RESTRICTED  
  
WT/ACC/KAZ/83  
 
 
9 July 2014  
(14-3924)  Page: 1/37  
Working Party on the Accession of Kazakhstan  Original: English  
 
  ACCESSION OF KAZAKHSTAN 
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND REPLIES 
 The following submission, dated 24 June 2014, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Kazakhstan. 
 
_______________ 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 2 - 
 
  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES .............................................................................................. 3  
-  Investment Regime ................................................................................................. 3  
-  State Ownership, State-Trading Entities and Privatization ...................................... 5  
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Enterprises, Enterprises with Special 
and Exclusive Privilege ............................................................................................ 5  
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING PO LICIES ........................................ 13  
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS ............................................................... 14  
-  Registration Requirements for Im port and Export Operations .............................. 14  
A. IMPORT REGU LATIONS ......................................................................................... 15  
-  Ordinary Customs Duties ....................................................................................... 15  
-  Tariff Rate Quotas ................................................................................................. 17  
-  Application of Internal Taxes to Imports ............................................................... 18  
-  Value-adde d tax .................................................................................................... 19  
-  Excise Taxes .......................................................................................................... 20  
-  Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and 
Licensing Sy stems ................................................................................................. 20  
(b) Import Licensing ................................................................................................... 20  
-  (i)  Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Prod ucts ................................................................... 20  
-  (iii)  Products containing cryptograp hic capabilities, including goods with 
encryption technology and sp ecial technical devices............................................. 21  
-  Other Customs Fo rmalities .................................................................................... 22  
B. EXPORT REGU LATION ........................................................................................... 23  
-  Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Services Rendered, Application of 
Internal Taxes to Exports ...................................................................................... 23  
-  Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas ..................... 23  
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS ............................... 24  
-  Industrial Policy, including Subsidies .................................................................... 24  
-  Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification ....................................... 26  
-  Trade Related Investment  Measures (TRIMs) ....................................................... 29  
-  Free Zones, Special Economic Areas ...................................................................... 32  
-  Government Pr ocurement ..................................................................................... 33  
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME ............................................. 34  
VI. TRADE IN SERVICES .............................................................................................. 36  
VII. TRANSPARENCY .................................................................................................... 37  
-  NOTIFICATI ONS .................................................................................................... 37  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 3 - 
 
  Unless otherwise indicated, reference in this document to "paragraph" means the paragraph 
number in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.10, the draf t Working Party Report; and reference to 
"question" or "response to question" means the question numbers in WT/ACC/KAZ/78, Replies to 
Additional Questions Raised by Members on the draft Working Party Report. 
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES 
- Investment Regime Question 1 
Paragraph 58:  Please include additional information provided in the responses to 
Questions 6-9 in this paragraph, along the lines indicated below: 
58.  She further stated that, in accordance with the Law "On Investments", In 
accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 4 of Law No. 373-II "On Investments" of 
8 January 2003 (hereinafter – the Law), an investor is granted full and 
unconditional protection of the rights and interests, ensured by the Constitution of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Law and other legal acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, as well as international agre ements ratified by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  This legal protection of in vestments included full and unconditional 
protection of the rights of investors;  and guarantee of indemnity for damages 
suffered by investors due to issuance by pub lic officials of acts that do not comply 
with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan as a result of non-compliant 
norms being issued, and unlawful acts (commissi on or omission) of public officials.  
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 922 of  the Civil Code, such damages shall be 
compensated by court decision using f unds from the State Budget. The Law "On 
Investments" does not contain provisions specifying contractual rights, but rather 
describes procedures for conclusion and te rmination of an investment contract.  
A Member requested to clarify whether in accordance with the Law "On 
Investments" the stability of the terms and conditions of contracts concluded 
between investors and state bodies were guaranteed, and whether any 
modification made into the list of priority activities or consequences of the list 
becoming void affected concluded investme nt contracts.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that legal certainty for investors was guaranteed by the Law 
"On Investments".  In accordance with pa ragraph 3 of Article 4 of the Law, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan guaranteed the stability of the terms and conditions of 
agreements concluded between investors and State agencies, except for 
agreements that were amended by mutual consent of the parties.   
[New Paragraph] These guarantees for investors did not extend to:  
(i) amendments to the legal acts of the Re public of Kazakhstan and/or their entry 
into force, nor to amendments made to international agreemen ts that changed the 
terms and conditions of import, production , and sale of excisable goods; or to 
(ii) amendments and addenda to Kazakhstan 's legislation introduced for national 
security, environmental safety, public he alth and morality purposes.  In these 
exceptional cases, stipulated  in Article 4 of the Law, the signed contracts can be 
modified, i.e., the State may enact new legislation or amendments to applied 
legislation.  It is important to note th at up to date Kazakhstan has not applied 
abovementioned exceptional cases and, consequently, has not modified the terms 
of signed investment contracts.  Thus , investors were guaranteed The legal 
certainty to investors guaranteed by the le gislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
and also meant that any modification made  into the list of investment priority 
activities or consequences of the list becoming void, did not affect concluded 
investment contracts.  The Law "O n Investments" also guaranteed the 
transparency of the activities of State agencies; the access to information related 
to investment activities (company registra tion, charter documents, licensing, etc.); 
a guarantee for investors to use income  at their full discretion; guaranteed 
protection of investors' rights in case  of nationalization and requisition; and 
investment dispute settlement regula tions, including the possibility of 
international arbitration pr o v i d e d  b y  t h i s  L a w .   A g reements on promotion and 
mutual protection of investments were conc luded with certain countries in order to WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 4 - 
 
  guarantee investment protection.  Thes e Agreements provided guarantees of 
investors' rights, including the recovery of investments when faced with political 
(regulatory) risks, nationalization an d expropriation; the prevention of 
discrimination; and the regulation of disp utes including appeal to international 
arbitration courts. 
Answer: 
At the request of a Member, Kazakhstan added into the revised draft Working Party Report of 
Kazakhstan information provided in the responses to Questions 6-9 as follows:  
"58.  She further stated that, in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 4 of the  Law "On 
Investments", an investor was granted full and unconditional protection of the rights and 
interests, ensured by the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Law and other legal 
acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as international agreements ratified by the 
Republic of Kazakhstan. This legal protection of investments included full and unconditional 
protection of the rights of investors; and guarantee of indemnity for damages suffered by 
investors due to issuance by public officials of acts that did not comply with the legislation of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan. Pursuant to para graph 1 of Article 922 of the Civil Code, such 
damages had to be compensated by court decision using funds from the State Budget. The 
Law "On Investments" did not contain provisions specifying contractual rights, but rather 
described procedures for conclusion and termination of an investment contract.    
58bis. A Member requested to clarify whether in accordance with the Law "On Investments" 
the stability of the terms and conditions of contracts concluded between investors and state 
bodies were guaranteed, and whether any modi f i c a t i o n  m a d e  i n t o  t h e  l i s t  o f  p r i o r i t y  
activities or consequences of the list becoming void affected concluded investment contracts.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that legal certainty for investors was guaranteed 
by the Law "On Investments".  In accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 4 of the Law, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan guaranteed stability of the terms and conditions of agreements concluded between investors and State agencies , except for agreements that were amended 
by mutual consent of the parties. These guarantees for investors did not extend to: 
(i) amendments to the legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan and/or their entry into force, nor to amendments made to international agreements that changed the terms and conditions of import, production, and sale of excisable goods; (ii) amendments and addenda 
to Kazakhstan's legislation introduced for national security, environmental safety, public 
health and morality purposes.  In these exceptio nal cases, stipulated in Article 4 of the Law, 
the signed contracts could be modified, i.e., the State could enact new legislation or 
amendments to applied legislation.  It was important to note that up to date Kazakhstan had 
not applied abovementioned exceptional cases and, consequently, had not modified the 
terms of signed investment contracts.  The legal certainty guaranteed to investors by the 
legislation of Kazakhstan also meant that  any modification made into the list of investment 
priority activities or consequences of the list becoming void, did not affect concluded 
investment contracts.   
58ter. The Law "On Investments" also guaranteed the transparency of the activities of State 
agencies; the access to information related to investment activities (company registration, 
charter documents, licensing, etc.); a guarantee for investors to use income at their full discretion; guaranteed protection of investors' rights in case of nationalization and 
requisition; and investment dispute settlemen t regulations, including the possibility of 
international arbitration provided by this Law.  Agreements on promotion and mutual protection of investments were concluded with certain countries in order to guarantee 
investment protection.  These Agreements provided guarantees of investors' rights, 
including the recovery of investments when faced with political (regulatory) risks, nationalization and expropriation; the prevention of discrimination; and the regulation of disputes including appeal to international arbitration courts."   
The sentence: "The Law "On Investments" did not contain provisions specifying contractual rights, 
but rather described procedures for conclusion and termination of an investment contract." is not relevant to the information provided in paragraphs 58 – 60. Therefore, we have moved it to 
paragraph 56 of the draft Working Party Report, where this sentence is more relevant: WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 5 - 
 
  "56.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Law No. 373 "On Investments" of 
8 January 2003 provided the specific elemen ts of the legal basis for Kazakhstan's 
investment policy.  This Law regulated relations with regard to investments in Kazakhstan, determined the legal and economic basis for the attraction of investments, guaranteed the 
protection of investors' rights when investing into Kazakhstan, and established measures of 
State support for investments and procedures for dispute resolution.  The Law "On Investments" did not establish local content or export performance requirements as 
measures of State support for investments. In response to a question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Law "On Investments" did not 
contain provisions specifying contractual rights, but rather described procedures 
for conclusion and termination of investment contract." 
Question 2 
Paragraph 74:  This paragraph deals with th e issue of Kazakhstan's "borderlands" in 
which ownership or lease-holding by foreig ners and foreign judicial entities is 
prohibited.   
- Per the response to Question 4 in WT/A CC/KAZ/78, please include the citation of 
the Government Resolution "which is curre ntly under elaboration by the National 
Security Committee" concerning the minimu m distance from the border that is 
prohibited for foreign lease of purchase. 
- Please include information in the te xt on the minimum distance when the 
Government Resolution is implemented. 
Answer: 
In accordance with paragraph 29 of Article 2 of Law No. 70-V "On the State Border of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 16 January 2013, the borderland wa s a part of the territory directly adjacent to 
the State border on the land plot. In the ar eas, where the State border passes through the 
border rivers, lakes and other waters, the borderland was defined as part of the territory directly adjacent to the coast of these waters as well as territories located in the islands, where the State 
Border regime was established. In accordance with paragraph 28 Article 2 of Law "On the State 
Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan", a border zone was a part of the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan adjacent to the borderland within  the territory of administrative districts". 
The relevant Government Resolution is expected to be implemented by mid-2014. We will include 
the requested information in the text of the draf t Working Party Report as soon as Government 
Resolution is adopted by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
- State Ownership, State-Tradin g Entities and Privatization 
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Enterprises, Enterprises with Special and 
Exclusive Privilege 
Question 3 
Paragraph 78 confirms that Kazakhstan will "p rovide foreign invest ed juridical persons 
of Kazakhstan, producing crude oil and gas in accordance with the national legislation of 
Kazakhstan, nondiscriminatory access to pipelin es which were partly or fully owned and 
regulated by the Government in accordance wi th the national legislation," and that this 
"applies only to pipelines regulated as natu ral monopolies within the framework of the 
Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Natural Monopolies'".  Given the length of time since this commitment was negotiated, we wo uld appreciate more information on what 
it now covers. 
- What percentage of Kazakhstan's pipelin es are "regulated as natural monopolies" 
as described above? WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 6 - 
 
  Answer:  
 
In accordance with paragraph 1 Article 4 of the Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998, transportation of oil and (or) oil products, and commercial gas 
via main pipelines is related to the sphere of natural monopolies.  
 1. Presently three out of four companies, who own main oil pipelines in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, are regulated as natural monopolies: 
 
1) JSC "KazTransOil"; 
2) JSC "North West Pipeline Company "MunaiTas" (51% of shares are owned by the JSC 
"KazTransOil", 49% of shares are owned by  the LLP "Chinese National Oil Company 
International in Kazakhstan"); and 
3) LLP "Kazakhstan-China Pipeline" (50% of rights of participation are owned by the JSC 
"KazTransOil", 50% of rights of participation are owned by the "China National Oil and 
Gas Exploration and Development Corporation").  
The fourth company is the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC), whose activities in the field of oil 
transportation are regulated by the terms set in the international consortium agreement. 
Therefore, the CPC is not subject to State regulation as natural monopoly.   2. In the field of gas transportation, the following companies, who own main gas pipelines, are 
regulated as natural monopolies:  
1) JSC "InterGaz Central Asia" (100% of shares are owned by the JSC "KazTransGaz"); 2) LLP "Asian Gaz Pipeline" (50% of rights of participation are owned by the JSC 
"KazTransGaz", 50% of rights of participation are owned by the "Trans Asia Gas 
Pipeline Company Limited"); and,  
3) LLP "Joint Venture "Beineu-Shymkent Gas Pipeline", which owns Beineu – Bozoi - 
Shymkent main pipeline (50% of rights of participation are owned by the JSC 
"KazTransGaz", 50% of rights of participation are owned by the "Trans Asia Gas Pipeline Limited" (China)).   
 
