RESTRICTED  
  
S/C/M/145  
 
1 April  2021 
(21-2757) Page: 1/28 
Council for Trade in Services    
 
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 5 MARCH 2021 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
The Council for Trade in Services held a meeting on 5 March 2021, chaired by Ambassador Tan 
(Singapore ). The agenda was contained in document s WTO/AIR/CTS/ 26 and Corrigendum 1 . 
Under Other Business, the Chairman  announced  that he would make a brief statement on the 
appointment of Chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in Services .  
The representative of the United States  said that, under Other Business, his delegation would raise 
an issue concerning the handling of WTO information by Members and Observers.   
The agenda was a dopted  as modified . 
The Chairman  recalled that delegations  were meeting in virtual mode.  He trusted that delegat ions 
attending virtually were , by then , all familiar with the main technical aspects of remote participation.   
 
He urged delegates to speak at a reasonable, moderate pace and, if possible, to provide the 
interpreters with an advance copy of any written sta tements they intend ed to deliver , to help ensure 
that interventions were properly conveyed and understood when translated in the other two official 
languages.   
 
1  ITEM A: NOTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE S III:3 , V:7 AND VII:4  OF THE GATS  
1.1.  With regard to the notifications made pursuant to GATS Article III:3 (Transparency), the 
Chairman  drew the Council 's attention to the communications received from  Australia (S/C/N/1042) , 
Switzerland (S/C/N/1044) , Kazakhstan (S/C/N/1045) and Japan (S/C/N/10 46). 
1.2.  He suggested that the Council take note of the notifications.  
1.3.  It was s o agreed . 
1.4.  Concerning the notification s made pursuant to Article V:7 (Economic Integration), the 
Chairman  drew the Council 's attention to the communication s received from: the United  Kingdom 
(S/C/N/1024) ; Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, 
Guyana, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and 
Tobago, and the United Kingdom (S/C/N/1025); the United  Kingdom, Costa Rica, El Salvador, 
Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama (S/C/N/1026);  the United Kingdom and Chile 
(S/C/N/1027); the United Kingdom, Ecuador and Peru (S/C/N/1028); the United Kingdom and 
Republic of Korea (S/C/N/1029); the United Kingdom and Singapore (S/C/N/1030); the 
United  Kingdom and Ukraine (S/C/N/1031); the United Kingdom and Viet  Nam(S/C/N/1032); the 
United  Kingdom and North Macedonia (S/C/N/1033); the United King dom and Republic of Moldova 
(S/C/N/1034); the United Kingdom and Georgia (S/C/N/1035);  the United Kingdom and Japan 
(S/C/N/1036); China and Mauritius (S/C/N/1037); Australia and Indonesia (S/C/N/1040);  the 
United Kingdom and the European Union (S/C/N/1041) ; Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; Hong Kong, 
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 2 - 
 
  China; Indonesia; Lao People 's Democratic Republic; Malaysia; Myanmar; the Philippines; 
Singapore; Thailand and Viet Nam (S/C/N/1043).   
1.5.  The United States  said that his delegation had taken note of the numerous noti fications from 
the United Kingdom and its Regional Trade Agreement partners . These  were a reflection of the UK's  
efforts to replicate or replace important trading relationships in their own right, separately from the 
previous EU agreements . His delegation looked forward to working with  all Members in the 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  (CRTA) on how to facilitate the  review of those 
agreements according to the CRTA Transparency Mechanism.  
1.6.  The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the noti fication s and the statement made 
and that the agreements notified be referred to the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements for 
consideration.   
1.7.  It was so agreed . 
1.8.  While on the subject of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, the Chair man drew 
delegations ' attention to the fact that, at its meeting scheduled for 22 -23 March, the CRTA w ould be 
considering two regional trade agreements that cover ed services trade : the Free Trade Agreement 
between the European Union and Singapore,  and the Free Trade Agreement between Peru and 
Australia. He trusted that the information w ould be useful to delegations.  
1.9.  With regard to the notifications made under Article VII:4 (Recogni tion), he drew the Council 's 
attention to the communication received from Switzerland and the United Kingdom (S/C/N/1039).  
