges. 
4.348.  In conclusion, Nigeria would like to acknow ledge the critical role played by the EU in the 
Multilateral Trading System. In that regard, we wish to commend the important role being played 
by Ambassador Angelos and his colleagues here in Geneva. It is our expectation that the EU would provide the necessary leadership that would lead a successful outcome at Bali. 
URUGUAY 
4.349.  La UE tradicionalmente ha sido un mercado de gran importancia para el Uruguay. Los 
países de la UE absorben alrededor del 20% del to tal de exportaciones de Uruguay al mundo por lo 
que se trata de un mercado de gran relevancia.  
4.350.  Las exportaciones de Uruguay a la UE están compuestas sobre todo por productos 
agropecuarios de alta calidad tales como carne vacuna enfriada y congelada, lanas, maderas, cereales, cueros y pieles tratados, frutas frescas, pescados, oleaginosos y aceites comestibles, etc. 
4.351.  Por otro lado, Uruguay importa productos manufacturados desde la UE como máquinas, 
equipos eléctricos, fertilizantes, productos farmac éuticos, productos químicos, plásticos, entre 
otros. La UE es extremadamente importante para Uruguay para el suministro de bienes de capital 
e insumos de la industria manufacturera. 
4.352.  Por otro lado se destaca que la presencia de empresas europeas en Uruguay en los 
sectores de manufacturas y en servicios ha ido creciendo ocupando hoy un lugar de gran 
importancia en sectores estratégicos en el país como las telecomunicaciones, los servicios 
portuarios y la energía. Creemos que esto demuestra la apertura y transparencia del Uruguay a la inversión privada, nacional y extranjera, y en particular europea y también el posicionamiento de Uruguay como centro logístico en América del Sur y puerta de entrada al MERCOSUR. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 50 - 
 
  4.353.  Con respecto a la situación actual de la política comercial de la UE y la coyuntura presente 
cabe hacer las siguientes observaciones. 
4.354.  Notoriamente se registra el efecto de la recesión sobre la demanda de importaciones 
europeas desde Uruguay. Si bien la UE no ha adoptado medidas de corte proteccionista de tipo 
arancelario o administrativo (licencias), en línea con los acuerdos del G-20 se destaca un creciente 
número de barreras técnicas, la mayoría de ellas vinculadas al comercio de productos agrícolas que contribuyen a dificultar las ventas hacia los mercados europeos incluso de productos con 
corrientes comerciales tradicionales. 
4.355.  En el mismo sentido operan los efectos de las políticas de ajuste del gasto, que deprimen 
la demanda interna no sólo de importaciones sino también de bienes locales. 
4.356.  En agricultura y en particular en muchos productos que conforman la oferta exportadora 
de Uruguay hacia la UE se observa una creciente politización de las barreras no arancelarias al 
comercio, particularmente en el uso y adopción de medidas sanitarias, fitosanitarias y de corte medio ambiental. Al respecto, el acceso al mercado europeo podría verse seriamente afectado por 
una tendencia a orientar las conclusiones científicas en función de preocupaciones más bien de 
corte político. 
4.357.  Esta tendencia puede observarse en el establecimiento de límites máximos de residuos, 
prohibición de ciertas sustancias, OGMs, huella ambiental y de carbono, entre otras medidas. La 
proliferación de normas privadas también puede tener un efecto negativo sobre el comercio y afectar el “ambiente” para el comercio. 
4.358.  Desde el punto de vista comercial, si bien luego de la caída pos-crisis inicial registrada por 
las exportaciones uruguayas en el año 2009 se retomó el crecimiento hasta 2011, las ventas 
uruguayas nuevamente cayeron en 2012 a los niveles del 2009. Desde entonces el saldo comercial favorable para Uruguay se viene reduciendo  año en año hasta alcanzar valores negativos en el 
2012 y esperamos que esta tendencia cambie en el 2013.  
4.359.  La tendencia alcista de los cinco principales productos exportados a la UE por Uruguay se 
interrumpe en el 2012 mostrando valores estancados (en madera y carne) o en descenso (para el 
resto). 
4.360.  En el corto plazo, las medidas adoptadas a nivel comunitario en relación con el SGP no 
deberían afectar significativamente los grandes números de nuestro comercio con la UE. Sin embargo, tendrán definitivamente un fuerte impacto sobre algunos sectores, cuyas exportaciones 
se dirigen históricamente en forma importante a ese mercado. Tales son los casos de los cítricos 
(con casi el 80% de sus exportaciones a la UE), la pesca, la carne equina y los cueros destinados a la industria automotriz.  
4.361.  A esto se agrega al impacto de decisiones no vinculadas con la crisis, como el fallo de la 
Corte Europea de Justicia en relación a los OGM en cultivos atractivos para las abejas. En el caso de la miel las ventas uruguayas que tenían una tradición en el mercado alemán han casi 
desaparecido. Y las exportaciones de este rubro continúan suspendidas de hecho luego de 2 años. 
4.362.  Si bien su impacto es menor en cuantía, la “graduación” Uruguay en el marco de la política 
de cooperación de la UE reduce las opciones para el financiamiento de acciones que han tenido un significativo impacto cualitativo, como lo son los programas “Uruguay Integra”, orientado a 
profundizar la cohesión social, y “Uruguay Innova”, dirigido a desarrollar y consolidar un sistema 
nacional de innovación, ambos factores clave en contribuir al desarrollo sustentable. 
4.363.  Uruguay continuará haciendo los máximos esfuerzos por cumplir la normativa europea 
para acceso al mercado aunque estas normas deberían acompasarse al principio científico y ser 
razonables. Y aquí nos referimos particularmente al ingreso de la carne, donde la certeza jurídica en SPS sigue siendo la mayor garantía que se le puede brindar a los proveedores como Uruguay. 
4.364.  Por otra parte, cabe señalar que para Uruguay la negociación del Acuerdo UE-MERCOSUR 
sigue siendo prioritaria y realizará todos los esfuerzos para una conclusión exitosa, equilibrada y WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 51 - 
 
  ambiciosa del mismo. Este Acuerdo puede ser un cable de energía para el MERCOSUR pero 
también para la UE. 
4.365.  Cabe destacar el desarrollo positivo que significó para Uruguay la habilitación para el 
ingreso de carnes de alta calidad a la llam ada cuota 481. Uruguay ha depositado grandes 
expectativas en la misma y ya empieza a desarrollarse una corriente comercial de importancia. 
4.366.  La UE es un proceso de integración exitoso que sigue siendo atractivo y ello se demuestra 
en la reciente adhesión de Croacia. En tal sentido esperamos poder conversar a la brevedad con la 
UE el impacto de este ingreso en las corrientes comerciales de Uruguay con Croacia. 
4.367.  Uruguay apela a la capacidad de liderazgo de la UE para seguir trabajando en la conclusión 
exitosa de la Ronda de Doha. En este sentido mi país reitera su compromiso a trabajar con toda la membrecía para lograr los resultados exitosos que permitan establecer un sistema multilateral del 
comercio justo, equilibrado, previsible y que beneficie a todos los miembros. 
4.368.  En una nota personal quiero destacar la labor que viene realizando el distinguido 
Embajador Angelos Pangratis en las diferentes conversaciones que tienen lugar en esta casa, con 
miras a lograr las grandes reformas del sistema multilateral del comercio. 
HONDURAS 4.369.  La Unión Europea compuesta por sus 28 Estados miembros con la reciente adhesión de 
Croacia como nuevo miembro es el mayor bloque comercial del mundo. A pesar de la actual crisis 
económica y financiera, el comercio sigue representando el núcleo principal de sus resultados económicos globales, en el 2011 el comercio de bienes y servicios con el resto del mundo representó más del 33% del PIB. 
4.370.  El informe de la Secretaría expone que lo s dos últimos años la política de la UE se ha 
enfocado en la recuperación de las crisis financieras, sin embargo las reformas realizadas en las políticas comerciales, las leyes o las instituciones son pocas, no obstante, es motivo de gran 
satisfacción el hecho de que no se haya recurrido a la implementación de medidas proteccionistas.  
4.371.  Observamos con agrado que se están adoptando medidas, tanto a nivel comunitario como 
a nivel estatal, para reducir los déficits públicos y mejorar la gobernanza económica. Confiamos 
que la plena aplicación de esas medidas apoye la  recuperación económica en los próximos años. 
Por otra parte, en el 2010 la Comisión puso en marcha su estrategia de crecimiento "Europa 2020" para el siguiente decenio. En el marco de dicha estrategia, se establecieron cinco objetivos para el 2020, en materia de empleo, innovación, educació n, inclusión social, clima y energía. A nivel 
estatal, cada Estado miembro ha adoptado sus propios objetivos nacionales en cada una de esas 
esferas. 
4.372.  A nivel bilateral, no cabe duda la im portancia que tiene la Comunidad Europea en el 
comercio exterior de nuestro país, siendo el tercer socio comercial de Honduras. Asimismo, 
Honduras se beneficia de las preferencias que la UE otorga bajo el programa Sistema Generalizado de Preferencias-Plus (SGP+), a través del cual se favorece el acceso de los productos hondureños 
al mercado europeo mediante el sistema preferencial, lo que ha permitido incrementar nuestros 
volúmenes de comercio.  
4.373.  En junio de 2007 se iniciaron las negociaciones de un Acuerdo de Asociación entre la UE y 
los países de Centro América. Cabe destacar que es el primer acuerdo entre regiones que celebra 
la Unión Europea, en los aspectos políticos, cooperación y establecer una zona de libre comercio, 
mismo que se  firmó en Honduras en junio de 2012.  
4.374.  El 8 de noviembre del 2012, la Unión Europea y 11 países de América Latina, incluyendo 
Honduras, firmaron un acuerdo que incluye los nuevos compromisos de la UE en relación con el 
banano al igual que las establecidas por el Acuerdo de Ginebra sobre el comercio de banano. 
4.375.  Honduras agradece a la Unión Europea por la constante ayuda otorgada en áreas de 
cooperación económica y asistencia técnica la cual alcanza los 240 millones de dólares EE.UU. y WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 52 - 
 