The fourth company, LLP "Tarbagatai - Munai" with 100% foreign capital (Netherlands), which 
owns Sarybulak – Zimunai main gas pipeline, is not subject to State regulation as natural monopoly.  
 
Question 4 
The August 2012 issue of Oil and Gas Journal states that Kazakhstan's trunk pipelines 
are mainly controlled by the relevant transp ort subsidiaries of Kazmunaigaz, the state 
oil and gas firm, with some exceptions, e.g., the Caspian Pipeline Consortium's 
Tengiz-Novorossiisk oil pipeline is controlled by an international consortium in which 
Kazakhstan has a minority equity stake.   
- Can Kazakhstan confirm this statem ent?  If not, please elaborate. 
- Are there any other pipelines in Kazakhst an with less than 51% state ownership? 
- Are the pipelines administered by subsid iaries of Kazmunaigaz considered to be 
"national companies?"  Are they cons idered to be "natural monopolies?" 
- Is the Caspian Pipeline Consortium's Tengiz-Novorossilisk oil pipeline (or any 
other pipelines in Kazakhstan with less than 51% state ownership) covered by the 
commitment in paragraph 78? WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 7 - 
 
  Answer:  
 
a) The Caspian Pipeline Consortium's Tengiz-Novorossiisk oil pipeline is regulated by an international consortium agreement in which Kazakhstan owns a minority share - 21%. 
The operation of the pipeline is not subject to State regulation as a natural monopoly.  
 b) The companies that own main pipelines in Kazakhstan with less than 51% ownership and 
are subject to State regulation as natural monopolies are the following:  
1) LLP "Kazakhstan-China Pipeline" (50% of rights of participation are owned by the JSC 
"KazTransOil", 50% of rights of participation are owned by the "China National Oil and Gas Exploration and Development Corporation" ); 
2) LLP "Asian Gaz Pipeline" (50% of rights of participation are owned by  the JSC 
"KazTransGaz", 50% of rights of participation are owned by  the "Trans Asia Gas Pipeline Company Limited"); and, 
3)  LLP "Joint Venture "Beineu-Shymkent Gas Pipeline", which owns Beineu – Bozoi - 
Shymkent main pipeline (50% of rights of participation are owned by the JSC "KazTransGaz", 50% of rights of participation are owned by the "Trans Asia Gas 
Pipeline Limited" (China). 
 c) The subsidiaries of "KazMunaiGaz", who own main pipelines, do not have the status of 
national companies. The following companies with participation of subsidiaries of "KazMunaiGaz" 
are regulated as natural monopolies:   
1) The JSC "KazTransOil"; 2) The JSC "North West Pipeline Company "MunaiTas" (51% of shares are owned by the 
JSC "KazTransOil", 49% of shares are owned by the LLP "Chinese National Oil 
Company International in Kazakhstan"); 
3) The LLP "Kazakhstan-China Pipeline" (50% of  rights of participation are owned by the 
JSC "KazTransOil", 50% of rights of partic ipation are owned by the China National Oil 
and Gas Exploration and Development Corporation);  
4) The JSC "InterGaz Central Asia" (100% of shares are owned by the JSC 
"KazTransGaz"); 
5) The LLP "Asian Gaz Pipeline" (50% of ri ghts of participation are owned by the JSC 
"KazTransGaz", 50% of rights of participation are owned by the "Trans Asia Gas Pipeline Company Limited"); and 
6) LLP "Joint Venture "Beineu-Shymkent Gas Pipeline", which owns Beineu – Bozoi - 
Shymkent main pipeline (50% of rights of participation are owned by the JSC "KazTransGaz", 50% of rights of participation are owned by the "Trans Asia Gas 
Pipeline Limited" (China)). 
 d) The Caspian Pipeline Consortium's Tengiz-Novorosiisk pipeline is not covered by the commitment in paragraph 78. Other pipelines with less than 51% State ownership are covered by 
the commitment in paragraph 78, provided that th ey are subject to State regulation as natural 
monopolies. The three companies that own main pipelines with less than 51% ownership and are subject to State regulation as natural monopolies are presented in paragraph b).  
 
Moreover, in accordance with Article 5 of the Law "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets", 
natural monopolies are prohibited to impose conditions of access to regulated services (goods, 
works) or conduct other actions leading to discrim ination of consumers. This rule applies to all 
natural monopolies, irrespectively of the share of State participation.  WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 8 - 
 
  Question 5 
The August 2012 issue of Oil and Gas Journal also states that "Kazakhstan's Legislature 
has passed a bill requiring any new trunk oil or gas pipelines built on the territory of the 
Central Asian State be majority -owned by the State.  The legislation will mean that the 
state will have at least 51% in any new pipelines." 
- Will these future pipelines also be "natural monopolies?"   
- Will they be administered by Kazmunaigaz  and/or be "national companies"?   
- Will they simply be "sta te-owned enterprises"? 
Answer: 
1. Future pipelines will belong to the sphere of natural monopolies, in case if they render 
services that are regulated by the State as natural monopolies in accordance with subparagraphs 
1) and 2) Paragraph 1 Article 4 of the Law "O n Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets".  
In accordance with subparagraph 1) Paragraph 1 Arti cle 4 of the Law, transportation of oil and (or) 
oil products via main pipelines relates to the sphere of natural monopolies.  
 In accordance with subparagraph 2) Paragraph 1 Article 4 of the Law, storage, transportation of commercial gas via connecting gas pipelines, main gas pipelines and (or) gas distributing facilities, 
operation of group reservoir units and transportation of crude gas via connecting pipelines is related to the sphere of natural monopolies.   2. In accordance with Paragraphs 1 and 2 Article 16 of the Law "On the Main Pipeline", in order 
to ensure energy security, the Republic of Kazakhstan has a priority right to participate with 
ownership of at least 51 percent of shares in the project of a newly created main pipeline.  
The priority right is performed by the Government  on behalf of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
 
Pursuant to Paragraphs 5 and 8 Article 16 of the Law "On the Main Pipeline", the Government may waive the priority right of the State, as well as may decide to participate with less than 51% in the 
project of a newly created main pipeline.   
  As described in paragraph 93 of the draft Work ing Party Report, the property of State-owned 
enterprises is indivisible and entirely belongs to the State. Thus, future pipelines may not be 
State-owned enterprises.   
 The status of juridical persons with State participation, who will own the newly created main 
pipeline, will be determined as a result of th e negotiations between the Government and the 
investor. The share of the Government's participation in ownership of the new pipelines will be determined on a case-by-case basis.   
Question 6  
Paragraph 107:  We believe that the brackete d text in this paragraph is redundant and 
unnecessary.  We are willing to see most of it, including our own proposal, dropped.  
Instead, we suggest two minor edits includin g reference to the second commitment text 
in paragraph 131. 
107.  [In response, a Member noted that the government owned 100% of the 
shares of national managing holdings an d national holdings, and thus exercised 
control of both the national managing ho ldings, national holdings and any JSCs 
[in] which the national managing holdin gs and national holdings owned 50% or 
more of the shares [within the competence of its representatives in the boards of 
directors].  Thus, each of the forms of JS Cs described in paragraph [98] as well as 
those national companies where the govern ment or a national managing holding, 
or a national holding owned 50% or more of the shares [for the purposes of 
coverage by the commitment in this sectio n] were [a state-controlled enterprise 
and] were subject to the provisions of paragraphs [130 and 131].   WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 9 - 
 
  Answer: 
Kazakhstan agrees to make the requested edits to the text of paragraph 107 with slight change:  
107. In response, a Member noted that the government owned 100% of the shares of 
national managing holdings and national holdings, and thus exercised control of both the 
national managing holdings, national holdings and any JSCs in which the national managing 
holdings and national holdings owned 50% or more of the shares.  Thus, each of the forms 
of JSCs described in paragraph [98] as well as those national companies where the 
government or a national managing holding, or a national holding owned 50% or more of 
the shares were subject to the provisions of paragraphs [130 and 131 ]. 
Question 7 
Paragraph 115:  Please add information to the following text in a Member's voice, as 
follows: 
 115. The representative of Kazakhstan st ated that, bBased on data provided by 
the Statistics Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in 2011 the "Samruk-Kazyna" 
accounted for 7.2% of Kazakhstan's GDP and 5.3% in 2012.  According to the 
Statistics Agency of Kazakhstan, the sh are in GDP of other national managing 
holding or national holdings and their enti ties in total constituted less than 0.5%.  
A Member noted, in contrast, that in October 2013, Fitch Ratings had noted 
Samruk-Kazyna's 100% state ownership and its strategic significance to 
Kazakhstan's economy, and stated that th e consolidated assets of Samruk-Kazyna 
and its 405 subsidiaries is equivalent to  50% of the country's GDP.  Fitch added 
that its investment accounted for 7-10 % of GDP per year, and that 27% of 
Kazakhstan's total tax revenues and 6%  of its total employment were also 
accounted for by this national holding company.   
 115 bis.  She added that Tthere were no im mediate plans for the privatization of 
the "Samruk Kazyna"'s holdings.  She adde d that Tthe majority of the Fund's 
portfolio consisting of key national companies operating in oil extraction, 
telecommunication, mining, railway, electr ic power transmission and the defence 
industry, included:  "KazMunaiGaz", "Kaz akhtelecom", "Kazakhstan Temir Zholy", 
"KEGOC" and "Kazpost", "Samruk-En ergo", National Atomic Company 
"Kazatomprom", "Kazakhstan Engineering" , "Air Astana", and "Samruk-Kazyna 
Pharmacia".  Other holdings of the "Samruk-Kazyna" were represented by 
companies operating in the financial se ctor, transportation and the chemical 
industry.  For the most part, the "Samru k Kazyna" companies were classified as 
"strategic objects" as they operated asse ts indicated in paragraph [89].  Services 
provided by national companies in the sp heres classified as natural monopolies 
were regulated in accordance with Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and 
Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998 (for  more detailed information please see 
section on "Pricing Policies").   
Answer: 
Methodologically, consolidated assets of "Sam ruk-Kazyna" could not be compared to GDP of 
Kazakhstan, because GDP represents the total value of final goods and services produced within a 
country during a specified time period, such as one year.   
According to the data of the Ministry of Econ omy and Budget Planning and the Statistics Agency, 
GDP of Kazakhstan in 2012 was equal to 30,347 billion tenge, or approximately US$203.5 billion.  WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Table 1. GDP by Production Method in 2012 
 Million Tenge % to GDP 
Gross Domestic Product  30 346 958.2 100  
Production of goods 12 589 413.3 41.4 
Including:  
Industry   
9 343 696.4  
30.8 
 of which  Mining and quarrying   
5 288 740.5  
17.5 
Production of services 15 918 183.5 52.5 
Including: 
 Transportation and        warehousing  
2 294 128.9  
7.5 
 Information and  communication 811 345.7 2.6
 
Gross Value Added 28 507 596.8 93.9  
Net taxes on import 1 839 361.4 6.1  
As it is shown in Table 1, more than half of GDP, i.e. 52.5%, is accounted for services, while 
production of goods constitutes 41.4%.    
In services sector, "Samruk-Kazyna"'s subsidiaries are engaged mainly in rendering transportation 
and communication services.  
In accordance with the official statistics, the share of transportation and warehousing services 
constitutes 7.5% of GDP while the share of info rmation and communication services constitutes 
2.6% of GDP.  
Table 2. Oil and gas sector in 2012 
 Million Tenge % to GDP 
Including:  
 Production of crude oil and 
natural gas; provision of services in these spheres  
 