1.10.    He suggested that the Council take note of the notification.  
1.11.   It was so agreed . 
1.12.   The Chair man offered the floor to the Secretariat to introduce its Note containing an "Overview 
of notifications made under relevant GATS provisions ", which Members had agreed would be updated 
annually. The Note ha d been circulated in document JOB(09)/10/Rev.11.   
1.13.   A representative of t he Secretariat  said that  the Note provide d a statistical account of the 
notifications made by Members under relevant GATS provisions, updated to incorporate notifications 
submitted between January and December 2020. The Note list ed all GATS notification requirements 
applicable to Members, irrespec tive of whether any notifications had been submitted under those 
Articles during the year in question.   
1.14.   As indicated in the Note, during 2020 , 22 notifications had been  made pursuant to Article 
III:3, by 36 Members , 5 economic integration agreements had be en notified under Article V:7 , and 
a further 11 notifications had been  submitted pursuant to Article VII:4.  
1.15.   Three observations could be  made based on the update d Note. First,  2020 had seen  fewer 
notifications submitted under Article III:3 than in the prev ious year ; nevertheless, the number of 
notifications had still increased when compared to the years 2016 -2018. Of the 2020 notifications, 
one had been  submitted in response to COVID -19 pandemic.  
1.16.   Second, t he number of economic integration agreements notifi ed by Members in 2020 was 
equal to th at of the  previous year. As had already been observed in earlier  updates, the previous  
few years  had witnessed a relative slowdown in the number of economic integration agreements 
notified.  
1.17.   Finally, t here had been no ch ange in the number of notifications submitted pursuant to 
Article  VII:4 compared to the previous year, continuing a trend of increasingly more notifications 
under th at Article in the previous  three years.  
1.18.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statement made.  
1.19.   It was s o agreed . S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 3 - 
 
  2  ITEM B: OPERATIONALIZATION OF THE LDC SERVICES WAIVER  
2.1.  The Chairman  drew the Council's attention to the notification of preferential treatment in favour 
of services and service suppliers of Least -Developed Countries submitted under the LDC Services 
Waiver by the United Kingdom (S/C/N/1038).  
2.2.  Since 2015, the preferential tr eatment extended by the United Kingdom to LDCs had been 
contained in the European Union's notification under the LDC Waiver (S/C/N/840). When the United 
Kingdom had ceased to be a Member State of the European Union on 31 January 2020, it had entered 
into a  transition period, during which time the EU notification continued to contain the preferential 
treatment extended by the United Kingdom to LDCs. The transition period had come  to an end on 
31 December 2020. Consequently, the United Kingdom had independent ly notified the preferential 
treatment which was available to services and service suppliers of LDCs.  
2.3.  The representative of the United Kingdom  said that trade in services held great potential for 
supporting developing countries. Services played a vital rol e in economic performance and resilience, 
supporting productivity growth, facilitating and diversifying exports, and promoting the movement 
up value chains via inputs into goods.  
2.4.  The United Kingdom recognised that the LDC Services Waiver was an important t ool for 
promoting LDCs' growth. The United Kingdom had been a leading advocate of the LDC Services 
Waiver from its inception.  It also funded the Trade Advocacy Fund (TAF), which had supported the 
LDC Group to formulate the collective request, which had pla yed a key role in operationalising the 
LDC Services Waiver to date.  
2.5.  Ensuring continuity in trading arrangements with developing countries as the United Kingdom 
left the European Union was a key priority, and the LDC Services Waiver was no exception. 
Immedi ately following the end of the United Kingdom's transition period with the European Union,  
the United Kingdom had  submitted an independent notification under the Waiver (S/C/N/1038), 
which had come  into force on 1 January 2021. The primary concern up to th at point had been on 
ensuring continuity and transparency. That was why the United Kingdom had taken a technical 
rectification approach and retained the same formatting  as well as  maintaining  the scope and 
substance of its former commitments under the EU n otification.   
2.6.  The United Kingdom was committed to operationalising the LDC Services Waiver and would 
continue to explore ways in which it could enable LDCs to take advantage of the preferences offered 
in the notification. The representative said that her d elegation also understood that market access 
was not the only barrier to services trade and that LDCs faced a range of constraints that prevented 
their businesses from making the most of export opportunities. That was why the United Kingdom 
continued to su pport LDC services trade through the Aid for Trade programming.   