  que son dirigidos principalmente a proyectos sociales. Dicha ayuda supone un gran esfuerzo, 
especialmente en tiempos de crisis como los actuales. 
KINGDOM  OF SAUDI  ARABIA 
4.376.  The Trade Policy Reports prepared by the EU and the Secretariat both highlight the 
economic and financial difficulties the European Union continue to be confronted to. Over the last 
two years, EU and Member States’ authorities have continued to focus their attention on the financial crisis that deeply affects their economies and have been implementing the much required 
reforms aimed at reducing public deficits and improving economic governance. 
4.377.  Their efforts are starting to pay off as the EU economy is expected to stabilize this year 
and to start picking up again next year. The EU is to be praised for not having adopted protectionist trade policies throughout the crisis to which it is confronted. 
4.378.  The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia encourages the EU and its member States to continue their 
macro-economic reforms to restore financial stability. As the world’s largest trading block, the EU has a very significant impact on all the trade and economic performance of all of it partners, 
particularly those that are the most vulnerable. The economic and financial reforms undertaken by 
the EU and its member States will first contribute to the recovery of the EU economy for the direct 
benefit of EU citizens and businesses but will have spill-over effects on the economies of all 
Members.    
4.379.  The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has a long established economic, political and cultural 
relationship with the EU and all of its member States. The bilateral relationship between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the EU is illustrative of the importance of trade for both partners, 
with year-over-year growth in EU exports to the Kingdom Saudi Arabia outstripping the average 
annual rate for EU exports overall, and the EU entrenching itself as our leading imports partner.  This trend is likely to continue as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia pursues the path of downstream 
economic diversification on which it has embarked. Saudi demand for machinery and transport 
equipment - already the largest category of Saud i imports from the EU - will most certainly 
continue to grow.   
4.380.  While generally welcoming the reforms undertaken by the EU and its member States over 
the last two years, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has concerns with some EU policies and measures affecting its economic diversification and development.   
4.381.  Because it qualifies as a high-income economy, starting from 1 January 2014, imports 
from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia into the EU will no longer have the benefit of the EU Generalized 
Scheme of Preferences (GSP). The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a developing country whose economy continues to be largely dependent on  some non-renewable natural resources.  
Industrialization and diversification is therefore essential for its development. The exclusion of 
Saudi imports from the benefit of the EU GSP syst em and the resulting increase in customs duties 
will make it more difficult for Saudi enterprises to export to the EU and to compete on fair and 
equal terms with other developing countries. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia encourages the EU to 
consider the overall development impact of its policies on all developing country Members and not to adapt measures that result in increased market access costs for their exports.  
4.382.  The importance of trade to the EU is reflected in its commitment to the WTO - in the EU’s 
words, the “multilateral bedrock” of its trade policy. This is equalled by its stated commitment to 
the successful conclusion of negotiations within the Doha Development Agenda (DDA). The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is confident that the EU will continue to show leadership in the crucial 
time ahead and do its part as we strive to finally bring the DDA to a successful conclusion.  
ZIMBABWE
  
4.383.   The EU signed an Interim Economic Partnership Agreement with four Eastern and 
Southern Africa (ESA) States namely, Zimbabwe, Madagascar, Seychelles, and Mauritius in 2009. 
The Interim EPA was implemented in May 2012. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 53 - 
 
  4.384.  The EU is Zimbabwe's second largest trading partner and the country started opening its 
markets to EU imports in January 2013. 
4.385.  The country had a positive trade balanc e with the EU between 2007 and 2011, a period 
when our trade balance with the rest of the world was declining.  
4.386.  Zimbabwe is concerned about the EU’s increasing partnerships with third parties as this 
will result in preference erosion. Our delegation would be interested to know what measures the EU will put in place to limit the impact of thes e partnerships on our preferences and to ensure 
compliance with the Multilateral Trading System. 
4.387.  Regarding trade in sugar, Zimbabwe is exporting to the EU on a duty-free quota-free 
market access basis and has been able to export  higher volumes of sugar from 2010 to 2012. We 
hope that EU’s Import regime post 2015 will pr omote a fair, stable and reasonably remunerative 
market price, guaranteed priority of access, lo ng-term predictability and a stable and balanced 
market.  
4.388.  The EU’s CAP reforms should move towards market orientation and modify the policy on 
cotton subsidies to bring it in line with commitments in the WTO. More extensive reductions to the 
subsidies granted to its producers should be applied in order to achieve a 100% decoupling. We call upon the EU to identify an alternative instrument other than the tied payments to its farmers. 
4.389.  Our delegation is greatly concerned about the EU’s proposed Tobacco Products Directive 
which is trade restrictive and violates WTO rules. The directive will also negatively impact on our economy and we call upon the EU to consider our concerns and adopt less trade restrictive measures. 
4.390.  Our delegation notes with great appreciation EU's commitment to the Multilateral Trading 
System and its increasing role in the Aid for Tr ade Agenda. We look forward to EU’s growing  
assistance towards trade related programmes to enable us improve their efficiencies, productive 
capacity, value chain analysis, export support measures, standardization and research and 
development in order to mitigate the impact of  the EU amendments to ACP-EU trade regimes. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 54 - 
 
  5  REPLIES BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND ADDITIONAL 
COMMENTS 
5.1.  I would like to say from the outset that I am very grateful for the constructive statements 
that were made on Tuesday by our discussant, Ambassador Yeend and no less than 
40 Delegations. They were extremely useful and ha ve helped me to identify a number of salient 
features which I will seek to address today. Ma ny interventions were based on the Secretariat’s 
Report, we have all clearly benefited from the high quality work that Richard Eglin, John Finn and 
their colleagues have produced in preparation of our meeting.  
5.2.  Let me start with broader macroeconomic issues. On Tuesday, many Members underlined 
that the EU, due to its sheer size and economic weight, was inevitably having an impact on the world as a whole and that the current EU difficul ties therefore mattered to other WTO Members as 
well. This is a message we recognize and I would like to assure you that we are very conscious of 
the particular responsibility which our status of the world’s largest economic and trading entity brings with it.  
5.3.  As was mentioned by many of you, th e EU has drawn the lessons from the economic, 
financial and sovereign debt crisis. On that basis we have undertaken a major overhaul of both the EU’s and the Economic and Monetary Union’s ec onomic governance, and I think everybody here 
has recognized that we had done a lot in view of the circumstances.  
5 . 4 .   A s  i s  n o r m a l  i n  t h i s  k i n d  o f  e x e r c i s e ,  h o w e v e r ,  s o m e  o f  y o u  h a v e  b e e n  c r i t i c a l  a n d  h a v e  
stated that they thought the EU should do more – in particular in terms of using trade policy as a 
leverage to overcome economic difficulties. I think that both our policy statements and our actions 
testify that we are doing everything possible to us e trade policy tools to achieve economic growth.  
5.5.  On Tuesday I have also heard many requests  for the EU to take supplementary steps in the 
context of unilateral trade liberalization, related notably to the level of our tariffs and to our 
support to agriculture. Here I would like to be very  clear about one thing which I will come back to 
in a moment: the EU cannot deliver the Doha Round all on its own!  
NO RETREAT INTO PROTECTIONISM 
5.6.  The vast majority of Members commended the EU for having successfully resisted 
protectionist tendencies, despite the strong impact that the financial crisis continues to have on economic growth and unemployment in the EU. In this context, numerous Delegations hinted that 
a number of specific areas deserved more attention. 
AGRICULTURE 
5.7.  I am pleased that the reform process of th e CAP, undertaken over the last two decades, has 
been acknowledged by our Discussant and by many Delegations. It is worth recalling that the level 
of trade-distorting support has decreased tremen dously over time and the use of market price 
support measures is minimal. Successive reforms of the CAP have increased the market orientation of European agriculture, and for the pe riod 2014-2020 the CAP will continue along this 
successful path.  
5.8.  Some Members have expressed concerns ab out the voluntary coupled support which will be 
available in the future CAP. Let me give you some more explanation. Under the agreed plan it will 
be possible for EU Member States to use part of their national ceilings for direct payments to grant 
coupled support in certain sectors and regions where specific types of farming or specific 
agricultural sectors are particularly important for economic, environmental and/or social reasons. Applying coupled support will be optional for member States and limited to a certain level. 
Payments under voluntary coupled support will be based on fixed areas and yields or on a fixed 
number of animals. Most importantly, decoupled di rect payments will continue to represent the 
largest share of spending and the future CAP will continue to be fully in line with our WTO 
commitments.  
5.9.  Some Members have expressed concerns ab out the level and the structure of EU tariffs. 
Interestingly such criticism has also come from some Members who themselves maintain a high WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 55 - 
 