4 460 496.6  
 
14.7 
 Railway services on  transportation of oil  products in tanks  
107 549.5 
 
0.4 
 Services on transportation  of oil and oil products  
153 984.2  
0.5 
 Services on transportation 
of gas via pipelines  
172 105.3  
0.6 
Gross Value Added of the oil and gas production and related services sector    
8 012 707.8   
26.4 
As it is shown in Table 2, the share of oil and ga s production in GDP is 14.7%.  In accordance with 
the data from the Statistics Agency the share of "Samruk-Kazyna"'s oil and gas producing 
subsidiary "KazMunaiGaz" in GDP in 2012 was 2.24 %. 
In accordance with the Statistics Agency, the services on transportation of oil and oil products 
constitute 0.5% of GDP, railway transportation se rvices of oil products via tanks constitute 0.4% 
of GDP, while services on pipeline transportati on of natural gas account for 0.6% of GDP.  
Thus, as mentioned in paragraph 115 of the draft Working Party Report, the share of the 
"Samruk-Kazyna"'s subsidiaries in the total output of goods and services produced in Kazakhstan 
constituted 5.3% in 2012.  
Kazakhstan will include the requested text in the draft Working Party Report.  
115. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, bBased on data provided by the 
Statistics Agency of the Republic of Kazakh stan, in 2011 the "Samruk-Kazyna" accounted for 
7.2% of Kazakhstan's GDP and 5.3% in 2012.   According to the Statistics Agency of WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 11 - 
 
  Kazakhstan, the share in GDP of other national managing holding or national holdings and 
their entities in total constituted less than 0.5%.  A Member noted, in contrast, that in 
October 2013, Fitch Ratings had noted Samruk-Kazyna's100% State ownership 
and its strategic significance to Kazakh stan's economy, and stated that the 
consolidated assets of Samruk-Kazyna and its 405 subsidiaries is equivalent to  
50% of the country's GDP.  Fitch added th at its investment accounted for 7-10% of 
GDP per year, and that 27% of Kazakhstan's  total tax revenues and 6% of its total 
employment were also accounted for by this national holding company.   
In response, the representative of Ka zakhstan noted that methodologically, 
consolidated assets of "Samruk-Kazyna" could not be compared to the GDP of 
Kazakhstan because the GDP represents the total value of final goods and services 
produced within a country during a specif ied time period.  In 2012 more than half 
of the GDP, i.e. 52.5%, was accounted fo r services, while production of goods 
constituted 41.4%. In services sector, "Samruk-Kazyna"'s subsidiaries engaged 
mainly in transportation and communication  services.  The share of transportation 
and warehousing services constituted 7.5%  of GDP while the share of information 
and communication services constituted 2.6% of GDP. Companies, providing 
services in both sectors were operating in a competitive environment along with 
other private companies.  The share of o il and gas production in GDP was 14.7%.  
In accordance with the data from the Statistics Agency the share of "Samruk-Kazyna"'s oil and gas producing subsidiary "KazMunaiGaz" in GDP in 
2012 was 2.24%.  
115bis. She added thatT there were no immediate plans for the privatization of the 
"SamrukKazyna"'s holdings.  She added that The majority of the Fund's portfolio consisting 
of key national companies operating in oil extraction, telecommunication, mining, railway, 
electric power transmission and the defence industry, included:  "KazMunaiGaz", "Kazakhtelecom", "Kazakhstan TemirZholy", "KEGOC" and "Kazpost", "Samruk-Energo", 
National Atomic Company "Kazatomprom", "K azakhstan Engineering", "Air Astana", and 
"Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia". Other holdings of the "Samruk-Kazyna" were represented by companies operating in the financial sector, transportation and the chemical industry.  For the most part, the "SamrukKazyna" companies were classified as "strategic objects" as they 
operated assets indicated in paragraph [89].  Services provided by national companies in 
the spheres classified as natural monopolies were regulated in accordance with Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Ma rkets" of 9 July 1998 (for more detailed 
information please see section on "Pricing Policies").   
Question 8  Paragraph 129:  We suggest (a) the following cl arifying edits to this paragraph; and (b) 
the earlier transitional date that we support:  
129.  In response ... described in this pa ragraphs [99-104] above and paragraph [701] 
of the section on Government Procurement] we re the only entities in Kazakhstan other 
than those described in the TRIMs section of th is Report that must comply with the local 
content provisions when seeking to purchase goods, services or works.  Currently the 
following State-controlled companies existed in Kazakhstan:   
- Three national managing holdings ("Sa mruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro ", "Bayterek");  
- Two national holdings ("Zerde" and "Parasat");  
- 33 national companies (including 10 under  the national managing holdings); and 
- 944 joint stock companies and limited lia bility partnerships managed by the 
government agencies. 
Kazakhstan requested a transitional period of  three years from the date of accession to 
the WTO for phasing-out the local content requirements in the procurement rules of companies when operating in the commercia l sphere that are national companies, 
belong to national managing holdings:  "S amruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro" and "Bayterek", or 
and national holdings:  "Zerde" and "Parasat " or JSCs in which the national managing 
holdings and national holdings owned 50% or  more of the shares.  The transitional 
period [until 1 January 2018]1 [until 1 January 2016]2 was required for development WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 12 - 
 
  and implementation of the new procurement regulation in accordance with the WTO 
provisions.  [Members noted that such a request was unprecedented.]3  
1  Language proposed by Kazakhstan. 
2  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
3  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan agrees with the proposed clarification edits into paragraph 129 in the following way:  
129. In response to a request from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
the local content requirements in the form of 20% conditional price discount were applied in procurements of national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies, as well as other joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships with 50% or more of 
State participation.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that the entities described in paragraphs [99-104]  above and 
paragraph [701] of the section on Government Procurement were the only entities in 
Kazakhstan other than those described in the TRIMs section of this Report that must comply 
with the local content provisions when seeking to purchase goods, services or works.  Currently the following State-controlled companies existed in Kazakhstan:   
- Three national managing holdings ("Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro", "Bayterek");  
- Two national holdings ("Zerde" and "Parasat");  - 33 national companies (including 10 under the national managing holdings); and - 944 joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships managed by the 
government agencies. 
Kazakhstan requested a transitional period of th ree years from the date of accession to the WTO 
for phasing-out the local content requirements in the procurement rules of companies when  
operating in the commercial sphere that are national companies,  national managing holdings:  
"Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro" and "Bayterek", or national holdings:  "Zerde" and "Parasat", or 
JSCs/LLPs in which the national managing holdings and national holdings owned 
50% or more of  the shares.   The transitional period [until 1 January 2018]
1 [until 
1 January 2016 ]2 was required for development and im plementation of the new procurement 
regulation in accordance with the WTO provisions.  [Members noted that such a request was unprecedented]
3. 
1  Language proposed by Kazakhstan. 
2  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
3  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
Question 9 
Paragraph 131:  We believe that the text be low is a better version of paragraph 131, 
ensuring that the national companies, holdings, and managing holdings are covered by 
the commitment in paragraph 130 on state owned and state controlled enterprises, 
notwithstanding that this definition is not a pplied to such firms in Kazakhstan's law.   
- The text that we propose also make s it clear that those purchases for 
governmental purposes, rather than for co mmercial resale or processing for sale, 
are not covered.  This tracks the text in paragraph 711 in the section on 
Government Procurement concerning "p rocurement of goods and services, 
including by State-owned and State-controlled enterprises."   
- Finally, we have been informed by Kazakhstan that a number of firms subject to 
paragraph 131 operate under both their own procurement regulations and those 
written into contracts they conclude with  the Government of Kazakhstan under the 
provisions of Law No. 291-IV on Subsoil Use.  We understand that Kazakhstan 
wants purchases for operations under thes e contracts by national companies and 
firms held by national holdings and nation al managing holdings to be subject to WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 13 - 
 
  the longer transition in paragraph 638 in  the TRIMs section of the draft Working 
Party Report.  We support new text that  accomplishes that, as indicated below. 
131.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that with respect to national 
companies, national managing holdings (Samruk-Kazyna, KazAgro and Bayterek), 
or national holdings (Zerde and Parasat), and the subsidiaries of the three national 
managing holdings or the two national holding companies for which a national managing holding or national holding owned 50% or more of the shares of the 
subsidiary, [from 1 January 2016]1[1 January 2018]2, [purchases of goods and 
services by such enterprises, which were  not for governmental purposes, but with 
a view to commercial re-sale or with a view to use for production of goods and supply of services for commercial sale, would not be subject to local content 
requirements of any kind, including applicat ion of price preferences, and that from 
[same date as above] these enterprises]1 [from 1 January 2018 purchases, which 
were not intended for governmental use, and sales in international trade of these 
enterprises]2 would be subject to the commitments set out in paragraph [130].  
She further confirmed that these commitments were without prejudice [to the 
transition period for investment contra cts concluded under Law No. 291-IV set out 
in paragraph [638] and]3 to Kazakhstan's participation in negotiations on joining 
the Agreement on Government Procurement or  its offer on covered entities in such 
negotiations.  The Working Party t ook note of these commitments.] 
1  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
2  Language proposed by Kazakhstan. 
3  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
Answer: 
The proposed text could be taken as a basis for the discussions on the length of the transitional 
period with slight changes of editorial/technical nature made in the revised paragraph 131 of the attached draft Working Party Report.   
In the penultimate sentence the reference to paragraph [638] should be replaced by the reference 
to corresponding commitments of TRIMs chapter, contained in paragraphs [660] and [661] of the draft Working Party Report WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.10.  
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
Question 10 
Please provide information on Kazakhst an's plans for enacting the necessary 
implementing legislation during the accession  negotiations, including but not limited to 
that listed in the Legislative Ac tion Plan, WT/ACC/KAZ/73/Rev.2.  
Answer: 
Based on the Legislative Action Plan, commitments  of the draft Working Party Report and draft 
Schedule of Specific Commitments on Trade in Services the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan has developed the draft law implementing the results of accession negotiations that is now undergoing internal approval procedures. It is planned that the draft law would enter into 
force at the moment of ratification of Kazakhstan's Protocol of accession to the WTO. 
Question 11 
Paragraph 195:  Current plans call for the im plementation of the Eurasian Economic 
Union (EAEU) on 1 January 2015, or in about 14 months.   
- Please provide additional information in  the Working Party Report text on the 
major changes contemplated in current st ructure or operations of the Customs 
Union when it becomes the Eurasian Economic Union, e.g., in what ways will the 
EAEU be different from the CU?  WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 14 - 
 
  Answer: 
The EAEU Treaty that was signed on 29 May 2014 establishes the Eurasian Economic Union 
(hereafter – the EAEU) in order to ensure free movement of goods, services, capital and natural persons as well as coordinated or agreed policy in  the sectors of economy, defined by the Treaty 
and international agreements within the EAEU.  According to the new provisions, the EAEU is 
established as an international organization of regional economic integration with international legal personality.  The EAEU Treaty will replace the international agreements concluded within the 
CU and the SES listed in its Annex No. 33, which will be terminated when the EAEU Treaty comes 
into effect on 1 January 2015.  
The new body – the Intergovernmental Council – will  be introduced into the structure of the EAEU. 
It will be held at the level of the Heads of the Governments of member States of the EAEU and be 
entitled to adopt decisions and give instructions by consensus.  
Functions of the Intergovernmental Council will be as the following: - ensure implementation and control of implem entation of the present Treaty, international 
agreements within the EAEU and decisions of the Supreme Council; 
- upon proposal of the Council of the Commission consider issues on which consensus was not 
achieved; 
- give instructions to the Commission; 
- propose to the Supreme Council candidates to  the members of the Council and Collegium of 
the Commission; 
- approve drafts of the budget of the EAEU, regu lations on the budget of the EAEU and reports 
on performance of the budget of the EAEU; 
- upon proposal of any EAEU member State consider issues on reversal or amendment of the 
approved decision of the  Commission or, if not agreed, take them for consideration of the 
Supreme Council; 
- approve decision on suspension of implementati on of decisions of the Council or Collegium of 
the Commission; and, 
- perform other functions provided by the EAEU  Treaty and international agreements within 
the EAEU. 
The Supreme Council will now be held only by the Heads of the States of member States of the 
EAEU. 
Earlier the Collegium could take decisions only by a qualified majority, now it will be entitled to 
take decisions also by consensus.  List of issues  on which decisions are taken by consensus will be 
defined by the Supreme Council. 
The Court of the Eurasian Economic Union will co nsider cases on implementation of the Treaty, 
international treaties of the EAEU and decisions of  the bodies of the EAEU on application of the 
EAEU member State or on application of the econom ic operators.  The EEC will no longer be able 
to make applications to the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union. 
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS - Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations 
Question 12 
A Member has raised a question in bilateral negotiations with the Delegation of 
Kazakhstan and also had provided the question in written form.  
This Member finds the reply provided by Ka zakhstan to be completely inadequate.  
The issue that has been raised by this Member does not in any way relate to 
"employment of natural persons" as Kazakhstan  put it, but rather to trading rights and 
violation of national treatment and MFN principles. WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 15 - 
 