2.7.  For example, the United Kingdom had been a key contributor to the Enhanced Integrated 
Framework (EIF). Among its other services -related work, the EIF coordinated essential country -
specific tr ade analysis in the form of Diagnostic Trade Integration Studies (DTIS). That evidence -
based work helped countries identify priorities to guide their trade agendas, including  with regard 
to services trade.  
2.8.  Through the EIF, the United Kingdom was also suppo rting LDC governments to lead on recovery 
efforts in the tourism sector, which had been severely impacted by the COVID -19 pandemic. For 
example, in Burundi and Zambia , the Aid for Trade  programming was helping to assess the impacts 
of COVID -19 on tourism a nd would be focusing on areas such as building resilience of small tourism 
operators, attracting investment and diversifying tourism products to meet market changes in the 
future.  
2.9.  The representative said that her delegation  was a strong supporter of the LD C Services Waiver. 
It was pleased to have notified the United Kingdom's continued offer of preferences under the Waiver 
and remained committed to supporting LDCs' services trade.  
2.10.   The representative of Chad, speaking on behalf of the LDC Group , said that th e Group 
welcomed the United Kingdom 's notification of preferential treatment to services and service 
suppliers from Least-Developed Countries. The Group noted that, according to the statement of the S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 4 - 
 
  United Kingdom, the communication contained the same set of preferences that the United Kingdom 
had granted  under the EU notification, submitted on 16 November 2015. At the time, the LDC Group 
had welcomed the useful contribution of the preferences granted by the European Union in favour 
of LDCs. The LDC Group had noted that a number of preferences responded to its collective request 
(S/C/W/356 and Corrigenda)  and, at the same time, the Group had highlighted some areas where 
they would like clarification s or improvement s.  
2.11.   The comparative review of the UK and EU notifications by the LDC Group was still ongoing. 
For the time being, the LDC Group thanked the United Kingdom for trying to maintain the preferences 
already granted within the European framework, in order to facilitate their review. As a preliminary 
point, the LDC Group particularly welcomed the preferences granted by the United Kingdom to 
contractual service suppliers  and independent professionals in sectors covered in the LDC collective 
request , such as accounting and bookkeeping, architectural and urban  planning services, 
engineering services, technical testing and analysis, advertising and public opinion polling services, 
various consulting services, translation and interpretation services, etc.  
2.12.   Regarding preferences under mode 3, for several sectors of  interest the entry  "none"  had 
been inscribed,  mean ing that there were no restrictions and that the sectors were open to LDCs . 
These included  maintenance and cleaning services, placement of personnel, packaging and printing, 
conference services, telephone answering services, security services, travel and tourism services, 
logistics services, entertainment, hairdressing, cleaning, dyeing, cosmet ics and other beauty 
treatments, etc. The maintenance of British preferences  was also welcome . 
2.13.   The LDC Group welcomed the fact that the UK notification included  several services mentioned 
under modes 3 and 4,  which were  covered in the LDC collective reques t as "none" for modes 1 and 
2. However, the LDCs noted the maintenance of a number of non -committed sectors for contractual 
service suppliers  and independent professionals being of interest to them, such as medical services 
(including psychologists), veter inary services, services provided by midwives, nurses, 
physiotherapists and paramedics, higher education services, tour operators and tourist guide 
services. The Group also noted the existence of economic needs tests in other sectors of interest 
which coul d constitute constraints on LDCs' access to markets.  
2.14.   As in the case of the EU notification in 2015, LDCs would like to see improvements in 
preferences with the elimination of residency and nationality requirements, and the recognition of 
LDC qualifications . Regarding the qualifications and conditions contained in section 4.4(a) of the 
notification  in document  S/C/N/1038, the Group would like to know if there was a possibility to 
renew a service contract for three months . Regarding  section  4.4(b), the notifi cation requirements 
for independent professionals demanded at least six years of experience. Could that criteria be 
reduced to four or five years? Regarding  section  4.4(c)(i),  could more information be provided 
regarding the evaluation of equivalence of fo reign university degrees that were not obtained in the 
United Kingdom?  