  level of agricultural protection or who have themselves resorted to sometimes significant tariff 
increases in the recent past. In this context let me state that successive CAP reforms were not intended to change EU tariffs. I would like to remind you that the EU is the world’s largest importer of agricultural products, with imports exceeding €102 billion in 2012. .  
5.10.  The EU only has a very limited number of tariff peaks. Non- ad valorem  tariffs (specific, 
compound, mixed and complex) are fully transparent and predictable. Their simplification was discussed in the context of the DDA but without any concrete outcome yet. In addition, in a 
situation of increasing agricultural prices, compared to ad valorem tariffs specific duties tended to 
see their relative levels go down. A successful conclusion of the DDA, to which the EU is fully committed, would among other things lead to major improvements in market access and domestic support. However, nobody can realistically expect the EU to make such a major concession in a 
unilateral manner.  
5.11.  As regards the export competition pillar, the phasing-out of export refunds could similarly 
only be part of the Single Undertaking. It must respect the concept of parallelism within the Export 
Competition pillar and linked to domestic suppo rt and market access issues under the Agreement 
on Agriculture and issues under othe r WTO agreements, such as TRIPS. 
5.12.  As regards the criticism of our exports of su gar, I would like to recall that the EU has never 
exceeded its WTO commitments and the relevant rules are applied in a manner consistent with the 
outcome of the past WTO disputes. 
5.13.  Mexico raised a specific question on tequila. I can confirm that the import duty applied to 
agave syrup is calculated according to its composition (including its sugar content). The calculation 
method applies uniformly across all EU member States and is publically-available (it is set out in 
Article 42(2) and (4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 951/2006 of 30 June 2006). 
5.14.  On cotton, I would like to respond to the De legation of Benin. As we all know, this issue is 
crucial for a number of LDCs. I can confirm that the EU already provides duty-free quota-free 
access to LDC imports and that it does not grant an y export subsidy. The EU has also reformed its 
domestic support to the sector – so this is clea rly an area where the EU has led by example. The 
EU could support any proposals in the DDA which captured and reflected the efforts we have 
already made.   
ANTI-DUMPING 5.15.  The Secretariat’s Report confirms that the EU is a modest user of antidumping measures, in 
particular when considered against the backgrou n d  o f  t h e  E U ’ s  s h a r e  i n  w o r l d  i m p o r t s .  S o m e  
Members raised concerns about the use by the EU of  trade defence instruments. I would like to be 
very clear about one thing: protection against unfair trade practices is not tantamount to 
protectionism. So while the EU is certainly not pursuing a protectionist agenda it will use existing 
WTO instruments to fight unfair international competition.  
5.16.  Among the Members raising concerns about our use of trade defence instruments, China 
claimed that it was being specifically targeted by the EU. I would like to clarify that China is by 
very far the largest source of EU imports. The existence of certain trade distortions that result from the important influence that the State has in the Chinese economy, may lead to a relatively higher number of trade defence investigations on imports from China. This being said, only a 
fraction (about 1%) of EU imports from China is subject to such measures.  
5.17.  Concerning specific question raised by Russia about the method of adjustment for energy 
costs, we have given detailed written replies.  
5.18.  We have also been asked some questions about our plans to reform our trade defence 
legislation. As I mentioned already on Tuesday, these draft reforms have the status of Commission legislative proposals. They are not adopted yet – but I can nevertheless indicate that their purpose 
is to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and transparency for all stakeholders of the related 
instruments.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 56 - 
 
  5.19.  Regarding Norway's question on the circ umstances under which the EU may decide not to 
use the lesser duty I want to clarify that our written reply of 9 July was correct. But again, since we are talking about a piece of draft legislation I would not want to prejudge the outcome of our legislative process.  
BILATERAL VS MULTILATERAL 
5.20.  Let me now turn to the points which several Delegates made about EU bilateral 
negotiations.  
5.21.  I want to underline again that our bilateral trade agenda is not and has never been 
conceived as an alternative to the multilateral trading system. We see our FTAs as stepping stones – not stumbling blocks – that could eventually contribute to the strengthening of the multilateral trading system. As some speakers also put it on Tuesday, progress in preferential arrangements 
has historically acted as a catalyst for future multilateral talks.  
5.22.  I would wish to reassure you that the EU is  acutely conscious of its responsibilities towards 
the multilateral trading system. In addition to en suring the full compatibility of our preferential 
agreements with WTO rules, the EU shall therefore also seek to ensure that the FTAs it is now 
negotiating with large trading partners are supportiv e of future progress at the multilateral level. 
5.23.  Regarding regulatory issues, a number of speakers have raised concerns about the fact that 
these would be negotiated among a limited number of large trading partners. Let me stress that 
the EU would have preferred to negotiate on such issues multilaterally in the first place – as demonstrated by the number of proposals we tabled  on NTBs in the Doha Round and in the review 
of the ITA. The fact that these proposals unfor tunately ended in a stalemate demonstrates how 
difficult it is to make progress on behind-the-border issues in the multilateral context. 
5.24.  Our Government Report presented a detailed view as to how bilateral progress on 
regulatory issues among a number of trading partners could have a systemic reach and act as a 
laboratory for filling the gaps in the multilateral rulebook. Indeed, whether by means of 
harmonisation of bilateral and regional rules or via the introduction of mutual recognition arrangements, regulatory cooperation among FTA partne rs will have positive spill over effects even 
on exports of third country partners that are not parties to these arrangements.  
REGULATORY ISSUES 5.25.  Speaking more specifically about regulatory  issues, let me now turn to the areas of TBT and 
SPS.  
5.26.  Several Members accused the EU of often using such measures for protectionist purposes. I 
must unequivocally refute such accusations.  
5.27.  First of all, EU regulations apply irrespec tive of the origin of the products. Since those 
measures affect equally both EU and foreign producers, they cannot create any artificial 
competitive advantage for the former and can therefore not be described as protectionist.  
5.28.  The EU pays maximum attention that TBT and SPS measures should not create unnecessary 
obstacles to trade or disproportionate burden fo r producers. In its legislative process, the EU 
evaluates the compatibility of the draft texts with its international trade obligations, including the TBT and SPS Agreements. We are convinced that  our Regulations are based on all available 
information, are well balanced and not more trade restrictive than necessary to fulfil their 
legitimate objectives. 
5.29.  Let me turn to the EU decision making system. On the one hand, some Members have 
criticized the EU for being too slow and taking too long time in adopting legislation and, on the 
other hand, other Members regretted that the EU was too quick in adopting legislation without 
sufficient consultation of third countries. Apart from the obvious contradiction that emerges from these statements, let me say that the EU’s legislative process is highly transparent. It gives 
numerous possibilities for stakeholder to express their positions which is not the case yet in many WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 57 - 
 