  Therefore, this Member has no choice bu t to repeat its question - how and when 
Kazakhstan intends to abolish the prohibition for natural persons who are not citizens of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan or Kazakh nation als living abroad to register as individual 
entrepreneurs? 
This Member requests the following commitmen t from Kazakhstan to be included in the 
draft Working Party Report: 
"The representative of Kazakhstan conf irmed that, before the conclusion of 
negotiations, Kazakhstan would amend the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Private 
Entrepreneurship (No. 124-III ZRK of 31 January 2006, with subsequent amendments) and any legislation as may be required to a llow natural persons, WTO Members' citizens, 
to register as individual entrepreneurs in Ka zakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
further confirmed that, from the date of a ccession, Kazakhstan would allow the stay of 
up to 90 calendar days to citizens of WTO Members, without the any registration with 
any state authority.  The Working Party took note of these commitments." 
Answer: 
As it is indicated in our previous reply, issues of  employment of natural persons, such as individual 
entrepreneurs, are not regulated by the WTO Multilateral Trade Agreements.  Within the 
framework of the ongoing WTO accession negotiations, as any other acceding country, Kazakhstan 
is undertaking commitments under the GATS in its Services Schedule on regulation of entry and stay of foreign qualified personnel such as Intra-Corporate Transferees and Business Visitors. Kazakhstan's national legislation, as of any other WTO Member's, does not provide national 
treatment to employment of foreign natural persons.  
Kazakhstan is ready to hold bilateral consultations with the concerned Member on this issue.   The statement of the concerned Member, that "Kazakhstan discriminates among WTO Members by 
allowing citizens of a Member to stay in Kazakhstan for 90 days without any registration, whereas 
citizens of other WTO Members are required to register with appropriate authorities if their stay exceeds 5 days", is not correct. According to the "Rules on Entry and Temporary Stay of Foreign 
Natural Persons in the Republic of Kazakhstan , and their Departure from the Republic of 
Kazakhstan", approved by the Resolution of th e Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 148 of 21 January 2012, all foreign natural persons are required to register within five calendar days from the date of crossing the state border of the Republic of Kazakhstan at the place 
of their temporary residence.  
The only exception was made in the framework of the Single Economic Space Agreement 
"On Legal Status of Natural Persons and Members of their Families" as of 19 November 2010, 
according to which citizens of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation are allowed to 
stay in Kazakhstan for a period of 30 days without registration.  
Kazakhstan's regulations in the area of entry and temporary stay of foreign natural persons do not 
provide for stay in Kazakhstan without registra tion for 90 days to citizens of any country.  
Moreover, registration requirements applied to foreign visitors are not governed by WTO 
Agreements and none of the WTO Members is obliged to provide MFN treatment on this issue.  
Therefore, Kazakhstan is not ready to include the proposed commitment text into the draft 
Working Party Report.  
A. IMPORT REGULATIONS - Ordinary Customs Duties 
Question 13 
Please circulate the necessary headnotes for Kazakhstan's consolidated goods schedule 
for review by signatory Members.  We sugge st that those developed for Russia's goods WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 16 - 
 
  schedule would be a good starting point,  given the unified tariff structure of the 
Customs Union. 
Answer: 
The part of headnotes for Kazakhstan's Consolidat ed Goods Schedule (to:  Part I – MFN Tariff. 
Section I – Agricultural Products. Section I – A.  Tariffs) developed based on the results of bilateral 
goods market access negotiations between Kazakhstan and WTO Members were submitted to the WTO Secretariat on 26 December 2012.  
In February 2013, the WTO Secretariat circulated the Notice of Inputs for Market Access 
Negotiations on Goods (WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/11) stating that "Kazakhstan has submitted … headnotes for the draft Goods Schedule, based on the results of bilateral market access negotiations on goods between Kazakhstan and WTO Members in the framework of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO". Electronic version of the headnotes can be obtained from the Accession 
Division of the WTO Secretariat upon request.   
The remaining headnotes are currently being developed based on the bilateral agreements signed 
between Kazakhstan and WTO Members. As soon as this work is completed, Kazakhstan will send 
the relevant headnotes for consideration by Members. 
Question 14 
Paragraph 277:  Could Kazakhstan confirm th at amendments to the CU Agreement are 
being enacted and provide information on  when this will be accomplished?  
277.  In response to the request of a Member to remove from Article 1 of the 
Agreement on Customs Regulation the provis ion stating the objective of the CET as 
"to protect the economy of the Customs Union from unfavourable influence of 
foreign competition", the representative of  Kazakhstan replied that the relevant 
amendments would be introduced to the Agreement on Customs Regulation by the 
date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. 
Answer: 
The CU Agreement on Common Customs and Tari ff Regulation of 25 January 2008 will be 
terminated as of 1 January 2015 due to entry into force of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic 
Union (hereafter - the EAEU Treaty).  
The inconsistent provision of Article 1 of the CU Agreement on Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of 25 January 2008 stating the objective of the CET as "to protect the economy of the 
Customs Union from unfavourable influence of foreign competition" was not incorporated in the 
EAEU Treaty and therefore will no longer exist as of 1 January 2015. 
Question 15 
Paragraph 283:  We support retention of this draft commitment text. 
283.   [The representative of Kazakhstan confirms that upon accession to the WTO, 
the CU CET will be brought into compliance with Kazakhstan's tariff commitments, 
with regard to the entire commodity nome nclature, in accordance with the results 
of the ongoing "adjustment" negotiat ions aimed at unification of tariff 
commitments of the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
Answer: 
Currently, Kazakhstan is discussing with the WTO Members the option of joining the WTO based on 
its own tariff commitments agreed with Working Party Members as a result of bilateral negotiations 
on goods market access.  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 17 - 
 
  Therefore, Kazakhstan cannot accept the proposed commitment text. 
Question 16 Paragraph 288:  We understand that Kazakhstan  is prepared to submit its ITA Schedule 
to the ITA Committee for review and verificati on in the nearest future, well in advance 
of its accession, in order to be able to jo in the ITA when it becomes a WTO Member.   
- We suggest deletion of the bracketed phrase, as follows: 
288.  [In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that Kazakhstan would submit  its Information Technology Agreement 
(ITA) Schedule to the ITA Committee for veri fication [by the time of its accession 
to the WTO], in accordance with ITA proced ures, in order to enable Kazakhstan to 
join the ITA when it became a WTO Member.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.]. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan agrees to remove the wording "by the date of its accession to the WTO" from the 
commitment text. Paragraph 288 of the draft Working Party Report will be amended as follows: 
288. [In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed 
that Kazakhstan would submit its Information Technology Agreement (ITA) Schedule to the 
ITA Committee for verification "by  the time of its accession to the WTO", in accordance with 
I T A  p r o c e d u r e s ,  i n  o r d e r  t o  e n a b l e  K a z a k h s t a n  t o  j o i n  t h e  I T A  w h e n  i t  b e c a m e  a  WTO Member.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
- Tariff Rate Quotas 
Question 17  
Paragraph 326:  Concerning the altern ative texts for a commitment on TRQs: 
- We support the second text as being more  complete, i.e., making reference to both 
new importers and to commercially viable quantities.   
- In addition, the commitment on new importer s in the second text is specific that 
access is to be granted "in quota" from th e outset, and tracks the language of the 
WTO Agreement. 
- We have had an extended conversation on  these points, with Kazakhstan resisting 
both concepts until relatively late in th e process, notwithstanding that they are 
provided for in the Agreement itself.   
- As we are subject to TRQs applied by Ka zakhstan, we need the additional clarity 
provided by the second text. 
326.  [The representative of Kazakhstan  confirmed that, in implementing TRQs, 
Kazakhstan would apply WTO-consistent proc edures that provide for allocations to 
new importers.  In case, if Kazakhstan decides to allocate TRQs on a 
country-specific basis, it wo uld provide for a transparent, predictable and timely 
reallocation mechanism that allows for fu ll utilisation of TRQs by WTO Members.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that from the date of accession of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO, import TRQs  applied in Kazakhstan would be 
administered, whether by the competent Bo dies of the CU or by authorities of WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 18 - 
 
  Kazakhstan, in a manner that was consistent with the GATT 1994 and other 
relevant WTO Agreements, including the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and the Agreement on Agriculture.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
1  Language proposed by Kazakhstan. 
326.  [The representative of Kazakhstan co nfirmed that from the date of accession 
o f  K a z a k h s t a n  t o  t h e  W T O ,  i m p o r t  T R Qs applied in Kazakhstan would be 
administered, whether by the competent Bo dies of the CU or by authorities of 
Kazakhstan, in a manner that was consistent with the GATT 1994 and other relevant WTO Agreements, including the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and the Agreement on Agriculture.  [She further confirmed that, in 
implementing TRQs, Kazakhstan would prov ide for allocations under the TRQs in 
commercially viable quantities and woul d provide opportunity for new entrants 
seeking access to in-quota allocations und er the TRQ.]  If Kazakhstan allocated 
TRQs on a country-specific basis, it woul d provide for a transparent, predictable, 
and timely reallocation mechanism that allows for full utilisation of TRQs by 
WTO Members.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
2  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
Answer: 
It should be noted that Article 3.5 (i) of th e WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures 
stipulates "…when issuing licenses, Members  shall take into account the desirability of 
issuing licenses for products in economic quantities".   
Furthermore, Paragraph 5 of the "Understanding on  Tariff Rate Quota Administration Provisions of 
Agricultural Products, as Defined in Article 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture", adopted by the 
Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 states that "As regards Article 3.5 (i), licenses for 
scheduled tariff quotas shall be issued in economic quantities".  
Therefore, Kazakhstan proposes to reflect the language of the relevant WTO Agreement and 
change the commitment text as follows: 
326.   [The representative of Kazakhstan co nfirmed that from the date of accession of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO, import TRQs applied in Kazakhstan would be administered, whether 
by the competent Bodies of the EAEU  or by authorities of Kazakhstan, in a manner that was 
consistent with the GATT 1994 and other relevant WTO Agreements, including the 
Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and the Agreement on Agriculture She further 
confirmed that, in implementing TRQs, Kazakhstan would provide for allocations under the 
TRQs in commercially viable quantities and would provide opportunity for new entrants 
seeking access to in-quota allocations under the TRQ and would take into account the 
desirability of issuing licenses for products in economic quantities as stipulated in 
Article 3.5 (i) of the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  In case, if 
Kazakhstan decides to allocate TRQs on a country-specific basis, it would provide for a 
transparent, predictable, and timely reallocation mechanism that allows for full utilisation of 
TRQs by WTO Members.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Application of Internal Taxes to Imports 
Question 18 We understand that Kazakhstan plans to tax au tomotive vehicles by engine size starting 
on 1 January 2014.  We understand that this tax would be distinct from excise taxes.  
- Is this correct? 
- Has this plan been introduced to the Majilis?  Has it been enacted? 
- If so, please describe the plan and confirm when it will be implemented. WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 19 - 
 