2.15.   By way of general comment , the advent of mass online services  and working from home, 
regardless of where the service provider was in the world , had proven to be important due to the  
COVID-19 pandemic. That phenomenon had made many of the residency obligations obsolete. The 
LDC Group stressed the need to enable LDC suppliers to provide professional services through modes 
1 and 2, especially in the areas of education, psychology and other professional services that could 
be provided via mode 1. The LDC Group reiterated its call for preferences to facilitate the recognition 
of vocational training credentials from LDCs to enable the provision of services on th ose platforms. 
The LDCs appreciat ed that the UK notification contained comprehensive preferences for adult 
education services at primary, secondary and tertiary levels. However, the Group believed that an 
effort remained to be made regarding entertainment services for mode 1 , taking into account the 
current health crisis.  
2.16.   The representative said that those were the preliminary comments of the LDC Group. The 
Group would come back to that agenda item at the next meeting to provide further information after 
completing the comparative review o f the notifications of the United Kingdom and the European 
Union. Again, the Group understood that the aim was to maintain the preferences provided for in 
the EU notification. It hoped to consult with the United Kingdom and other notifying Members on 
how n otifications could be improved. The Group was very pleased  to see the UK notification of 
preferences among the notifications received until then . S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.17.   The representative of the United Kingdom  said that her delegation was grateful for the positive 
and constructi ve response from the LDC Group and would give further consideration to detailed 
suggestions for improvement and clarification. The United Kingdom looked forward to working with 
LDC Members on that issue.  
2.18.   The Chairman  noted that the notification by the Unit ed Kingdom was welcomed by the LDC 
Group. He also remarked  that the UK notification included preferences relating to measures other 
than those described in GATS Article XVI (Market Access) and that those preferences had been  
approved by the Council when they were included in the EU notification of preferential treatment, at 
the Council  meeting held on 18 March 2016.  
2.19.   He suggested that the Council take note of the notification submitted  and the statement s 
made.  
2.20.   It was so  agreed . 
2.21.   The Chairman  reminded  the Council of the proposal to organize  a webinar, to bring together 
LDC service suppliers and consumers of LDC services in Members having granted preferences under 
the Waiver. Following an initial proposal from the LDC Group, at the December meeting the Co uncil 
had agreed to task the Secretariat with the preparation of a draft programme for the event. The 
Secretariat draft had been  circulated on 9 February, in document JOB/SERV/CTS/3. It was based on 
the outline that had been prepared by the LDC Group, in d ocument JOB/SERV/CTS/2, and 
incorporated delegations' comments and observations.  
2.22.   The representative of the United States  thanked the LDC Group and the Secretariat for putting 
together the draft program me. His delegation was interested in learning more abou t the experiences 
of LDC service suppliers and their efforts to expand into other markets , and hearing from notifying 
Members or service consumers in those Members where LDCs had actually used the preferences. 
The United States would welcome  the sharing of  their experiences. In addition, the United States 
was always interested in finding out more about statistics and data on services trade and viewed  
that session of the webinar as helpful.  The representative also noted that as the programme 
developed, the U nited States would like to be consulted on various invited speakers and might be 
able to contribute to that effort.  
2.23.   The representative of Turkey  said that her delegation fully supported the organisation of a 
webinar on LDCs' services export performance and  the implementation of preferences granted under  
the LDC Services Waiver. She  further thanked the Secretariat for the programme outline that had 
been circulated recently. Turkey was currently in the process of planning possible contributions to 
the webinar , especially under session 1, which was about LDC services trade data. Since 2016, 
Turkey's statistics institute, TurkStat, had instituted  a comprehensive system for international trade 
in services statistics, which was based on direct reporting. TurkStat had made the current dataset 
public in March 2020 and had been improving the system ever since. The available data was fully 
compliant with Eurostat and OECD criteria. Turkey believed  that it would be interesting to share  data 
about  its imports from LDC Me mbers , including sectoral information. Turkey would also be happy to 
provide information on the operationalisation of its notification under the LDC Waiver and looked 
forward to cooperating further on the subject.  
2.24.   The representative of Singapore  said that her delegation supported the proposed programme 
for the webinar on the sharing of information. Singapore believed that the key objective of the 
webinar was the sharing of information between LDC services suppliers and Members. The 
combination of  presenting quantitative data as well as complementing and sharing experiences with 
some qualitative account was a good idea and Singapore believed that that would contribute to the 
conversation. She also suggested leaving  some time for Members to engage w ith the panellists in a 
Q&A session.  