  WTO Members. Any legislative proposal is preceded by a mandatory 3-month public consultation 
process, which is open to stakehol ders also from third countries.  
5.30.  Turning to the specific area of REACH and its impact on SMEs, let me refer to a number of 
simplifications that have been brought to the syst em: simplification of the registration obligations 
for low tonnage substances, exemption of polyme rs from registration, reducing registration 
requirements for transported intermediates under certain conditions, establishing ECHA fee reductions. These measures are especially import ant for SMEs and they apply equally to both 
domestic and foreign firms. Registration of substances used in the 'upstream' processes and other 
obligations are directly applicable only to EU-based operators.  
5.31.  Some comments were made about the lack of translation of REACH-related documents in 
Spanish, but let me point out that Spanish being one of the EU official languages, all documents 
are available also in this language.  
5.32.  Turning to SPS measures, I would like to say that these are extensively harmonized within 
the EU and only very marginal areas are not harmonised. 
5.33.  Contrary to what has been mentioned by some, EU SPS measures are taken on the basis of 
a thorough risk analysis. In particular, maximum residue levels (MRLs) of pesticide residues, including import tolerances, are set on the basis of  a scientific opinion of the European Food Safety 
Authority (EFSA). In the EU like in other third co untries, MRLs are based on the actual use of a 
pesticide. If a particular pesticide is not used in the EU, it would be unreasonable to request the EU to replace default MRLs for a wide range of pesticides with some other arbitrary value. So the rule is that when there are no authorized uses for a pa rticular pesticide in the EU, MRLs are fixed at the 
lowest analytical level – the level of determination (LOD) - to give traders a form of legal certainty.  
5.34.  In so doing, the EU avoids the trade disrup tive 'zero tolerance' approach often used by other 
countries. An import tolerance may also be applied for – and granted by the EU - under the 
condition that there is no health risk for consumers and that the requested MRL is not higher than 
the one established in the third country. As regard s carbendazim in rice, we have replied to India 
in writing.  
5.35.  A number of comments were also made about ractopamine. The EU has a scientific 
justification for not following the recently adopted Codex standard on ractopamine. As the US is aware, this standard was adopted on the basis of a very narrow majority and after much controversy. The EU has repeatedly stated that there are no grounds upon which to determine 
MRLs for ractopamine. The EU position is based on the EFSA opinion on ractopamine, which is 
available on the organization’s website. 
ENVIRONMENT 
5.36.  A few Members raised questions related to the interaction between trade and environment. 
Concerning the Fuel Quality Directive I can respond to the Canadian concerns by confirming that the EU will take into account available informatio n on the emissions associated with different types 
of fuels in the context of the implementation of Article 7a). The EU recalls that it has organized 
extensive consultations on the issue and due account will be taken of the inputs received. In addition, an impact assessment is currently bein g conducted to inform the process of preparation 
and adoption of implementing measures under Article 7a). 
5.37.  Regarding biofuels, several Members have  asked questions about the calculation method 
used in determining their sustainability criteria. We have already provided detailed explanations and references to the respective EU pieces of legislation in our written replies.  
5.38.  Regarding exports of timber the EU adopted a Regulation which gives a legal basis for 
entering into voluntary partnership agreements with exporting countries, which aim to guarantee that the wood exported to the EU comes from legal sources and to support partner countries in 
improving their regulation of sustainable loggi ng. Six countries are developing the necessary 
systems, six are negotiating and 15 other countries  expressed their interest. The first imports of 
FLEGT licensed timber are expected in 2014. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 58 - 
 
  SERVICES 
5.39.  Regarding trade in services, some Members underlined that the EU was largely open and 
welcomed the EU efforts towards further financial services reforms.  
5.40.  Concerns were, however, raised about the services Directive’s implementation in the EU. I 
would like to underline that its improvement is an evolutionary process. The European Commission 
continues to work with Member States to further improve the internal market for services.   
5.41.  On the practical front, we are aiming to improve the “Points of Single Contact” so that 
entrepreneurs may access and process information relevant to their delivery of services in another 
Member State. We are certainly aware of the positive spill-over this can have in terms of international trade. 
5.42.  Responding to the questions about the interaction between plurilateral and multilateral 
negotiations on services let me say that the EU would have preferred to achieve further 
liberalisation in the context of DDA services negotiations.  
5.43.  In order to get out of the present impasse, a growing number of WTO Members is 
participating in the plurilateral negotiations on a Trade in Services Agreement (TISA). These 
negotiations are conducted in a transparent and inclusive manner, and all interested WTO Members are invited to participate provided they share the same objectives to further liberalize 
trade in services. Let me also underline that the EU, in particular, works to foster the future 
multilateralization of the TISA.  
5.44.  Brazil raised concerns about the legal uncertainty of the EU’s services commitments which 
was due to the unresolved issue of Article XXI negotiations. Let me say that the EU-12 schedule 
and 16 individual schedules provide information on the specific services commitments of all of our 
member States, while the consolidated version (which is a consolidated schedule of the individual schedules and not the consolidation of commitments) was meant to serve for an easier reference 
base. Therefore, WTO Members have no reason to be worried about the fact that the Article XXI 
process is still on-going. 
IPR 
5.45.  The EU has been commended for the adoption finally of the unitary patent framework and 
we are convinced that this will bring about major benefits also to foreign patent holders – as they will have cheaper and less burdensome access to EU-wide protection.  
5.46.  Questions have also been raised on EU  implementation of the Nagoya protocol. In 
October 2012, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation on Access to Genetic 
Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Bene fits Arising from their Utilization in the Union, 
which is currently under consideration both by the EU Council and the European Parliament.  
5.47.  Regarding the Customs treatment of medi cines in transit through the EU, the relevant 
Regulation of 2003 has recently been modified so  as to improve its legal clarity and solve the 
problems related to legitimate trade in generic medicines. More importantly, the EU Guidelines 
concerning the enforcement by customs' authorities of IPR with regard to goods in transit, in 
particular medicines, do address the specific concerns raised at the time by India and Brazil.  
5.48.  Some Members have also expressed concerns regarding our system of protection for 
geographical indications. In the EU, the level of protection for GIs provided for in bilateral or 
regional agreements is equivalent to, and not grea ter than, the level of protection for geographical 
indications protected subsequent to an individual  application on the basis of the relevant EU 
legislation. Concerning opposition procedures, th e bilateral and regional agreements dealing with 
the protection of GIs have reflected the state of internal EU legislation applicable at the time of 
their conclusion. Recent agreements therefore pr ovide for opposition procedures as does the 
current internal EU legislation. 
5.49.  I would also like to stress that in its FTA negotiations the EU will continue to fully respect its 
WTO commitments, including those under the TRIPs agreement, notably its Article 24. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 59 - 
 
  PUBLIC PROCUREMENT 
5.50.  Some Members asked about the conditions under which they can access the EU 
procurement markets, above and below the threshol ds set by our legislation. As I mentioned on 
Tuesday, the EU procurement markets above the thresholds are the most open among all GPA 
parties and WTO Members, combining potentially significant market access commitments (up to 
85%) and a large degree of de facto  openness.  
5.51.  The same openness applies to procurement below the thresholds. Despite the absence of a 
fully harmonized framework, such procurements have to respect the principles of 
non-discrimination and transparency, based on the ca se law of the EU’s Court of Justice. Foreign 
goods, services and suppliers enjoy the same de facto access to these contracts in all our member States. I would also like to again clarify that there is no "Buy Europe" policy, neither above nor 
below the thresholds.  
5.52.  We note the interest of some emerging countries in the access to the EU procurement 
market. We would therefore invite them once again to join the GPA or to take suitable market 
access commitments under the bilateral free trade agreements which we are currently negotiating 
with them.  
5.53.  As for procurement by State Owned Enterprises, I would like to clarify that, unlike a number 
of GPA members, the EU submits SOEs operating in the utilities sectors to procurement rules in 
line with the GPA disciplines and that market access commitments on these entities are offered 
under the GPA or bilateral FTAs. 
5.54.  Let me react to Colombia’s remark about th e supposed lack of EU transparency on its SOEs. 
The neutral competitive clause included the EU Treati es is such that the nature of the ownership of 
EU enterprises is irrelevant when it comes to the application and enforcement of EU legislation on competition (as explained in the Secretariat Report paragraph 3.160).  
FISHERIES 
5.55.  Regarding EU fishery policy, let me start with tariff-related issues. The 11% average tariff 
quoted by Norway is somewhat misleading since in practice, average tariffs are in the range of 
3-4%. Concerning Norway’s call for international rules on catch certificates, let me just state that 
the EU is supportive under certain conditions and this idea is currently being discussed in the relevant fora.  
5.56.  Several speakers raised EU fisheries practices. In this respect, I would like to refer to the 
on-going reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy which is now under consideration of the co-
legislators. Its basic objectives are to prioritize sustainability and to end overfishing, so that it would answer the concerns raised on Tuesday. 
5.57.  Concerning the Regulation dealing with unsustainable fishing by third countries, let me 
clarify that the envisaged steps aim at ensuring the effectiveness of conservation measures. No such measure has been adopted yet and, if and when this would happen, these would be fully 
compliant with WTO rules.  
TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT 5.58.  Turning to the fundamentally important subj ect of trade and development, I would like to 
reiterate the EU’s conviction that both concepts are tightly inter-related. Indeed, if enhanced 
economic growth is necessary for development, then trade is one of the fundamental tools to 
achieve it.  
5.59.  It is widely recognized that the EU is one of the most important partners for developing 
countries and Least-Developed Countries. Apart from being the biggest donor of development 
assistance, the EU also is the largest export market for Least Developed Countries. To help the latter better grasp trade opportunities that exist in EU markets, Aid for Trade remains a pivotal 
instrument of our Trade and Development policy – an d the EU is also the world’s largest donor in 
this respect.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 60 - 
 