  Answer: 
According to the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, automotive vehicles are subject to 
transport tax based on engine size. The transport tax is distinct from the excise tax. 
The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 December 2013 No.152-V On Amendments and 
Addenda into Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan provided for an increase in tax 
rates for automotive vehicles with an engine capacity of more than 3000 cubic centimeters, which is paid on an annual basis.  
The Law came into force on 1 January 2014.   The following increased tax rates apply to 
automotive vehicles produced (manufactured or asse mbled) in the Republic of Kazakhstan and (or) 
imported to the Republic of Kazakhstan starting from 31 December 2013: 
No. 
  Tax rate 
(monthly calculation index) 
1. Automotive vehicles with an engine capacity of (cubic centimeters):  
 over 3 000 to 3 200 inclusive 35 
 over 3 200 to 3 500 inclusive 46 
 over 3 500 to 4 000 inclusive 66 
 over 4 000 to 5 000 inclusive 130 
 Over 5 000 200 
- Value-added tax 
Question 19 Paragraph 342:  Please provide the value of 30,000 MCI in US dollars. 
Answer: 
Since 1 January 2014 the monthly calculation index (MCI) is 1 852 tenge (US$12,1). Therefore, 
30 000 MCI is US$363 137. 
Question 20 
Paragraph 355:  We understand that Kazakhst an agrees to the date of 1 January 2018 
for this commitment.  Please reflect this in the revised text as indicated below. 
355.  [The representative of Kazakhst an confirmed that, from the date of 
accession, Kazakhstan would apply its do mestic taxes and exemptions thereof, 
including VAT, excise taxes, and other ta xes, in a non-discriminatory manner in 
compliance with Articles I and III of the GATT 1994 [, except for VAT preferences 
for agricultural producers and processor s described in paragraphs 345 and 346.  
The Republic of Kazakhstan would br ing these VAT preferences applied to 
agricultural producers and processors into  conformity with the WTO rules [upon 
expiration of the three-year transitional period starting from the date of accession 
of Kazakhstan to the WTO] [by 1 January  2018].  She added that during this 
period, the scope of the exemption would not be increased, either in terms of 
coverage or level of exemption].  Th e Working Party took note of this 
commitment.] 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan will amend the commitment paragraph as proposed: 
355.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply its domestic taxes and exemptions thereof, including VAT, excise taxes, and other taxes, in a non-discriminatory manner in compliance with Articles I and III of 
the GATT 1994, except for VAT preferences for agri cultural producers and processors described in 
paragraphs 345 and 346.  The Republic of Kazakhstan would bring these  VAT preferences applied WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 20 - 
 
  to agricultural producers and processors into conformity with the WTO rules  
[by 1 January 2018] . She added that during this period, the scope of the exemption would not 
be increased, either in terms of coverage or le vel of exemption. The Working Party took note of 
this commitment.] 
- Excise Taxes 
Question 21 We understand that Kazakhstan intends to in crease its excise taxes.  Please provide 
information on the scope and nature of the ta x increases, and the date when they will be 
implemented. 
Answer: 
The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Amen dments and Addenda into the Certain Legislative 
Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Tax I ssues" No. 152-V of 5 December 2013 (hereinafter – 
the Law) envisages gradual increase of excise tax rates for imported and locally produced tobacco 
and alcohol products on a uniform and non-discriminatory basis. 
Excise tax rates for tobacco products and alcohol beverages will be increased in accordance with 
the following schedule: 
Types of tobacco products 2014( tg/kg) 2015(tg/kg) 2016(tg/kg) 
Filter-tipped cigarettes 3000 3900 5000 
Non-filter cigarettes, smokables 3000 3900 5000 
Cigarillos 3700 4800 6225 
Cigars 475 620 565 
Tobacco 3800 4900 7345 
For alcohol products: 
Types of alcohol products 2014(tg/l) 2015(tg/l) 2016(tg/l) 
Alcohol products 1000 1200 1600 
Cognac, brandy from imported cognac 
spirit  250 250 250 Cognac, brandy from domestic cognac 
spirit 
- Quantitative Import Restrictions, incl uding Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing 
Systems 
(b) Import Licensing 
- (i)  Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products 
Question 22 Paragraph 390:  Kazakhstan has indicated that  revised legislation as described below is 
before its Parliament along with other change s to Kazakhstan's alcohol regime, and that 
enactment is expected in 2014. 
 Could Kazakhstan remove the brackets in this text? 
390.  ...  In response to a question from  a Member, the representative confirmed 
that Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products would be 
amended to reflect the changes in licensing regime applied to imports of ethyl spirits and alcohol products [by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO].  
In response  ...    WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 21 - 
 
  Answer: 
The brackets will be removed for this submi ssion of the draft Working Party Report.   
390. The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, pursuant to CU Commission 
Decision No. 747, upon accession to the WTO of any EAEU member State , non-automatic 
import licensing requirement for ethyl spirits and alcohol products (Section 2.18 of the 
Common List) would be eliminated and replaced by an automatic licensing procedure whereby licenses would be issued upon submission of the appropriate and complete 
documentation.  She further noted that pursuant to Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Improvement 
of Permissible System" of 15 July 2011 amendi ng the Law on Licensing, the requirement for 
an activity licence for importation of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, which was used as a 
condition for obtaining an import licence for ethyl spirits and alcohol products, had been 
eliminated as of 30 January 2012.  She noted, however, that importers into Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products were still required to hold an activity licence for 
production, distribution, or storage of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, and to obtain and 
apply strip stamps for the purposes of excise  tax payments, as described in the section 
"Application of Internal Taxes to Imports" of this Report.  In response to a question from a 
Member, the representative confirmed that La w No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and 
Alcohol Products would be amended to reflect the changes in licensing regime applied to imports of ethyl spirits and alcohol products [by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO].  In response to a question from another Member concerning licensing requirements 
for non-food products containing denatured alcohol, e.g., fuel mixtures, cosmetics, 
fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products and EAEU  legal 
acts did not regulate importation of these products.   
- (iii)  Products containing cryptograp hic capabilities, including goods with 
encryption technology and special technical devices 
Question 23 
Paragraph 402 states that the CU Encryption Regulation had been amended by Decision 
of the Collegium of the EEC No. 103 "On Amendments to the Regulations on the Application of Restrictions" of  14 May 2013 with the purpose to include the definition of 
"mass market goods", as defined in  Annex 15 (c) of this Report.   
-  I n  Q u e s t i o n  3 5  o f  W T / A C C / K A Z / 7 8 ,  w e  n o t e d  t h a t  t h e  l a n g u a g e  i n  D e c i s i o n  
No. 103 narrows the definition of "mass ma rket goods" as defined in Annex 15(c) 
of the draft Working Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.10) and introduces 
additional hurdles for products that qualify for mass market treatment.   
- In bilateral contacts with Kazakhstan in the interim, we have cited specific aspects 
of Decision No. 103 that do not confor m with the agreed definition of "mass 
market goods found in Annex 15(c). 
- Kazakhstan has rejected our concerns, and failed to justify the inconsistencies 
identified by us in the language of the Decision.  Neither has Kazakhstan 
addressed the fact that the new language imposes additional burdens on trade.   
- The narrowed definition has direct implications for the market access of goods 
covered by the Information Technology Agreement. 
- Kazakhstan should not dismiss our concerns and we reiterate our request that 
Kazakhstan bring the text of the regu lations into conformity with its WTO 
commitments prior to closing this part of the WP Report text.   
Please add the following Members language to the end of the text of paragraph 402: WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 22 - 
 
  "402. ... as defined in Annex 15(c) of th is Report.  A Member stated that the 
amendment to the CU Encryption Regulation in EEC Collegium Decision No. 103 
narrows the definition of "mass market goods" as defined in Annex 15(c) of the 
draft Working Party Report and introduces  additional hurdles for products that 
qualify for mass market treatment.  It al so creates additional barriers that would 
affect the ability of goods covered by th e Information Technology Agreement to 
access the market.  She asked that these inconsistencies with the agreed definition 
be corrected prior to conclusion of the negotiations." 
Answer: 
The proposed text will be incorporated for the next  submission of the draft Working Party Report.   
402.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, prior to 1 January 2010, the 
importation of goods containing encryption technology had only been subject to an activity 
licence; pursuant to the Resolution of the Go vernment of Kazakhstan No. 1160 "On Approval 
of Licensing Rules and Qualification Requirements for Activity in the Sphere of Development 
and Sale (including other Transfer) of Devices for Cryptographic Protection of Information" 
of 30 November 2007, no import licence had been required.  Currently,  the importation of 
goods containing encryption technology was regulated by Annex 7 to the EAEU Treaty, 
and Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this section, and by the Regulation "On the 
Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Removal of the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption (Cryptographic) Means" (hereinafter: "the Encryption Regulation"). She further stated that the Encryption Regulation had been 
amended by Decision of the Collegium of  the EEC No. 103 "On Amendments to the 
Regulations on the Application of Restrictions " of 14 May 2013 with the purpose to include 
the definition of "mass market goods", as defined in Annex 15 (c) of this Report. A Member 
stated that the amendment to the Encrypti on Regulation in EEC Collegium Decision 
No. 103 narrowed the definition of "mass ma rket goods" as defined in Annex 15(c) 
of this Report and introduced additional  hurdles for products that qualified for 
mass market treatment.  It also created a dditional barriers that would affect the 
ability of goods covered by the Informat ion Technology Agreement to access the 
market. A Member asked that these inconsis tencies with the agreed definition be 
corrected prior to conclusion of the negotiations."  
Question 24 
Paragraph 411:  Please confir m Kazakhstan's readiness to "engage interested Members 
in a review of the operation of this inte rim system [that provides that for goods 
containing encryption technology that need an import licence , such goods would need 
to undergo expert evaluation and approval (conclusion) only once] ... to clarify and 
refine procedures for notification, confirmati on, and licensing of goods with encryption 
technology and, where possible, to further improve and expand the products covered." 
Answer: 
As stated in the commitment text of paragraph 411 of the draft Working Party report, Kazakhstan 
is ready to "engage interested Members in a revi ew of the operation of this interim system… ." 
- Other Customs Formalities 
Question 25 Paragraph 458 states that Kazakhstan is in  the process of implementing a Unified 
Automated Information System (UAIS) for customs clearance, and plans to have it 
implemented across the country by 1 January 2014.   
- Is this still the expected date of full implementation? 
- Information on a Unified Automated Info rmation System for customs clearance in 
the section entitled "Customs Valuation" could be moved to the section on "Other WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 23 - 
 
  Customs Formalities," since this system does not necessarily pertain to customs 
valuation. 
Answer: 
Paragraph 458 of the draft Working Party Report is in the section "Other Customs Formalities" 
(paragraphs 455-460).  
In several regions of the Republic of Kazakhstan test application of an electronic customs 
declaration system will be implemented by 1 January 2014.  Furthermore, other regions will 
implement the system in a staged manner. At the moment, it is not possible to state the exact 
date of the implementation of the system across the country due to differences in technical capacity of the regions to implement the system.  Therefore, paragraph 458 has been modified as 
follows: 
458.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, to facilitate control at the border, her 
Government was in the process of implementing a Unified Automated Information System (UAIS).  As a first step, the Government of  Kazakhstan had introduced an electronic 
customs declaration system.  Paper customs declarations continued to be used in parallel.  
At the moment, test application of an electronic customs declaration system was being conducted in several regions of Kazakhstan.  The system would be applied across the 
country when all necessary test applications were completed. The planned date of 
introduction of the system across the co untry was 1 January 2014 depended on 
the outcomes of implementation of  the system in the pilot regions.  Concerning the 
protection of confidential information under the UAIS, she said that the Customs Control 
Committee used standard software to ensure the security of information in the system.  
She pointed to Article 16 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, pursuant to 
which customs bodies, customs officials as well as other persons who had access to 
information in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan had no right to 
disclose, use for personal purposes, or transfer to third parties (including Government bodies) information regarded as State, commercial, bank, or tax secret, or other secrets 
protected by laws as well as other confidential information (exceptions were contained in 
paragraph 3 of this Article).   
B. EXPORT REGULATION - Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Serv ices Rendered, Application of Internal 
Taxes to Exports 
Question 26 Paragraph 500 lists the goods upon which Kazakhstan has export duties and notes 
Annex 23(a).  Is the list in the paragraph an d in Annex 23(a) still accurate and up to 
date? 
Answer: 
The list of goods towards which Kazakhstan applies export duty rates provided in paragraph 500 of 
the draft Working Party Report and in Annex 23(a) of the draft Working Party Report is up to date.  - Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas Question 27 
We request Kazakhstan to provide informat ion in the Working Party Report on its 
temporary ban on the export of certain types of petroleum products (including light oils, 
kerosene, gas oil and other petroleum produc ts, but excluding special gasoline, light 
distillates for motor gasoline with an octane rating of 80, and consumer heating oil) 
from 1 July 2013 to the end of the year.   
- The description should indicate HS num bers of the products whose export is WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 24 - 
 
  banned, how often they are applied, and WTO justification for their application. 
Answer: 
The Resolution of the Government of Kazakhst an No. 1402 of 26 December 2013 established the 
ban on exports of certain types of light dist illates (HS 2710 12), kerosene, gas oils and other 
petroleum products, except for petroleum solvent and home heating oil, which remains in force 
until 1 July 2014. 
The measure was introduced in order to prevent a critical shortage of goods essential for the 
domestic market.  
Domestic oil refineries do not have sufficient capacity to fully meet the domestic needs in fuels and 
lubricants that is caused by the quality of Kazakhstan's oil (with high paraffin and sulfur content) 
and equipment, which is currently used by domestic oil refineries. It should be noted that 
temporary export bans are applied by Kazakhstan during cultivation and harvesting seasons.  
At present, the programme for modernization of domestic oil refineries is being implemented. 
As soon as this work is completed, the production of petroleum products will be sufficient to meet 
the domestic demand. 
Temporary measures applied by Kazakhstan are in full conformity with Paragraph 2(a) of Article XI 
of the GATT 1994, which provides for the exception fr om prohibition on application of quantitative 
bans and restrictions as "export prohibitions or restrictions temporarily applied to prevent or 
relieve critical shortage of foodstuffs and other products essential to the exporting contracting 
party" . 
Kazakhstan will include the following te xt in the draft Working Party Report: 
xxx. In response to the question by a Member  concerning temporary bans on exports of 
petroleum products from the territory of Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that the Resolution of the Governme nt of Kazakhstan No. 1402 of 26 December 2013 
had established the temporary ban on exports of certain types of  light distillates  (HS 2710 
12), kerosene  (HS 2710 19 210 0 – 2710 19 250 0), gas oils  (HS 2710 19 420 0 – 2710 
19 480 0, HS 2710 20 110 0 – 2710 20 190 0) and other petroleum products  (HS 2710 
20 900 0 ), except for petroleum solvent (HS 2710 12 210 0-2710 12 250 0), and home 
heating oil. She further added that the temporar y bans were introduced in order to prevent 
a critical shortage of goods essential for the domestic market, since domestic oil refineries 
did not have sufficient capacity to fully meet  the domestic needs in petroleum products. 
In her view, the temporary measures applied by Kazakhstan were in full conformity with 
Paragraph 2(a) of Article XI of the GATT 1994. 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECT ING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS 
- Industrial Policy, including Subsidies Question 28 
Paragraphs 541 and 548 contain informatio n on the Programme Business Road Map 
2020 and Government Resolution No. 1017, re spectively.  We expressed concern in 
                                               