2.25.   The representative of the European Union  thanked the Secretariat for the draft programme 
regarding the workshop on the LDC Services Waiver. The European Union attached great importance 
in assisting LDCs to strengthen t heir economies and services trade. The LDC Services Waiver was a 
very important instrument in that respect, in addition to the development and capacity -building 
programmes and instruments. The European Union believed that the proposed webinar's outline 
would allow  Members to  have useful exchanges on the operationalisation of the Waiver. The S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 6 - 
 
  perspective of LDC Members and services suppliers would be of particular interest and importance. 
As in previous occasions, the European Union stood ready to participate  in the discussions and share 
its experiences on that issue.  
2.26.   The representative of India thanked the Secretariat for the programme outline. India attached 
utmost importance to the meaningful implementation of preferences granted under the LDC Services 
Waiver by all preference -granting Members , with the ultimate objective of increasing LDCs share in 
the global services export s. As a developing Member, India had always firmly supported better 
integration of LDC Members into the multilateral trading system. In dia welcomed the proposal of 
LDCs to hold a webinar on the implementation of the W aiver so that Members could better 
understand the practical difficulties of LDCs and provide them with capacity building and technical 
assistance in a more targeted manner. I ndia looked forward to actively participat ing in the webinar.  
2.27.   The representative of Chad, speaking on behalf of the LDC Group , thanked the Chairman and 
the Secretariat for having worked with the Group in producing the draft programme for the webinar 
on export performance and the facilitation of the implementation of preferences notified under the 
LDC Services Waiver. Regarding s ession 2, the LDC Group pointed out that importers of LDC services 
likely to participate in the workshop were mainly based in Members that had made notifications. 
Therefore, the Group called on those Members to contribute to the identification of companies  
established in their territory which imported services from LDCs. In that regard, the Group hoped to 
have a dynamic exchange at the workshop between service providers from LDCs and businesses or 
consumers who might already buy services from LDCs. The semi nar was extremely useful to the 
Group and those discussions would allow to better understand what was happening on the ground 
and to share the LDCs' experience, particularly in light of the current health crisis throughout the 
world.  
2.28.   The representative of  Australia  thanked the Secretariat and the LDC Group for preparing the 
further draft outline for the webinar. Australia saw significant value in that kind of information -
sharing and would like to contribute to the webinar. In relation to session 2 specific ally, and as Chad 
had mentioned, her delegation had been seeking to identify Australian importers of LDC services 
that might be able to participate in and contribute to that session. In relation to session 3, Australia 
might be able to contribute by provid ing information on and experiences with technical assistance 
and capacity -building to LDCs , assist ing service suppliers to improve their export competitiveness 
and opportunities. As requested by the communication, her delegation would inform the Secretaria t 
of any contributions it could make in due course.  
2.29.   The representative of South Africa  confirmed her delegation's support for the proposed 
webinar. In addition, South Africa emphasised the need for improvements in implementation and 
aftercare of the Waiver , particularly the gaps with respect to monitoring and evaluating the impact 
of the implementation of the preferences granted under the Waiver, with a view to assess ing its 
implications for LDCs' share in global services trade. COVID -19 had a disproportion ate impact on 
developing countries, especially LDCs, that compel led to pay special attention to the recovery and 
participation of LDCs in world services trade.  
2.30.   In December 2020, South Africa  had introduced a proposal to enhance implementation and 
aftercar e of the Waiver, namely  the introduction of an online WTO -hosted portal for LDC service 
suppliers and importers of such services, so that they could record bottlenecks or challenges in 
activating the preferences granted. The portal could facilitate the rea l-time collection of sector al and 
mode -specific data and could also give preference -granting Members the opportunity to look into 
ways to address the issues recorded therein. Her delegation believed that the proposal deserved 
attention going forward and co uld be considered further in the webinar , considering the targeted 
audience , and in future meetings of the Council . 