  5.60.  The EU has recently adopted its budget fo r the years to come and I am happy to confirm 
that our strong commitment to helping developing countries achieve broad, inclusive and sustainable economic growth will be maintained in the period 2014-2020.  
5.61.  However, as I said development policy is not only about development assistance. In the 
medium- to long-term, strong economic and trade cooperation is also key. That is why the EU 
continues negotiating Economic and Partnership Ag reements with ACP countries and regions. As 
we heard from Trinidad and Tobago on Tuesday, these negotiations go beyond conventional free-
trade agreements and are genuinely development-oriented. They take account of the 
socio-economic situation of our ACP partners, notably include provisions on co-operation and assistance for the implementation of the agreemen ts. The EU’s intention is certainly to complete 
these negotiations as soon as possible. 
5.62.  Our belief in the crucial role of trade for development is also confirmed by the recent 
revision of our Generalized Scheme of Preferen ces. The GSP review was carried out to support 
developing countries through enhanced trade opportunities, economic growth and diversification, 
in full compliance with the Enabling Clause.  
5.63.  This revision resulted from a long and co mprehensive process during which the EU informed 
all trade partners and stakeholders. It was mainly aimed to adjust the system to the major shifts 
that had occurred in the world economy and trade relations during the last decade. The revised 
GSP therefore seeks to focus tariff benefits on those countries that need them most. It will allow poorer developing countries to better compete on EU markets and thus more fully integrate into the world economy. LDCs will continue to benefi t from the EU's duty-free, quota-free preferences 
on all products, apart from arms and ammunition, under the EBA scheme.  
5.64.  Countries which will be removed from the list of beneficiaries are those that are classified as 
high income or upper middle income economies by the World Bank. It is obvious that they have 
different trade needs compared to poorer developing countries. Their economic success, which we 
applaud, means that they are competitive on wo rld markets and, therefore, that they do not 
depend on GSP-related benefits anymore. Therefore, we do not foresee specific remedies in this 
respect. 
CONCLUSION 5.65.  I realize that my statement today was perhaps a bit too long but this was unavoidable in 
view of the huge number of questions which our TPR has raised. 
5.66.  This in itself is good news and testifies to the intensity of our interaction in this context. I 
would certainly want to state that we tried our best to provide meaningful written answers to all the questions which we had received by the end of June – and this was no small undertaking.  
5.67.  I am looking forward to a fruitful discussion  today and would of course be willing to address 
further comments and questions that Members may still have. 
DISCUSSANT 
5.68.  This morning I will touch briefly on some of the key themes I have seen emerging from this 
Trade Policy Review. I want to thank Peter Balas for the comprehensive comments he has just provided; my remarks will cover many of areas mentioned by Peter. 
5.69.  First, Many Members welcomed the fact that, despite its economic and financial challenges 
over the past few years, the EU has avoided sliding into protectionism – which we well know 
c a u s e s  m o r e  p r o b l e m s  d u r i n g  d i f f i c u l t  t i m e s  t h a n  i t  s o l v e s .  T h e  E U ’ s  a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t  o f  t h e  importance of trade in its recovery has also been noted positively by many delegations. 
5.70.  Numerous developing countries have expressed appreciation for the significant aid for trade 
contributions made by the EU, as well as its high overall level of ODA. Some, however, were concerned by the possible consequences of the EU’s review of its GSP arrangements. I note this 
issue was again addressed by the EU during its comments earlier this morning. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 61 - 
 
  5.71.  Members encouraged the EU to retain its commitment to the multilateral trading system, 
including in the lead-up to MC9 in Bali. They noted the EU’s active trade policy agenda outside the WTO, particularly the new TTIP negotiations with  the US and the EU-Japan discussions. A common 
refrain was to make sure such negotiations are “a building block, not a stumbling block”, that they 
should support, complement and enhance the multilateral trading system, and not detract from it. 
I think members will have been reassured by the comments we have heard from the EU during this trade policy review about its commitment to the multilateral trading system. 
5.72.  Agriculture has again played a prominent part in the discussions – there was a positive 
acknowledgement of the reforms undertaken, but al so a consistent message that more needed to 
be done, including through the on-going discussions on the Common Agricultural Policy. There was some concern about the direction of the current CAP discussions, such as the introduction of 
coupled payments and the continued inclusion of export subsidies. Many of these issues would be 
addressed, of course, through the successful conclusion of the Doha agriculture negotiations, which is why we all, including the EU, need to commit strongly to advancing some agriculture 
issues in the context of Bali this year. 
5.73.  Various other specific issues were raised. The new EU-wide unitary patent was welcomed, 
for instance, with many hoping that it would be  implemented as soon as possible. There were 
numerous calls for greater transparency in gove rnment procurement, particularly at the sub-
federal level. The EU’s use of anti-dumping measures was an area of concern for some Members, while many others remain troubled by the on-going subsidisation of the EU fishing fleet and its contribution to stressed global fishing stocks.   
5.74.  Quite a number of Members urged the EU to make sure its SPS measures were determined 
on the basis of sound science, with ractopamine and biotech products singled out for particular attention. Others urged the EU to ensure its technical regulations were justified, appropriate and 
consistent, as well as asking to be given better opportunity to provide comment at an early stage 
in the EU’s process for developing new technical regulations. Inconsistent application of SPS and TBT measures between different EU member States  was also frequently mentioned. I would note, 
however, the further advice received from th e EU this morning on many of those issues. 
5.75.  Above all, however, my impression is th at the questions and discussions have served to 
confirm the important place of the EU in the global trading system – both as a key trading partner for many delegations and as a global leader in supporting and advancing the rules based 
multilateral trading system. I would encourage the EU to continue in this role, by taking into 
account and acting on the points made by Members as part of this review, and by continuing its p o s i t i v e  w o r k  h e r e  i n  G e n e v a  o v e r  t h e  n e x t  f e w  m o n t h s  i n  t h e  l e a d - u p  t o  t h e  B a l i  m i n i s t e r i a l  
meeting. 
5.76.  Lastly, I would like just again to briefly thank the Secretariat for all its hard work in 
preparing for this review; and of course the EU as well, particularly in answering so many 
questions in such a timely manner and for participatin g so positively this week; and, finally, to all 
the delegations who also were an integral part of the discussions over the past three days. 
RUSSIAN
 FEDERATION 
5.77.  Since the Russian Federation didn’t take the floor on the first day of the EU TPR we would 
like first to associate with the statements made here earlier by numerous economies for which the 
EU remains the key trade partner. Russia has been among these countries for a long time and - taking into account the up-growing bilateral economic relations between us – will enjoy the reality 
with the EU being our major trade partner for many years to come. 
5.78.  In this context Russia attaches much importance and attention to the trade regime of the 
EU and continuous efforts of its authorities to be fully consistent with the core principles of the 
multilateral trading system such as transparency, accountability and non-discrimination.  
5.79.  Nevertheless, like most of the WTO Memb ers, in respect of several sectors that are 
important for Russia, we have some serious concerns about the current EU trade practices which affect negatively bilateral trade between Russia and the EU. The issues of particular interest for us 
which we addressed to the EU in writing during this TPR cover anti-dumping policy, SPS measures, WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 62 - 
 
  trade in energy, road transport transit. Russia wo uld like to thank the EU Delegation on this TPR 
for the answers provided to some of our questi ons. We are going to give them a thorough 
consideration.  
5.80.  At the same time we would like to dr aw the EU’s attention to the Russia’s question 
concerning consistency of the “Third energy package”. To our regret this written request in fact 
was left by the EU without definite answer but with the reference to complexity of the issue raised and time limits for preparing a response. While understanding technical constrains faced by the EU 
Russia would appreciate and will be looking forward to receiving from the EU clear and 
comprehensive response for this question in due course later on. 
5.81.  In conclusion we would like to thank the Delegation of the EU for its impressive work 
throughout these months and congratulate our European partners with their successful 11th TPR 
round.   
PERÚ 5.82.  Desde el último examen en el 2011, se han dado importantes cambios. En primer lugar, la 
Unión Europea se ha expandido con el ingreso de un nuevo miembro, Croacia, al que damos la 
bienvenida. Ha emprendido la reforma a su Polític a Agrícola Común, a implementarse en el período 
2014-2020, y ha revisado su Sistema Generalizado de Preferencias con un enfoque en los más 
pobres, y asimismo, viene negociando acuerdos preferenciales con varios países en desarrollo, 
habiendo anunciando su intención de negociar  un acuerdo de libre comercio con los EEUU. 
5.83.  Luego de ser muy afectada por la crisis económica global, en este período, la UE ha tenido 
que enfrentar la crisis de la deuda soberana, registrándose inclusive una reducción del 0,3% de su 
economía en el 2012. Si bien hay perspectivas de recuperación para el 2014, ésta es todavía muy 
frágil y no uniforme entre sus miembros. Dado es te difícil contexto económico, con indudables 
costos sociales que se han traducido en altas tasas de desempleo en varios de sus miembros, la 
UE ha debido iniciar un proceso de reformas para enfrentar estas vulnerabilidades y riesgos, en 
particular de la zona Euro y de los mercados financieros y fortalecer el marco de la Unión Monetaria Europea, y también para aumentar la co mpetitividad y sustentabilidad de su economía.  
5.84.  La UE es la mayor economía del mundo y un socio comercial global, muy importante para 
una gran mayoría de los miembros de esta casa. Apreciamos que a pesar de este difícil contexto financiero, ha mantenido su apertura, transparencia y ha resistido al proteccionismo.  
5.85.  En el ámbito bilateral, la Unión Europea en uno de los principales mercados de destino de 
las exportaciones peruanas, registrando en el 2012 la cifra record de 7,7 miles de millones de 
dólares EE.UU., duplicando su valor desde el 2005. Por su parte, las importaciones fueron del orden de los 5,2 miles de millones de dólares EE.UU., con lo cual la balanza comercial bilateral 
tuvo un saldo favorable para el Perú del orden de los 2,500 millones de dólares EE.UU. 
5.86.  El Perú ha sido beneficiario del Sistema General de Preferencias que otorga la UE, bajo el 
esquema SGP Plus, lo que ha tenido efectos positivos en la economía peruana y en el bienestar de 
su población. Por ello, evaluamos con gran inte rés el nuevo esquema que se prevé implementar a 
partir del 2014. 
5.87.  La Unión Europea es también la primera fuente de inversión extranjera directa para el Perú, 
con un estimado de 10898 millones de dólares EE.UU. de stock de inversión en el 2012, según los 
registros de la agencia nacional PROINVERSIÓN, si endo los principales países de origen España, 
Reino Unido y Holanda.  
5.88.  La creciente relación comercial y financiera y la complementariedad de las economías del 
Perú con los miembros de la Unión, ha llevado a que nuestros gobiernos negocien un Acuerdo 
Comercial Multipartes, que entró en vigencia el 1° de marzo de 2013. Dicho Acuerdo contiene provisiones muy amplias para la liberalización del comercio de bienes, servicios, compras públicas, 
y disciplinas en materia de defensa comercial, políticas de competencia y propiedad intelectual; y 
refleja el compromiso de nuestros gobiernos de fortalecer los lazos de amistad y cooperación, y contribuir al desarrollo del comercio mundial, sustentado en las normas de la OMC.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 63 - 
 