1 Except for petroleum solvent (HS 2710 12 210 0 -2710 12 250 9) and home heating oil. Products HS code 
Ban1 
Light distillates 2710 12 
Kerosene 2710 19 210 0 – 2710 19 250 0 
Gas oil 2710 19 420 0 – 2710 19 480 0, 2710 20 110 0 – 
2710 20 190 0  
Other petroleum products 2710 20 900 0 WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 25 - 
 
  earlier comments that certain aspects of th ese programmes were inconsistent with the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies.   
- Kazakhstan has stated in responses in WT/ACC/KAZ/78 that it is currently 
reviewing these programmes in light of WT O obligations and would amend them if 
necessary to remove problematic aspects of the legislation.   
- Please provide this information in the Working Party Report, including information 
on the findings of the reviews and what changes were or will be made to these 
programmes to eliminate the possib ility of prohibited subsidization. 
Answer: 
In order to bring its subsidy programs into compliance with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures, the Government of Kazakhstan is working on introduction of 
amendments into its two legislative acts. In particular, the target indicators in relation to export 
promotion and other references to export performance will be excluded from the Programme Business Road Map 2020.  
The Government Resolution No. 1017 will be abolished.  
Kazakhstan will add the relevant information to paragraph 552 bis as follows: 
552bis. A Member expressed concern with regard to Kazakhstan's two subsidy programmes 
- Business Road Map 2020 and Government Resolution No. 1017.  In his view, certain 
aspects of these programmes appeared to constitute prohibited export subsidies in accordance with WTO SCM Agreement.  This Me mber sought Kazakhstan's review of this 
legislation and amendment prior to conclusion of  the negotiations to eliminate the possibility 
of prohibited subsidization. In response, the re presentative of Kazakhstan explained that in 
order to bring its subsidy programmes into compliance with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the Government of Kazakhstan was working on 
introduction of amendments into its two legislative acts.  In particular, the target indicators 
in relation to export promotion and other references to export performance would be excluded from the Programme Business Road Map 2020.  The Government Resolution 
No. 1017 would be abolished. 
Question 29 Paragraph 554:  Concerning the [bra cketed language] in this text: 
- Kazakhstan has identified programmes and acknowledged that they have 
measures that promote exports in return for benefits.  While we are certain that 
Kazakhstan intends to amend any programmes  that have prohibited subsidies prior 
to accession to the WTO, we want to highlight the commitment with regard to the 
programmes identified by inserting the text, [including development programmes 
providing benefits for exporting firms]. 
- We support the term [export performance] since it is the language used in the 
Agreement. 
- We note that the commitment in paragr aph 554 to circulate Kazakhstan's subsidy 
notification upon accession conflicts with  the commitment in Table 2.  We support 
Kazakhstan's request for a transition, and suggest editing the commitment to 
remove the reference to "upon accession" and substitute an appropriate reference 
to Table 2.   
554.  [The representative of Kazakhstan  confirmed that, except as otherwise 
provided in the Working Party Report, up on accession, Kazakhstan would eliminate 
all subsidies programmes[, including de velopment programmes providing benefits 
for exporting firms,] administered within its territory falling within the scope of 
Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Su bsidies and Countervailing Measures or WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 26 - 
 
  modify these programmes so that any subs idy provided would not be contingent, 
de jure or de facto , upon [exportation] [export pe rformance], or on the use of 
domestic over imported goods.  She also confirmed that any subsidy programme in 
place or established after accession within  the territory of Kazakhstan would be 
administered in conformity with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures.  In addition, the Republic of Kazakhstan would provide a 
subsidies notification prepared in ac cordance with Article 25 of the WTO 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures to the Committee on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures [as pr ovided for in Table 2 of this report] 
upon entry into force of Kazakhstan's Pr otocol of Accession.  She also confirmed 
that Kazakhstan would not invoke any of th e provisions of Articles 27 and 28 of the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Counter vailing Measures.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan in its previous answer has described amendments into the Program Business Road 
Map 2020 and Government Resolution No. 1017 that will eliminate problematic provisions related to export performance. These amendments will be made prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the 
W T O .  I n  t h i s  r e g a r d  K a z a k h s t a n  b e l i e v e s  i t  i s  u n n e c e s s a r y  t o  a d d  t h e  p r o p o s e d  l a n g u a g e  w i t h  
regard to the identified programmes [ including development programmes providing benefits for 
exporting firms ] to the commitment text. 
Kazakhstan agrees to use term [export performance] and to edit the commitment by substituting 
the reference to "upon accession" by a reference to Table 2 of the Report:  
554.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confir med that, except as otherwise provided in the 
Working Party Report, upon accession, Kazakhstan would eliminate all subsidies 
programmes [including development programmes providing benefits for exporting firms] 
administered within its territory falling within  the scope of Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement 
on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures or modify these programmes so that any subsidy 
provided would not be contingent, de jure or de facto, upon export performance , or on 
the use of domestic over imported goods.  She also confirmed that any subsidy programme 
in place or established after accession within the territory of Kazakhstan would be administered in conformity with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures.  In addition, the Republic of Kaza khstan would provide a subsidies notification 
prepared in accordance with Article 25 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures to the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures as 
provided for in Table 2 of this Report .  She also confirmed that Kazakhstan would not 
invoke any of the provisions of Articles 27 and 28 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.]  
- Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification 
Question 30 Paragraph 594 states that Law No. 603 On Te chnical Regulation was last amended in 
July 2010.   
- Is this correct, or have there been subs equent amendments.  If so, please describe 
any relevant changes to the law.   
Answer: 
Since 2010, several Laws that introduced amendments into the Law No. 603 "On Technical 
Regulation" have been adopted. In particular, these are:   
- The Law No. 378-IV "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of state control and supervision" of  6 January 2011;  
- The Law No. 400-IV "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Regu lation of Trade Activities" of 26 January 2011; WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 27 - 
 
  - The Law No. 452-IV "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Revi sion of Competences of Authorized Bodies and 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Adoption of  legal acts establishing requirements to the inspected subjects" of 5 July 2011;  
- The Law No. 562-IV "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Defe nse and Military Service" of 16 February 2012; 
- The Law No. 31-V "On Amendments and Additions to  Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on Technical Regulation and Metrology" of 10 July 2012; 
- The Law No. 34-V "On Amendments and Additions to  Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on the Issues of State Monopoly" of 10 July 2012; 
- The Law No. 36 V "On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Reduction of  the Number of Authorization Documents and 
Optimization of Control and Supervisory Functions of State Bodies" of 10 July 2012; 
- The Law No. 81-V "On Amendments and Additions to  Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Competition" of 6 March 2013; 
- The Law No. 124-V "On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of alignm ent with the System of State Planning of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 3 July 2013; 
- The Law "On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on the Issues of Organization and Conduct of International Specialized Exhibition EXPO-2017 in Astana".  
 
The most significant amendments to the Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation" aimed at alignment of national legislation in the field of technical regulation with Kazakhstan's international 
commitments were made by the Law No. 31-V of 10 July 2012 (hereinafter – the Law).  
 This Law had introduced amendments and addenda to eight Codes and 22 Laws of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  The Law contains provisions that exclude the Government's competence to adopt 
technical regulations due to the development of common technical regulations of the EAEU and delegates the authority to adopt technical regula tions of the EAEU to the Eurasian Economic 
Commission.  The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan participates in development of draft 
technical regulations of the EAEU prior to their adoption by the Eurasian Economic Commission.   
 Moreover, the Law introduced new provisions to the Law on Technical Regulation that reflect 
Kazakhstan's commitments undertaken in the course of the WTO accession process and are aimed 
at bringing the national legislation in line with international practice. In particular, a new article on the Information Centre reflects Kazakhstan's commitment to establish an enquiry and notification 
point in accordance with the TBT Agreement. Article 24 of the amended Law provides for an 
application of international and regional standards, recommendations and guidelines, and normative documents of foreign countries. Moreover, a new article on Uniform State Fund of Normative Technical Documents that contains information on all adopted standards, classifiers of 
technical and economic information and normative technical documents has been introduced in to 
the Law on Technical Regulation.  
This information has been provided in paragraph 571: 
 
571. …In particular, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Amendments and Additions 
to Some Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology" had been adopted on 10 July 2012.  This Law had introduced amendments and addenda to eight Codes and 22 Laws of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan.  The Law had excluded 
the Government's competence to adopt technical regulations due to the development of 
common technical regulations of the EAEU  and transfer of the authority to adopt technical 
regulations the EAEU  t o  t h e  E u r a s i a n  E c o n o m i c  C o m m i s s i o n .   T h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  
Republic of Kazakhstan only reviewed an d approved draft technical regulations of the EAEU 
prior to their adoption by the Eurasian Economic Commission.  The Law also provided for the 
harmonization of terms in the field of technical regulation with the EAEU legislation .  
In particular, the terms  'state system of  technical regulation', 'register of state 
system of technical regulation', 'compul sory certification', 'uniform state fund', 
'normative technical documents', 'doc uments in the field of conformity 
confirmation', 'standard', 'testing laborato ry', 'standard of the organization'  were 
introduced or modified.  Moreover, the Law had introduced new provisions to the 
Law on Technical Regulation that reflec ted Kazakhstan's commitments undertaken WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 28 - 
 
  in the course of WTO accession process an d were aimed at bringing the national 
legislation in line with international prac tice. In particular, a new article on the 
Information Centre reflected Kazakhstan 's commitment under the TBT Agreement 
to establish an enquiry and notification point. Article 24 of the amended Law 
provided for an application of inte rnational and regional standards, 
recommendations and guidelines, and norm ative documents of foreign countries. 
Moreover, the new article on Uniform State Fund of Normative Technical 
Documents that contained information on all adopted standards, classifiers of 
technical and economic information and normative technical documents had been 
introduced by the Law in to the Law on Technical Regulation.  
Question 31 
Paragraph 626 states:  
"626. ... possible under the Law "On Technical Regulation" for Kazakhstan to 
accept the results of conformity assessm ent procedures done in WTO Members on 
the basis of, and in compliance with, Ar ticle 6.1 of the WTO TBT Agreement, 
without requiring the conclusion of a mu tual recognition or other agreement.  
The acceptance of such results throughout the CU was established by the 
CU Treaty on the Functioning of the Cu stoms Union in Compliance with Customs 
Union Party Commitments under the Multilateral Trading System.  Therefore, from the date of its accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure, whenever possible, that results of conformity asse ssment procedures of conformity 
assessment bodies located in other WTO Members were accepted , provided that 
Kazakhstan was satisfied, as provided in  Article 6.1 of the WTO TBT Agreement, 
that those procedures offered an assurance of conformity with applicable technical 
regulations or standards equivalent to  the own procedures of Kazakhstan.  
The representative of Kazakhstan also conf irmed that as provided in Article 6 of 
the WTO TBT Agreement, such acceptance also could, for example, be achieved 
through the membership of Kazakhstan's na tional accreditation body in ILAC and 
the International Accreditation Forum (IAF ) and signing of the ILAC Arrangement , 
which would build confidence in the adequacy and technical competence of the conformity assessment bodies of third count ries accredited by other ILAC and IAF 
members, including acceptance of the results of such conformity assessment 
bodies, conclusion of a Mutual Recogn ition Agreement and other appropriate 
means. ..."  
- The statement in paragraph 626 is a co mmitment.  However, we were recently 
informed by a representative of the Technical Barriers to Trade division of the Eurasian Economic omission that all CU imports subject to technical regulations 
would need to be assessed for conformity by a CU conformity assessment body on 
the Unified Register, none of which were fo reign or ever could be.  He also denied 
that membership in ILAC woul d change that in any way. 
- That does not seem consistent with the statement in paragraph 626, i.e., that the 
acceptance of conformity a ssessment results by Kazakhstan of foreign CA bodies is 
possible. 
- We would appreciate clarification on this  point.  In addition, please confirm the 
commitment in paragraph 626, and cite CU legal instruments that ensure that 
Kazakhstan will be able to keep this  commitment after its WTO accession. 
Answer: 
Section X "Technical Regulation" and Annexes 9-11 of  the EAEU Treaty, which will enter into force 
on 1 January 2015 and replace the Agreement on Uniform Principles and Rules of Technical Regulation in the Republic of Belarus, Republic  of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 
18 November 2010, do not establish any restrictions for member States of the Union to accept 
results of conformity assessment procedures of conformity assessment bodies located in third 
countries.   WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 29 - 
 