2.31.   The representative of China  said that her delegation welcomed the proposal of the LDC 
Members and thanked them for their meticulous work and  informative presentation on a number of 
important issues about the proposed webinar. China was supportive of the idea to hold a webinar 
on the LDC Services Waiver as soon as possible and believed it would improve  Members ' 
understand ing of  the practical difficulties for LDC Members . It would further facilitate  the possible 
grant ing of  targeted  preferences to the LDC Members within Members'  capabilities. China  would 
actively participate in relevant discussions and encouraged Members to exchange in-depth 
experiences and practices, so as to improve LDC Members to better achieve economic development 
through participation in the multilateral trading system.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.32.   The representative of Japan  expressed his delegation's appreciation to the Secretariat for 
developing the programme and its support of the webinar . Japan was among the Members that had 
notified preferences  under the LDC Services Waiver, and his delegation attached importance to 
further facilitating services trade of LDC Members. In that regard, Jap an was interested in hearing 
first-hand experiences an d information from exporters, importers and government officials. Japan 
looked forward to the webinar.  
2.33.   The representative of Brazil  thanked the Secretariat for the programme outline o n that 
important is sue. His delegation  attached a lot of relevance to that discussion. He further thanked 
the LDC Members for incorporating some of the suggestions that Brazil and other Members had put 
forward  on that issue in the previous meetings. His delegation was partic ularly interested in the 
experience -sharing session by exporters and importers. Services was a vast field of economic 
activit y, making it difficult to identify operators that use d the preferences that Brazil and other 
Members had given under  the LDC Waiver . Brazil would be thankful if LDC Members could identify 
some case studies and economic operators that could share  the challenges and opportunities for 
LDC Members in using those preferences.  
2.34.   The representative of the United Kingdom  expressed her delegatio n's support for the proposed 
webinar and thanked the LDC Group and the Secretariat for the program me outline and for 
organizing that event. The United Kingdom was committed to support ing LDCs' trade in services and 
welcomed the opportunity for Members to s hare experiences and best practice. Her delegation  would 
be happy to share information on its work in supporting LDC services trade capacity. It would also 
consult with domestic stakeholders to identify case studies on importing LDC services that might be 
useful to share at the webinar  and would be in touch with the organizers as requested.  
2.35.   The representative of Canada  reiterated her delegation's support for the proposed webinar as 
presented in JOB/SERV/CTS/3 and thanked the LDC Group and the Secretariat for the proposal that 
built on the successful October 2019 dedicated session  that had  given further valuable insights into 
the state of LDC services trade. I n Canada's view, the continued work underlined the importance of 
trade in service s for LDCs ' economic growth and the integration of LDCs into the multilateral trading 
system. Her delegation was encouraged to see that the updated proposed agenda for the web inar 
had taken  into consideration many of the comments shared by Members , including Canada. She 
welcomed the focus on  the experiences of LDC suppliers , including  the challenges and opportunities 
related to COVID -19 and the importance of LDC -specific sector al data. Canada was also pleased by 
the level of support expressed at that meeting.  
2.36.   Canada had also t aken note of the proposal by South Africa on a potential online portal. It 
would be useful to have a written proposal to help in considering that further . She had  understood  
South Africa to suggest that the portal should  be discussed during the webinar. She thus asked for 
further clarifications and whether that would involve a revision of the programme , because she had 
understood that the programme was at a final stage . 
2.37.   The representative of South Africa  replied that her delegation's  proposal was not meant to 
amend the programme. There was scope to address it under the current webinar programme 
because the targeted audience consist ed of importers and exporter s of LDC services. During their 
discussions, they could also reflect if the proposal o n a portal could be helpful in terms of addressing 
some of the issues that they encountered.  
2.38.   The representative of the United States  said that his delegation wanted to c onsult a little 
further with the organi sers of the webinar on the proposal made by South Africa. The idea had not 
been discussed or fleshed out thoroughly. It would be premature to start discussing that in the 
webinar, but the United States would be happy to take that back and consult further with Members 
and the Secretariat.  
2.39.   The Chairman  thanked Members for their useful comments. He further noted the broad 
support for the draft programme outline prepared by the Secretariat. As for the suggestion brought 
up by South Africa, it was not a proposal to change the programme outline. He thus suggested that 
the Council agree to hold the virtual workshop around the end of May, on the basis of the Secretariat 
outline. He appealed to Members for their help in identi fying possible speakers and communicating 
their names to the Secretariat.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 8 - 
 
  2.40.   He suggested that the Council take note of the statements made and revert to that item at 
its next meeting.  