  5.89.  Por lo expuesto, este examen de políticas comerciales de la Unión tiene una particular 
importancia para mi país dado que nos permite analizar y ponderar sus importantes avances y retos, y el hecho que no obstante este periodo crítico a nivel mundial, haya mantenido la apertura y transparencia de su régimen de comercio e inversiones. Sin embargo, preocupa a mi país que la 
agricultura siga siendo un sector muy protegido con un 14,8% de arancel promedio aplicado frente 
al 6,5% para los demás sectores. Esperamos que la nueva etapa de la Política Comunitaria Agrícola continúe el proceso de reducción de los aranceles y subsidios agrícolas que distorsionan el 
comercio.   
5.90.  En esta oportunidad, mi delegación ha presentado algunas preguntas respecto de los 
procedimientos aduaneros, ventanilla única, licencias de importación y reglamentos técnicos. Por último, debe presentar una vez más su preocupaci ón respecto del Reglamento No. 258/97 el cual 
continúa restringiendo el ingreso al mercado europeo de algunos alimentos e ingredientes 
alimentarios (a los que califica como "Novel Foods"). Ello afecta el comercio de los productos derivados de nuestra biodiversidad, tales como el Camu Camu, Yacón y Sacha Inchi, los que se 
consumen en el mercado local e ingresan a importantes mercados de terceros países pero están 
impedidos de ingresar al mercado europeo. Este tema ha sido presentado en reiteradas ocasiones por mi delegación en el Comité de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias de la OMC, entre otros foros, 
sin haber recibido respuesta a la fecha. En ese sentido agradecemos las respuestas que nos pueda 
brindar la UE a estas preguntas e inquietudes 
PHILIPPINES 5.91.  The Philippines fully associates itself with the statement made by Brunei Darussalam on 
behalf of ASEAN last Tuesday. In addition to the points raised therein, we would like to enumerate 
a few observations regarding the EU and its value to the multilateral trading system and to the Philippines. 
5.92.  Firstly, the EU is a pillar of strength of the multilateral trading system, the Doha 
Development Agenda, and the upcoming 9th Ministerial Conference in Bali. EU’s unwavering and unequivocal commitment to a rules-based, open and fair trading system is a significant 
contribution in the midst of continuing global challenges and protectionist pressures. In this 
regard, we share others’ views that the active leadership, deep engagement, and maximum flexibility of the EU will be essential in achieving a meaningful and development-oriented Bali package. 
5.93.  Secondly, in spite of current fiscal and related challenges within the union, the EU continues 
to be a shining light for regional integration that functions effectively within our multilateral framework. The Philippines continues to learn from the good practices and policies of EU and its 
member-states as we strive to contribute positi vely to the establishment of an ASEAN Economic 
Community in the near future. 
5.94.  Thirdly, even if the EU is collectively an advanced economy, it is still a work-in-progress like 
the rest of the membership. The EU’s dedication and hard work in attempting to resolve current 
challenges and to continue to grow in its integration process has been cited. We appreciate the inclusive manner in which the policies and programmes have been undertaken, and we hope and expect that the EU will continue to take into consideration the well-being of the multilateral trading 
system and all WTO members, particularly developing countries, in pursuit of its own development 
agenda. 
5.95.  Fourthly, the Philippines appreciates the EU ’s transparency and openness to dialogue in 
addressing bilateral and other concerns. We look forward to continuing close engagement with the 
EU through this open-door policy.  
5.96.  Fifthly, the EU is a credible advocate for development, leading the way concretely in helping 
LDCs and other developing countries achieve greater participation in global trade through Aid for 
Trade, Trade Related Technical Assistance, and other donor programmes. The Philippines looks 
forward to continuing our dynamic partnership with  the EU in these capacity-building endeavours.  
5.97.  Last but not the least, the Philippines vi ews the EU as an important partner in trade and 
overall foreign policy. Our Partnership and Cooperation Agreement is a concrete manifestation of WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 64 - 
 
  our strong bilateral relations and yearning for closer collaboration in many areas. We look forward 
to realizing the potential to strengthen our relationship, including possible future economic and trade engagements. 
MALAYSIA 
5.98.  Malaysia would like to revisit issue raised by Malaysia on Tuesday regarding the EU revision 
of the Renewable Energy Directive. Malaysia is very disappointed that despite Malaysia cooperation and inputs into the process, on 11 July, the European Parliament's Environment Committee has 
voted to push ahead with a discriminatory and unscientific approach to the revision of the 
Renewable Energy Directive. The vote represented a vote in favour of incomplete and uncertain 
science, and a vote against innovation and grow th. Over 300,000 small farmers across Malaysia, 
who rely on oil palm for their livelihood, w ill be affected by the Committee's decisions. 
5.99.  Malaysia deemed the decision as a transparent attempt by European agriculture producers 
to block market access for Malaysian palm oil at the expense of small farmers in Malaysia. This discriminatory treatment of Malaysian palm oil calls into question the European Parliament's 
commitment to international trade agreements, including the on-going negotiations for an 
EU-Malaysia Free Trade Agreement. 
5.100.  Oil palm is by far the most land-efficient oilseed crop in production, with productivity far 
greater than rapeseed, soybean and sunflower. Palm oil biodiesel, responsibly produced in 
Malaysia, can be a major contributor to reducing GHG emissions in Europe. The development of oil palm is a leading contributor to poverty alleviation, economic growth, and social development in Malaysia. Malaysia has also proven its commitment to environmental protection by pledging to 
preserve 50% forest cover - a far higher percentage that any European Union country - and the 
palm oil industry is proud to be an important part of Malaysia's environmental conservation efforts. 
5.101.  Malaysia calls on members of the European  Parliament to support the text drafted by the 
Industry and Energy Committee, which is based on realistic assessment of the current science, and 
would support both the environmental goals of th e European Union, and access to the EU market 
for biofuels by Malaysia's palm oil farmers. 
CHINA 
5.102.  China takes note of the statement just made by Mr. Balas, Head of the EU delegation. 
China also appreciates the new observations made by discussant Ambassador Yeend.  
5.103.  Since EU is a key partner of China in te rms of trade and economic relations, China would 
like to take this opportunity to learn more about the EU policies through the review, including our 
written questions. We were prepared to thank the EU delegation for their statement today. But after listening to Balas’ statement, I have to say that China is very disappointed. The statement 
concerning the part of China’s state interference vis-à-vis EU trade defence policies is totally 
unacceptable. Of course, there are also a few other points I would like to take in order to make further comments and seek follow-up clarifications from EU. 
5.104.  First, on trade remedies. The statement by EU obviously does not agree with the facts, as 
we have evidence to indicate that, unfair trade measures taken by EU against Chinese products 
are based on criteria that are problematic, and ar bitrary or discriminatory, to say the least. The 
answer to our questions by EU that only a small fr action of about 1% of Chinese imports is subject 
to the measures and that other Members such as  Canada and the US have taken more measures 
against imports from China, China does not believe that the portion of trade affected or behaviours of other Members could be justification for abuse of trade remedies. As we stated on Tuesday, 
what worries us is the clear upward trend of the trade remedies of EU targeting Chinese products. 
The more frequent initiations of cases against China involving larger and larger trade values is certainly a sign of abuse of the measures on th e part of the EU, and this has triggered strong 
public outcries in China. Therefore, China urges the EU to reflect soberly on the problem of its 
trade policies and negative impacts on the bilateral trade relations and refrain from recourse to such measures to the extent possible, especially those that are not based on complaint, some investigations not based on complaints by businesses, by other stakeholders. They are strongly 
opposed by consumers within EU. It hurts the interests of the vast majority of the practitioners WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 65 - 
 