  Thus, Kazakhstan confirms the commitment stipulated in paragraph 626.  In particular, 
Kazakhstan confirms that whenever possible, re sults of conformity assessment procedures of 
conformity assessment bodies located in other WTO Members will be accepted, provided that Kazakhstan is satisfied, as provided in Arti cle 6.1 of the WTO TBT Agreement, that those 
procedures offered an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards 
equivalent to the own procedures of Kazakhstan. 
The national accreditation body of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the "National Accreditation Centre" 
of the Committee on Technical Regulation, has become a signatory of multilateral agreements on 
mutual recognition of accreditation results, in particular, the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) (on testing and calibration) and the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) (on product certification). Membership in these organizations provided the basis for acceptance by 
Kazakhstan of test, inspection and calibration data issued by laboratories accredited by other ILAC 
and IAF members.   
- Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) 
Question 32 
Paragraph 660 contains the commitment for a date for a "standstill" on investment 
contracts concluded under Law No. 291-IV that contains local content procurement 
requirements in exchange for the right to ex plore or extract minerals under the Law.  
Kazakhstan agreed with our Delegation and another Member that this date would be 
31 December 2012.   
- We support removal of the brackets on [31 December 2012] and the elimination of 
[the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO]. 
660.  [The representative of Kazakhstan  confirmed that, from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure that all laws, regulations and 
other measures applied in Kazakhstan th at were within the scope of WTO TRIMs 
Agreement, whether adopted by Kazakhstan  or the competent bodies of the CU, 
would be consistent with the relevant pr ovisions of the WTO Agreement, including 
the TRIMs Agreement, except for measur es applied under investment contracts 
concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO]3 
[31 December 2012]1,2 under the provisions of the Law No. 291-IV, and industrial 
assembly agreements concluded under the provisions of the Order No. 113 prior to 
[the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO]3 [31 December 2012]1,2.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan also confirme d that from [the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO]3 [31 December 2012]1,2, Kazakhstan would not include in 
any new investment contracts or industri al assembly agreements concluded with 
investors in any sector, or incl ude or maintain in the renewal of any existing 
investment contracts or industrial asse mbly agreements, provisions that are 
inconsistent with the relevant provisio ns of the WTO Agreement, including the 
TRIMs Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
1 Language by a Member of the Working Party. 
2 Language by another Member of the Working Party. 
3 Language proposed by Kazakhstan 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan initially considered the proposed date of 31 December 2012 provided that Kazakhstan 
will accede to the WTO by 1 January 2013.  
The Government of Kazakhstan cannot accept the proposed date, i.e., 31 December 2012 as the 
cut-off date, starting from which the local content in procurement of goods would be 
grandfathered from investment contracts, due to the relevant  requirement stipulated in Law 
No. 291-IV.   WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 30 - 
 
  In accordance with the EAEU Treaty, starting from 1 January 2015, Kazakhstan will not require 
local content in procurement of goods in new contracts on subsurface use signed between the Government and investors.  Therefore, in parallel with the ratification of the EAEU Treaty in the 
Parliament, the Government will proceed with the amendment to the Law No. 291-IV that will 
remove the local content requirements in procurement of goods in investment contracts on 
subsurface use.  Only based on the abovementi oned amendment made to the Law No. 291-IV, the 
Government of Kazakhstan will be able starting from 1 January 2015 not to require local content in 
procurements of goods when signing contracts with investors.  
Against the above background, Kazakhstan proposes  to set 1 January 2015 as a cut-off date for 
grandfathering local content requirements in contracts on subsurface use.  
Question 33 
Paragraph 661 contains the commitment for a date for the elimination of local content 
requirements in procurement of firms with  investment contracts concluded under Law 
No. 291-IV that were concluded prior to 31 December 2013.  Kazakhstan has suggested 
the date of 31 December 2021.  We have suggested 1 July 2021.   
- We support removal of the brackets on [31 December 2012] and the elimination of 
[the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] as in paragraph 660, and  
- We support a transitional date [as of the da te of expiration of the initial duration of 
the contracts or within six years of the date of accession or by 1 July 2021, 
whichever takes place sooner] for contra cts concluded under the Law No. 291-IV. 
- We understand that the date of [1 July 2018] is agreed for the elimination of WTO 
inconsistent measures in industrial a ssembly agreements concluded under the 
provisions of Order No. 113.   
- Please confirm and remove the brackets. 
- We suggest a consultation date two year s in advance of the agreed date for the 
elimination of WTO-inconsistent measur es applied under investment contracts 
concluded under the provisions of Law No. 291-IV, i.e., [1 July 2019].  
661.  [The representative of Kazakhstan  confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent 
measures applied under investment contra cts concluded prior to [the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 De cember 2012] under the provisions of 
the Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced [by xxxx]1 [as of the date of 
expiration of the initial duration of the co ntracts or within six year of the date of 
accession or by xxx [1 July 2021] [31 December 2021],3 whichever takes place 
sooner].2  She further confirmed that all WT O-inconsistent measures applied in 
accordance with industrial assembly agre ements concluded prior to [the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO]3 [31 December 2012]1,2 under the provisions 
of the Order No. 113 would be eliminated by [1 July 2018].  [The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that with respect to the measures applied under the 
industrial assembly agreements pursuant to the Order No. 113 and under the investment contracts pursuant to the Law No. 291-IV concluded prior to [the date 
of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO]3 [31 December 2012],1,2 Kazakhstan would 
engage in consultations with interested WTO Members no later than [1 July 2016] 
and [1 July 2019],2 respectively, regarding WTO cons istent measures that could be 
applied, and notify WTO Members of any measures planned to replace 
WTO-inconsistent measures at least six months prior to the adoption of any new 
measures.]  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
1  Language by a Member of the Working Party. 
2  Language by another Member of the Working Party. 
3  Language proposed by Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 31 - 
 
  Answer: 
According to the established practice, procurement plans are made by investors starting from 
1 January of each calendar year.  Therefore, Kazakh stan asks the transitional period to be set as 
31 December 2021, to enable investors to remove their local content commitments in procurement 
of goods starting from 1 January 2022.  
As for the date of 1 July 2018, Kazakhstan confirms that this date was agreed for the elimination 
of WTO inconsistent measures in industrial assembly agreements concluded under the provisions 
of Order No. 113.  
As in case with cut-off date for subsurface use contracts, Kazakhstan proposes to set 
1 January 2015 as the cut-off date for grandfathering local content requirements in industrial assembly agreements. 
Kazakhstan agrees to start consultations 2 years in advance of the agreed date for the elimination 
of WTO-inconsistent measures applied under investment contracts concluded under the provisions of Law No. 291-IV.   
Kazakhstan plans to remove all brackets from the TRIMs commitment text as soon as the 
proposed dates for the cut-off date and transi tional period are agreed with Members.  
Kazakhstan proposes the following changes in the text: 
 
659.  The representative of Kazakhstan expl ained that in accordance with the 
EAEU Treaty, starting from 1 January 201 5, Kazakhstan would not require local 
content in procurement of goods in invest ment contracts with subsurface users.  
Therefore, in parallel with the ratificati on of the EAEU Treaty, the Government 
planned to initiate the amendment to the Law No. 291-IV that will remove the local 
content requirements in procurement of goods in contracts on subsurface use.   She 
further emphasized that taking into account the importance of the local content provisions 
for diversification of the economy in investment contracts concluded prior to 1 January 2015 in accordance with the Law No. 291-IV and industrial assembly 
agreements concluded under the Order No. 113, a transitional period was required to 
phase-out these measures.  
660.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of its accession to 
the WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure that all laws, regulations and other measures applied in 
Kazakhstan that were within the scope of  WTO TRIMs Agreement, whether adopted by 
Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be consistent with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the TRIMs Agreement, except for measures 
applied under investment contracts concluded prior to [1 January 2015]
iii 
[31 December 2012] in accordance with the Law No. 291-IV, and industrial assembly agreements concluded prior to [1 January 2015]
iii [31 December 2012]i,ii under the 
provisions of the Order No. 113. The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that from 
[1 January 2015]iii [31 December 2012]i,ii, Kazakhstan would not include in any new 
investment contracts or industrial assembly agreements concluded with investors in any sector, or include or maintain in the renewal
2 of any existing investment contracts or 
industrial assembly agreements, provisions that are inconsistent with the relevant provisions 
of the WTO Agreement, including the TRIMs Ag reement.  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments.] 
661.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures 
applied under investment contracts concluded prior to [1 January 2015]iii 
[31 December 2012]i,ii in accordance with the Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced 
[by xxxx]i,ii [as of the date of expiration of the initial duration of the contracts or within 
six years of the date of acce ssion or by [31 December 2021]iii [1 July 2021]i,ii, 
whichever takes place sooner].  She further confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures applied in accordance with industrial assembly agreements concluded prior to 
                                               
2 The term "renewal" refers to extension of the duration of existing contracts.  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 32 - 
 
  [1 January 2015]iii  [31 December 2012]i,ii under the provisions of the Order No. 113 
would be eliminated by [1 July 2018]. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that with respect to the measures applied under the industrial assembly agreements pursuant to the Order No. 113 and under the investment contracts pursuant to the Law No. 291-IV 
concluded prior to  [1 January 2015]
iii [31 December 2012]i,ii, Kazakhstan would engage 
in consultations with interested WTO Members no later than [1 July 2016] and [31 December 2019]
iii [1 July 2019]i,ii, respectively, regarding WTO consistent measures 
that could be applied, and notify WTO Me mbers of any measures planned to replace 
WTO-inconsistent measures at least six months prior to the adoption of any new measures.]  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
i  Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. 
ii  Language proposed by another Member of the Working Party. 
iii  Language proposed by Kazakhstan. 
- Free Zones, Special Economic Areas 
Question 34 
Paragraph 698:  Kazakhstan has confirmed that the date that the transition period ends 
is 1 January 2017.  Please insert that date and remove the brackets, as follows: 
698.  [With respect to local content requirements, sufficient processing, i.e., 
substantial transformation, and exemptions  from tariffs and taxes, the goods of 
juridical persons which had been regi stered and active in SEZs and free 
warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession  to the WTO, would continue to enjoy 
the treatment described in paragraphs [668], [671], [691], and [693] of this 
Report, during the transition period ending  on 1 January 2017.  Upon expiration of 
the transition period, firms register ed in SEZs and operating these free 
warehouses would not be subject to export  performance, trade balancing, or local 
content criteria requirements, in law or  in practice, nor would any new firms 
registering in SEZs or to operate a free warehouse be subject to such 
requirements.  In addition, goods imported into free warehouses and SEZs under 
provisions that exempt imports from no n-CU Parties from customs duties and 
certain taxes, which were then released to  the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan 
and the territory of the CU, would be subject to those duties and taxes as 
applicable and customs formalities when entering the rest of the territory of 
Kazakhstan and the territory of the CU.  If those imported goods were reprocessed, i.e., substantially transformed,  within the territory of a SEZ or in a 
free warehouse, the duties and taxes that would otherwise have been assessed for 
those goods were to be paid when the final products entered the rest of the 
territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the CU.  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments.]. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan will add the date of the transiti on period 1 January 2017 to the paragraph 698 as 
follows: 
 698. [With respect to local content requirements, sufficient processing, i.e., substantial 
transformation, and exemptions from tariffs an d taxes, the goods of juridical persons which 
had been registered and active in SEZs and free warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession 
to the WTO, would continue to enjoy the treatment described in paragraphs [668], [671], 
[691], and [693] of this Report, during the transition period ending on [1 January 2017].  
Upon expiration of the transition period, firms registered in SEZs and operating these free 
warehouses would not be subject to export performance, trade balancing, or local content 
criteria requirements, in law or in practice, nor would any new firms registering in SEZs or to operate a free warehouse be subject to such requirements.  In addition, goods imported into free warehouses and SEZs under provisions that exempt imports from 
non-EAEU member States  from customs duties and certain taxes, which were then 
released to the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the EAEU , would be WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 33 - 
 