2.41.   It was so agreed .  
3  ITEM C: WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE  
3.1.  The Chairman recalled that,  at the previous  meeting, the Council had continued its deliberations 
of the joint communication from a group of Members titled 'Exploratory discussions on supporting 
digital capability of business and consumers ', circulated as document JOB/SERV/296/Rev .4.  
3.2.  He indicated that the  communication had generated significant interest and discussion. The 
materials shared by delegations had offered, in his view, worthwhile inputs to help Members ' 
reflections and understanding of e -commerce. Agains t that background, at the December meeting 
he had proposed that the information provided be compiled into a single document.  
3.3.  He had , therefore, issued a Chairman 's Note, under his own responsibility, circulated as 
document JOB/SERV/CTS/4. The Note provide d his account of the Council 's activities focused on 
supporting digital capabilities. Its objective, and its value -added, was to capture the information 
provided by Members and present it in a structured and user -friendly manner.  
3.4.  He reiterate d that the ex change of information had been  in no way mandatory. Moreover, the 
information shared was only illustrative of the different types of initiatives that Members had 
undertaken to support digital capabilities and did not provide either a comprehensive or an 
exhaustive account of Members ' initiatives in this sphere. Nevertheless, he had been heartened to 
see the Council engage in such extensive and rich exchanges over the past year and thought it 
worthwhile to capture their essence in an easily accessible snapsh ot document.   
3.5.  The representative of Chile said that his delegation was grateful to the  Chairman for his Note 
and to the co-sponsors for their communication in JOB/SERV/296/Rev .4, which had significantly 
contributed to the Council 's discussion under the e -commerce Work Programme, especially in the 
current circumstances marked by the COVID -19 health crisis.  
3.6.  Over previous years, on-line trade had exhibited important and sustained growth . That growth 
had accelerated because of the COV ID-19 pandemic, which had created a series of challenges for 
goods and services suppliers, and MSMEs in particular.   
3.7.  In that context, his d elegation was of the view that exchanging information about national 
programmes aimed at increasing digital capabilities was a very useful and opportune cooperation 
initiative.  
3.8.  At previous Council meetings, Chile had shared infor mation about its programme  to support 
electronic commerce called "ExportaDigital ", developed by Chile 's export promotion agency, 
ProChile.  At that meeting, he w ished to make a contribution in response to the second question in 
the communication, about domestic program mes, policies or practices  that had  been or were being 
put in place to increase digital capability and address the digital divide as they relate d to e commerce, 
including any assistance to MSMEs . 
3.9.  In that regard, he mentioned the programme "Digitaliza tu PyME ", which h ad been developed 
by Chile 's Ministry of Economy, Development and Tourism, together with Corfo and Sercotec.  That 
initiative aimed to help smaller firms in Chile use digital technologies to increase sales, lower costs 
and improve their relationship with clie nts and suppliers. To achieve that objective, the programme 
offered distinct activities and tools, like trainings, lectures, consulting services and platforms . 
3.10.   As a first step, the programme offered a digital check -up. MSMEs responded to  a questionnaire 
that enable d a complete evaluation of the degree of digital maturity, on the basis of which qualified 
consultants made personalised recommendations to improve the  company 's process of digitalisation, 
which was evaluated over time.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.11.   In addition, through different platforms and webinars, interested MSMEs were invited to learn 
about how digital technologies could be used to their advantage and how digital knowledge an d tools 
could be used in the running of their business.  
3.12.   The programme also included a free nationwide platform called "Pymes de Barrio " which 
connected consumer needs with MSMEs ' supply through a virtual assistant. That greater digital 
presence was aimed at expanding MSMEs ' sales channels. Moreover, an agreement had been  
reached with different firms focused on logistics for e -commerce to enable signed -up MSMEs to ship 
their products and easily sell from a digital application. Information about the programm e was 
presented in a simple and acce ssible manner on the initiative 's website, www.digitalizatupyme.cl . 
3.13.   The representative of the Republic of K orea expressed his delegation 's appreciat ion for the 
Chairman 's efforts with his  informative Note. At the previous meeting, his delegation had  outlined 
Korea 's online shopping trend following the COVID -19 outbreak and its policy responses , including 
specific policy examples.  