  and consumers. Therefore we urge EU to correct its attitude. We do not like the attitude of 
defiance of the EU, especially for this exercise, because we believe it does not help EU to diagnose its problems and make corrections necessary in order to increase its competitiveness or overcome its difficulties. 
5.105.  Turning to the second issue of agriculture,  I agree with the statement or observation made 
by distinguished Discussant Ambassador Yeend. A lot more needs to be done by EU in this regard. 
This is also a common understanding by many WT O Members. We note that in answers to our 
questions regarding agricultural tariffs and quotas , the EU emphasized the results of the Uruguay 
Round negotiations and indicated that reform of its agriculture policy is not intended to address market access issues. In China’s view, some aspect of agricultural policy of the EU is a prominent 
representation of state interference in the market  and the economy, resulting in trade distortion 
and affecting seriously the interests of other Members. While we welcome efforts of the EU to 
reform the policy, we would also like to urge the EU to address more substantially the concerns of WTO Members in the reform process. 
5.106.  Thirdly, let me turn to the issues for furt her clarifications. One of our questions was on the 
relationship between the state-aid programmes of the EU and its subsidy programmes notified to 
the WTO. While the answer of the EU elaborates on its subsidy notification to the WTO, it does not 
seem to have explained its relationship with state-aid programmes, which was the point of our 
interest in the question.  
5.107.  Fourthly, another follow-up is in regard to paragraph 3.2 of the Secretariat Report. The 
paragraph said that according to the Commission, customs declarations rules are to be streamlined 
in the coming Union Customs Code (UCC), which will provide for “only one type of simplified 
declaration”. While our question was to seek the meaning of this “one type of simplified declaration”, the reply of the EU is somewhat perplexing, saying that  the UCC will provide 
“different types of simplifications”.  We therefore hope that the EU could provide some clarification. 
5.108.  In the interest of time, I will refrain from  going further. My delegation has received a few 
additional questions from the Capital and they w ill be forwarded to the EU together with the 
follow-up questions, including what I have just me ntioned. We look forward to replies from the EU 
in the coming month.  
5.109.  Finally, China urges EU to reflect its trade policies soberly so as to find out those 
problematic aspects of those policies and make necessary adjustments, because we believe this 
will be good for EU to create environment that is conducive to growth of robust trade and business 
cooperation with other WTO Members. 
CANADA 
5.110.  Canada acknowledges the efforts made by th e EU in its statement in providing additional 
information on a number of issues of interest to Members. Canada, in particular, appreciates the details on EU's Fuel Quality Directive, implementing measures, as well as government 
procurement, SPS and TBT policies and practices. 
5.111.  We again thank the EU for its written responses to our questions. We do have a number of 
follow-up questions that we shared this morn ing. These cover procurement but also the new 
Investment Agreement and the relationship to the existing bilateral treaties, as well as on 
Renewable Energy Directive. We afford to receiving those responses and reviewing them. 
UNITED
 STATES 
5.112.  The United States wishes to thank the EU delegation for the answers to our written 
questions and for its engagement this morning and over the past several weeks in the preparation 
for this week. 
5.113.  We have a small number of follow-up qu estions for the EU which we provided to the 
Secretariat this morning. Very briefly, we would be interested in additional information regarding 
the consultations of stakeholders on proposed legislation and policies. We also seek clarification with regards to whether risk assessment would not be relevant for measures adopted by the WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 66 - 
 
  Commission. And finally, we are seeking clarification with regards to the nature of the refusal of 
the trademark registration to cover protected traditional terms for wine. 
JAPAN 5.114.  Japan appreciates the effort made by the EU delegation led by Mr Balas for providing us 
with helpful explanations in response to our concerns. I also appreciate the insightful comments 
from the discussant, H.E. Mr Tim YEEND. 
5.115.  It has been a timely and significant Trade Policy Review given the on-going negotiation of 
the Japan EU Economic Partnership Agreement. We would like to conclude the negotiation as soon 
as possible, and hope that the results of the nego tiation will contribute to the multilateral trading 
system. 
5.116.  The questions and answers through the TPR ar e useful for us to grasp the overall picture of 
the present EU trade policies in the multilateral trad ing system both in terms of its strength as well 
as some shortcomings. 
5.117.  Let me state three additional specific questions from Tokyo taking into account our 
discussion on the first day. 
5.118.  Firstly, "Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade Voluntary Partnership 
Agreements" (FLEGT VPA). We would like to know and understand the progress of establishing the 
licensing scheme and the EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) and so on, related to VPA. 
5.119.  Secondly, GPA and the International Procur ement Initiative of the EU. Please provide us 
with the EU’s answers to some of the advanc e questions where the International Procurement 
Initiative is applied. 
5.120.  Third and finally, competition policy and re gulatory issues on the pharmaceutical industry. 
W e  s h o u l d  b e  g r a t e f u l  t o  b e  i n f o r m e d  o f  t h e  criteria for the EU to determine if a settlement 
agreement “delays” entry of generic medicine. 
EUROPEAN
 UNION 
5.121.  Thank you for the continued interest of the delegations in the EU's trade policies and 
especially those delegations who were not able to speak earlier and they spoke for the first time 
today giving broader reaction to the points made in our statement during the process and in the 
Reports. In this respect, we would like to, of course, acknowledge and thank other positive statements made about the EU's trade policies like Peru or the Philippines. 
5.122.  We would also like to thank the further fo llow-up questions which have been either sent or 
given directly by some WTO Members like Canada and the US and we will reply in the thirty days 
deadline to their questions. 
5.123.  Let me make some specific points about the issues raised. First of all, concerning the 
statement of Russia and, more specifically, the ques tions about the issue which they raised in their 
written questions. The Third Energy Package is an  area on which we have already provided quite 
detailed replies and, furthermore, this is an area which is subject of permanent bilateral 
consultations between the EU and Russia. I will just note that early next week we will have a 
bilateral consultation and this should be on the agenda and we will have the opportunity to spell out the EU's position and concerns of Russia with respect to the WTO related implications of the Third Energy Package. This is a piece of legislation that has much broader implications.  
5.124.  Concerning the statement of Malaysia about the recently adopted resolution of European 
Parliament's Environment Committee of process, you can understand it is not appropriate for the European Commission to make any views about legislative action. This is not an action by the 
European Parliament, this is one of the Environmental Committee and this is a decisional 
resolution subject to further consultations within the Parliament. It is up to the legislators to reflect on this subject. I won't go into further comments. WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 67 - 
 
  5.125.  Concerning the specific questions raised by Japan, let me come back to those concerning 
the details on imports of timber, of the Volunt ary Partnership Agreement. These are bilateral 
agreements between the European Union and timb er exporting countries which aim to guarantee 
that the goods exported to the EU is from legal sources and is to support partner countries in 
improving their own regulation and governance of the sector. The envisaged licensing system is to 
certify legal timber for exports to the EU market . There are quite a large number of good exports 
in countries in all parts of the world (Africa, Central and South America) which have expressed 
interest in participating in this Voluntary Partnership Agreement. Further details might be given in 
our written replies. 
5.126.  The Japanese delegation has also made a point about the on-going process of the 
international procurement instrument. This falls in the category which is still draft legislation in the 
process of work between the legislators, the Counc il and the European Parliament. We have taken 
note of these views but as this is not a final piece of legislation, I do not wish to comment. I would like to point out that other EU legislative init iatives are also subject to very broad public 
consultations. Those views will be taken duly into account. 
5.127.  Concerning generic medicines, we replied in written form and I think it covers the question 
raised but we are ready to look at if  Japan requires further clarification. 
5.128.  Concerning the statement made by China, please let me do a personal comment. As a 
longstanding Representative of my home country  in the GATT and the WTO as ex-Ambassador, I 
am surprised about the tone of the Chinese statement. I think that this kind of terms is totally unacceptable and this is not the usual way to discuss issues in the WTO. Of course, countries can 
raise concerns. But as for what it is acceptable and what is not acceptable, it is not so much the 
views of the individual representatives or even co untries, but if there are disputes, we have the 
rule of law here, the dispute settlement procedures and those procedures will decide whether 
these actions or lack of actions from certain Members of the WTO to meet their legal obligations.  
5.129.  In what concerns trade defence, there are a number of on-going cases involving among 
others China and I don't think one could say these dispute settlement procedures would have 
supported in most cases the views of the Chinese delegation, in particular the Representative of 
China. But I don’t want to go into this kind of polemic. I would just note that I think it is useful to look at the way we express ourselves and I can a ssure the Representative of China that when we 
take actions we do it soberly. I also think that other member States will take due note of all this 
when they will look at pieces of legislatio n proposals that are coming from the European 
Commission. 
5.130.  Now, turning to the substance, I would like to point out that, again, concerning trade 
defence measures, what China calls discriminatory in the treatment of China, we consider that we 
simply apply the rule of law, the WTO and the EU law on the claims of industry in most cases and we follow and proceed a deep investigation. There is, however, an admitted specificity of the trade 
defence measures procedures concerning China due to the fact that China has a special accession 
protocol, which is valuable until 2016, and which was, of course, accepted by China at the time of its accession to the WTO. And EU, as some othe r Members of the WTO, based their trade defence 
procedures on the particular specificities of that accession protocol that reflected again the 
particular specificity of the Chinese economy when it joined the WTO. So, this is not at all illegal or 
unlawful or even discriminatory when we follow the rule of the law. We take note that according to the Representative of China this is an abuse by the EU. But again, we have the Dispute Settlement 
Mechanism to decide what is use and what is abuse. It is also true that in certain cases the 
European Commission launches its cases ex-officio on its own initiative. This is a rather exceptional situation and based normally on EU consideration and interest.  
5.131.  We take note of China's call on us to do more in the reform of the EU's agriculture policies 
and we admitted that market access is not part of the present reform of the common agriculture policy. Therefore, we call, among others, China to work with us effectively in order to create the conditions for a successful completion of the Doha Round and that would be an opportunity to deal 
with market access issues in the EU but also in other WTO Members. 
5.132.  Finally, we also take note of the view that our notifications on subsidies are not sufficiently 
transparent and we will look at the notifications of other partners like China to find good examples.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 68 - 
 