  subject to those duties and taxes as applicable and customs formalities when entering the 
rest of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the EAEU .  If those imported goods 
were reprocessed, i.e., substantially transformed,  within the territory of a SEZ or in a free 
warehouse, the duties and taxes that would otherwise have been assessed for those goods 
were to be paid when the final products entered the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan and 
the territory of the EAEU .  The Working Party took note of these commitments.]. 
- Government Procurement 
Question 35 
Paragraph 712:  Please remove the bracke ts in this Member's language text 
[immediately after].  Since it is not a commitm ent, and it was stated by a Member, there 
should be no brackets. 
Answer: 
Paragraph 712 will be amended as follows: 
712.  Some Members of the Working Party sought a commitment from Kazakhstan that it would 
initiate negotiations for membership in the Agreement on Government Procurement by tabling an 
entity offer [immediately after ] its accession to the WTO. 
Question 36 
Paragraph 713:  A Member requests that Kaza khstan accept a transition of two years 
form the date of accession for its initiation of negotiations to accede to the Agreement 
on Government Procur ement as follows: 
713.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the intention of Kazakhstan to 
join the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement and to notify the Committee 
on Government Procurement to this effect at the time of accession of Kazakhstan 
to the WTO and to ensure that from the da te of accession, its Government agencies 
would award contracts in a transparent manner according to published laws, 
regulations and guidelines.  She also confirmed that Kazakhstan would request observership in the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement at the time of its 
accession to the WTO and would initiate  negotiations for membership in the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurem ent by tabling an Appendix 1 offer 
within [four] [two] years after accession.  She confirmed that, if the results of the 
negotiations were satisfactory to the interests of Kazakhstan and the other 
Members of the Agreement, Kazakhstan would accede to that Agreement.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
Answer: 
Four-year transitional period, requested by Kazakhstan, would allow the Government, as an 
observer to the GPA, to explore to a greater exte nt the provisions of the GPA and the experience 
of other WTO Members, which already joined the Agreement and based on these analysis to make 
a decision. 
Therefore, Kazakhstan would prefer to initiate negotiations for membership in the WTO Agreement 
on Government Procurement by tabling an Append ix 1 offer within four years after accession. 
Question 37 
Paragraph 714 states that the Government of Kazakhstan is developing legislation to 
exclude procurements by state enterprises an d enterprises with stat e participation from 
the coverage of Law No. 303 "On Government Procurement" of 21 July 2007 when the 
purchases are for commercial purposes.   
- Please update this paragraph to indicate if the legislation has been enacted and/or WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 34 - 
 
  its status in the legislative process. 
Answer: 
Taking into account that the Ministry of Finance and Antimonopoly Agency are now developing the 
draft law, there is no need to update the paragraph at this time.  
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME 
Question 38 The response to Question 56 refers to the draft Agreement on Uniform Procedure for 
Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights.   
- Since this agreement will take priority ov er the Kazakhstan legislation, we would 
like to review it to ensure it does  not conflict with TRIPs obligations. 
Answer: 
The text of the Agreement on Uniform Procedure for Collective Management of Copyright and 
Related Rights is developed based on the TRIPS Ag reement and will be provided to Working Party 
Members as soon as it is agreed among the member States of the EAEU.  
Question 39 
Concerning changes to Article 48 of the Copyri ght Law, and the response to Question 62, 
we would like to confirm our understanding of the use of the word "foreseen" in 
Article 48(1).   
- Are we correct in understanding this provision to refer to those rights and related 
rights that have been enumerated under the Copyright Law, rather than to the 
types of infringement that may have been foreseen by legislators at the time the 
law was drafted?  If our understandi ng is correct, please confirm this. 
- However, if the use of the word "fores een" was intended to limit the types of 
infringement covered by the law only to th ose foreseen in 2012, please explain this 
in further detail. 
Answer: 
We confirm that your understanding is correct. Th e word "foreseen" in provision of Article 48(1) 
refers to copyright and related rights enumerated under the Copyright Law and is not intended to 
limit the types of infringements only to those foreseen in 2012. 
Question 40 The response to Question 62 also states that "The word "foreseen" in the version of 
July 2013 relates not to the infringement but to copyright and (or) related rights that 
are foreseen in the Law.  Therefore, Articl e 48 is not limited to certain infringements 
because we understand it is not possible to fo resee all infringements in this sphere."  
Our concern is not about foreseen acts of in fringement, which as noted are not possible, 
but rather about the types of infringement th at are not foreseen in 2012.  For example, 
in the 1950s, a digital reproduction of a wo rk was not foreseen but should nonetheless 
be covered by the reproduction right.   
- Does the use of the word "foreseen" limit  infringements only to those types that 
are foreseen in 2012, even though we a ssume technological advances will make 
new unforeseen types of infringe ments possible in the future? WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 35 - 
 
  Answer: 
The word "foreseen" does not limit infringements only to those types that are foreseen in 2012.  
Question 41 Question 65:  We understand that the 2012 am endments to the Copyright Law say that 
Article 9.1-1 is deleted, but the revise d copy of the law incorporating the 2012 
amendments that the Kazakhstan provided to us has not deleted the provision.   
- Will there be a revised, English edition of  the copyright, containing all of the 
amendments to date, including all 2013 amendments?  If so, please let us know 
when it will be available. 
Answer: 
Please find the last version of the Copyright La w which is issued in document WT/ACC/KAZ/84.  
Question 42 
Paragraph 744 reports on the plans for intell ectual property harmonization among the 
parties to the Customs Union.   
- We would appreciate as much information as possible on the timeline for the 
realization of these plans. 
- We seek an assurance by Kazakhstan that these Agreements and Treaty will be 
under consideration by the CU Parties,  that copies will be circulated to 
WTO Members for review and comment. 
Answer: 
The member States of the EAEU plan to adopt the Agreements and the Treaty mentioned in the 
WPR in 2014.  
Kazakhstan will forward the draft texts of the Agreements and the Treaty to WP Members for 
review as soon as they are agreed am ong the member States of the EAEU.  
Question 43 
Paragraphs 814-818:  These paragraphs are bracketed.  Para graphs 814-815 are 
Members' language and should not be bracke ted unless another Member objects.  Unless 
a Member has objected, these statem ents should not be in brackets. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan agrees to remove brackets from paragraphs 814-815: 
814. [ Some Members expressed their concerns that without legal provisions requiring 
authorities to prohibit the unfair commercial use of undisclosed information and test data 
provided to obtain marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan of pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemical products, there would be no effective protection against such use 
granted to the applicant providing such data.  A period of at least six years, starting from 
the date of marketing approval in Kazakhstan, sh ould be provided, and during this period no 
person other than the person who submitted such data originally would be permitted, 
without the explicit consent of the person who submitted the data, to rely directly or 
indirectly on such data in support of an application for marketing approval/registration.  These Members also sought confirmation that applicants that sought marketing approval/registration for generic versions of pharmaceuticals (reproduced medicines) were 
required to submit pre-clinical and clinical test results and other data that was required for WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 36 - 
 
  marketing approval/registration of "original" medicines and would not be permitted to rely 
on others' data without permission for the six-year period of protection against unfair commercial use.  These Members requested that Kazakhstan comply with Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement and provide this level of protection.   
815. Some Members also expressed concerns about the transparency of the process for 
granting marketing approval/registration for pharmaceuticals and requested that Kazakhstan establish procedures so that an entity submitting undisclosed information and test data to 
obtain marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical in Kazakhstan would be informed 
if another application was filed seeking marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical with a similar active ingredient.  These Member s sought assurances that those entities that 
had a marketing approval/registration or pending application for a pharmaceutical with the 
same or similar active ingredient had an opportunity to provide information to Kazakhstan's 
officials on whether other applicants had permission to use the first applicant's undisclosed information and test data, and to bring to the attention of Kazakhstan's officials issues 
regarding a subsequent applicant's developm ent and submission of its own undisclosed 
information and test data.  Members also requested information on whether Kazakhstan's officials would deny marketing approval/registrat ion for a pharmaceutical if the applicant did 
not provide its own undisclosed information and test data and on the status of 
pharmaceuticals that were improperly granted marketing approval/registration.  In particular, on whether pharmaceuticals that were granted marketing approval/registration based on applications that did not include th e applicant's own undisclosed information and 
test data would be removed from the market until such legal requirements were satisfied. ]   
Question 44 
Paragraph 752 states that Article 28 of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights of 
Kazakhstan limiting the term of protection of copyright to 70 years after the author's 
death unless otherwise specified in Article 28.  However, the website of the World 
Intellectual Property Organization (h ttp://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp? 
file_id=200036) states that Article 28 of the sa me law limiting the term of protection of 
copyright to 50 years after the author's death unless otherwise specified in Article 28.   
- Can Kazakhstan please confirm the term of  protection of copyright as provided by 
its Copyright Law? 
Answer: 
According to paragraph 1 of Article 28 of the e ffective Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 
10 June 1996 the term of copyright protection is limited to 70 years after the death of the author. 
Amendment that has extended the term of protec tion from 50 to 70 years was made by the Law 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual 
Property" of 22 November 2005. 
VI. TRADE IN SERVICES 
Question 45 Paragraph 868:  This statement is Members'  language and should not be bracketed 
unless another Member objects.  Unless a Member has objected, these statements 
should not be in brackets. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan will remove brackets in paragraph 868 of the draft Working Party Report of 
Kazakhstan. 
868. [ Some Members stated that they expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to 
guarantee transparency of licensing requirements and procedures, qualification 
requirements and procedures as well as of other authorisation requirements, in particular 
with respect to obtaining, extending, renewi ng, denying and terminating licenses and other WT/ACC/KAZ/83 
 
- 37 - 
 
  approvals required to provide services in Kazakh stan's market and appeals of such actions.  
Kazakhstan's licensing procedures and conditions should not in themselves act as a barrier to market access and should not be more trade restrictive than necessary.  Kazakhstan should publish a list of authorities responsible for authorising, approving or regulating those 
service sectors in which Kazakhstan has made specific commitments and Kazakhstan's 
licensing procedures and conditions.  Members also expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that for those servic es included in Kazakhstan's Schedule of 
Specific Commitments on Services, relevant regulatory authorities would be separated from, 
and not accountable to, any service suppliers they regulate.  Members further expected 
Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that foreign service suppliers remain free to choose their partners . ] 
VII. TRANSPARENCY 
- NOTIFICATIONS Question 46 
Table 2:  The Table should be amended to indi cate that the transition for submission of 
the notification on the WTO Agreement on Subsidies is 120 days.  We understand that 
this is acceptable to Kazakhstan. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan amended the Table 2 - Timeline for th e Submission of Notifications provided in the 
Chapter "Transparency" of the draft Working Party Report of Kazakhstan in order to indicate that the transition for submission of the notification on the WTO Agreement on Subsidies is 120 days.    
Table 2 - Timeline for the Submission of Notifications 
Notification Requirement Type of Measure Deadline 
Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994 - Decision on checklist of issues Responses to the checklist of issues 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (ASCM) 
- Article 25.1 annual;  
- GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 annual Any subsidy as defined in ASCM Article 1:1 which 
is specific within the meaning of ASCM Article 2 as 
well as any other subsidy which causes increased 
exports or decreased imports within the meaning of the GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 (Format:  G/SC) 120 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures - Article 5.1 Trade-related investment measures (TRIMs) which 
are inconsistent with the pr ovisions of Article III or 
Article XI of the GATT 1994 and not justified under exceptions to the GATT (Format:  G/TRI) 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Im port Licensing 
import licensing Procedures - Article 7.3 Replies to questionnaire on procedures 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Rules of Origin - Article 5:1; - Annex II, paragraph 4 Existing non-preferential rules of origin:  judicial 
decisions and administrative rulings of general application relating to non-preferential rules of origin 90 days after 
accession 
 
 
__________