  CHINA 
5.133.  After listening to the statement by Mr Balas, I feel obligated to respond in defence of 
China’s interest and position. 
5.134.  No.1, I hope that EU is not saying that all the outcomes of dispute cases in the WTO 
support are all the views of EU. I hope this is not the case EU is trying to suggest. 
5.135.  No 2, I hope that by EU saying that, in the trade defence measures, it has followed the 
rule of law. There is request in the bilateral consultation on such specific issues that are obviate 
violations of WTO laws and rules, while EU has rejected to discuss this matter saying that its 
concerns has to be addressed regardless of WTO rules and laws. 
5.136.  No.3, concerning agriculture and Doha negotiation, China is ready to engage with EU and 
other Members to try to create necessary conditions and to take necessary steps to see that will 
be substantial and concrete results in the outcome of MC9, or even in the form of early harvest 
status. 
5.137.  No.4, concerning the notification of subsid ies, the interesting thing is that we understand 
the EU is running some subsidies in programme of state-aid. Since EU has been accusing China of 
state interference, sometimes in the form of subsidy, on one occasion we have suggested EU that we would like to send a team to EU to study about system of subsidy programme and notification 
mechanism, but this request was declined by EU. So I think this is indication of EU’s hypocrisy.  WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 69 - 
 
  6  CONCLUDING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON 
6.1.  This was the eleventh Trade Policy Review of the European Union and it attracted a lot of 
interest from WTO Members with well over one th ousand questions were asked and responded by 
the EU. More than forty different delegations took the floor on both days. Our discussion was 
greatly helped by the comments of the discussant, Ambassador Tim Yeend of Australia, and the 
statements by the head of the EU delegation, Peter Balas. 
6.2.   As many delegations noted, the economic crisis in the EU has dominated developments over 
the past two years. Although other international organizations have greater roles in developing 
and analysing financial and macroeconomic measures, the Trade Policy Review cannot ignore these developments as they have had a considerab le impact on trade. The general state of EU’s 
economy was focused in the reports prepared by the EU, the Secretariat, the discussant and many 
delegations in their questions and intervention s. For a number of reasons, though domestic 
demand remains subdued, trade was the main engine of growth.  
6.3.  Although a considerable number of measures to address the crises have been taken at the 
levels of the EU and its Member states and there are several positive signs, the economic recovery 
is still fragile and unemployment in some Member states remains high. However, the reforms that are being undertaken, including fiscal reform and banking union, should help lead the way to a 
sustainable recovery that will benefit not only the EU but also its trading partners.  
6.4.  It was also widely noted by delegations th at, despite the crises, the EU has not resorted to 
introducing new protectionist measures which is a positive indication of both the strength of, and the EU's commitment to, the multilateral trading system. Furthermore, although a wide range of 
issues were raised by delegations during the m eeting, on the whole, the EU has low barriers to 
trade and investment and its laws and procedures are transparent and, to a large extent, uniformly applied throughout the 28 Member states. Furthermore, as Peter Balas noted in his 
opening remarks, the recent accession of Croatia is "another sign that the EU, the current 
economic difficulties notwithstanding, remains a successful and attractive entity."  
6.5.  The EU's commitment to the multilater al trading system, the Doha round, and the 
preparations for the next Ministerial Conference in  Bali in December were appreciated by Members 
including EU’s statement that the WTO represents the multilateral bedrock of its trade policy. Members consider that as the EU is the largest trading entity in the world and one of the main 
trading partners for many countries, its support for the WTO and active engagement in its work 
are essential for the multilateral trading system. However, while appreciating the EU's right to 
negotiate free trade agreements with other countries, several delegations urged the EU to take care that these agreements do not dilute its commitment to the multilateral trading system, 
particularly given the start of negotiations last week with the United States on the Transatlantic 
Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and on-going negotiations with other major economies. 
6.6.  Several delegations commended the EU for its support for aid for trade and noted that the EU 
was the largest provider in the world for such aid.  
6.7.  Despite the focus of developments in the EU over the past two years being on measures 
related to the on-going economic crises, several trade-related measures have been agreed, although in some cases they have not yet been fully implemented. The changes to the GSP 
scheme, which are to be implemented from the start of 2014, was one area which drew comments 
by some Members. Other reforms awaiting full implementation relate to customs procedures and the introduction of the single electronic window, which could help reduce differences in 
implementation of customs laws among Member st ates, and the application of the single unitary 
patent which should make registration of patents in the EU less difficult. 
6.8.  Given the size and importance of the EU to world trade and the diversity of its economy, it is 
difficult to cover each and every issue that was raised on Tuesday and today. However, I noted 
that some of the points made by delegations in their interventions were also raised in earlier trade policy reviews of the EU, although it is reassuri ng to see that there are not many new issues.  
 Tariffs: The EU was commended for the high number of duty free tariff lines and its relatively low 
average tariff. However, many delegations noted that some sectors continue to be protected by WT/TPR/M/284 • European Union 
 
- 70 - 
 
  high tariffs which are often specific duties or complex forms of duties while some agricultural 
products are also subject to seasonal tariffs.  
 Agriculture: Although the EU has reached a political agreement on further reforms of the 
Common Agricultural Policy to apply from 2014, and the general trend is towards greater market 
orientation of agriculture in the EU, delegations noted that market access was not being directly 
addressed in these, or previous, reforms. There were also some concerns about the levels of 
support to producers as well as the continued, albeit declining, use of export subsidies. In this respect, successful completion of the Doha Round is essential to address these issues globally.  
 Fisheries: The reform of the Common Fisheries Policy also attracted a lot of interest, particularly 
concerns about overfishing, subsidies that co uld increase fishing capacity, and the possible 
application of unilateral trade sanctions against third countries for over-exploiting fisheries stocks 
shared with the EU. 
 Government procurement: While government procurement above certain thresholds has been 
harmonised and must comply with EU laws, there were concerns about procurement below these 
thresholds by Member states, sub-federal agencies, and state-owned enterprises.  
 SPS and TBT measures: SPS and TBT measures also remain a concern for other WTO Members 
who called for better opportunities to participate in the formulation of these measures which 
should be based on science and should be no more trade restrictive than necessary to meet their 
objectives.  
6.9.  Despite the great diversity among the Member states of the EU, it is, in many ways a single 
economic unit with common rules governing trade and most trade-related areas. However, some 
differences remain in the application of rules an d procedures and member States have different 
legal and administrative systems while retaining competence or have considerable flexibility in some areas such as corporation tax, excise duties, and VAT. Nevertheless, there is a considerable 
degree of harmonization in areas where the EU has competence, which now also includes 
investment. 
6.10.  I would like to thank the EU for choosing to use the alternative timeline for this Trade Policy 
Review which gave all delegations time to consider its replies and has helped our discussion. From 
the statements from delegations, it is clear that, on the whole, the EU has managed to provide satisfactory answers to practically all the questions put to it although I appreciate the fact that in 
some areas the questions referred to proposals for future legislation where it was not possible to 
provide definitive answers. Nevertheless, the EU  is to be commended for answering so many 
questions and we look forward to getting the last re plies over the next four weeks. Finally, I would 
like to thank the EU, our discussant Ambassador Tim Yeend, and the delegations for contributing 
to a successful review of EU trade policy. 
__________