3.14.   He wished to give an update about  online shopp ing statistics in Korea. Prior to the pandemic, 
the proportion of online shopping in total retail sales was around 22%. Th at ratio had skyrocketed 
to around 28% in February and March 2020, bringing  it to 26.2% in the first quarter  of the year . In 
the second  quarter, when the social distancing policy had been  eased, the ratio had stabilized at 
around 25.7%. In the third quarter, however, the ratio  had increased again , to around 27.3%. In 
the fourth  quarter, the ratio had sharply increased , to 29.2%. Finally, in December  2020, online 
shopping had accounted for 30.4% of total retail sales, which was a dramatic figure and the first 
time that it had been  above 30%.  
3.15.   What had been the factors contributing to that sharp increase in e -commerce transacti ons in 
Korea? The tightened social distancing policy in the fourth  quarter of 2020 had been  partially 
responsible for  that phenomenon, but the re had also been a  fundamental shift in consumer 
behavioural  trends. Many more people ha d become more accustomed t o online shopping than offline 
shopping. Shopping via mobile device s accounted for about 70%  of the total  in December 2020, 
which was an increase of 4% compared to the previous year.  
3.16.   In Korea, there was a high rate of mobile device distribution, the IT inf rastructure was well 
established, and delivery services were also highly developed. Some of th ose features ha d been 
supported by government policies. Korea 's well -functioning online shopping system ha d acted as a 
preventive measure against COVID -19 and at the same time  had led to steady consumption and a 
resilient economy.  
3.17.   A few weeks earlier , an innovative e -commerce company operating in Korea, which  offered 
huge advantages in terms of rapid delivery and quality control, had announced its IPO plan at the 
NYSE. Th at move was aimed at  raising more capital for deeper and broader innovation in the field 
of e-commerce.  
3.18.   Online shopping platforms work ed 24 hours  a day, seven days a week,  unlike offline shopping. 
The online shopping industry was a kind of battlefield full of competition and innovation. The Korean 
delegation firmly believe d that online retail ha d become more competitive due to open competition 
and con tinuous innovation. Many online retail companies ha d been financed by venture capital, with 
some companies evolving from offline retail business. Other companies were subsidiaries of global 
online retail chain s. In terms of business model, some companies were agents and others function ed 
as dealers. Some companies were trying to be more competitive as dealers by focusing on quick 
delivery or just -in-time delivery , especially in the early morning.  
3.19.   Korea  believe d that  those kinds of innovations c ame from ope n competition. The Korean 
government ha d not been seeking what the industry should exactly be like, but it ha d been creating 
a level playing field and  a business -friendly environment for market participants.  
3.20.   The representative of Singapore  thanked Chile a nd Korea, as well as other Members who had 
previously shared information on their  experiences and  initiatives. Her delegation had also 
contributed to the discussion at previous meetings.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 10 - 
 
  3.21.   At that juncture, by way of  general remarks , she noted that digital transformation had 
impacted everyone's lives and that COVID -19 had accelerated digital adoption  in many parts of the 
world; therefore, it was not surprising  that that topic had dominated much of the CTS discussion in 
2020. Her delegation  saw Member s' deliberations as a contribution to the broader e -commerce Work 
Programme  agenda under the CTS , with the aim of sharing information in a constructive manner. 
She also appreciated the Council's focus on real and ta ngible examples and how they collectively  
tapped digital means, especially during the pandemic.   
3.22.   She also thank ed the Chairman for his Note, which  captured the key issues addressed in the 
previous year , summed up the keen interest Members  had in e-commerce in the CTS and provided 
a useful referen ce point for Members  on the CTS discussions under the Work Programme in 2020 .  
3.23.   The representative of Australia  thanked  Chile and Korea for the very useful information they 
had shared on their policies and practices to boost the digital capability  of busine ss, including the 
innovative models used in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic. The exercise ha d been a useful 
and constructive contribution to the broader e -commerce Work Programme item in the Council .  
3.24.   She also wished to thank the many Members that ha d constructively engaged on th e co-
sponsors ' communication and shared their experiences. Members  had developed a rich dataset that 
provide d both governments and business with best practice and information on practical initiatives 
they c ould tap into to improve their digital capability.  
3.25.   The representative of India thank ed the Chair man for the compilation of information shared 
by Members under the Work Programme during the course of 2020. While her delegation  welcome d 
such information exchange and the sharing of national experiences, India urged Members  not to 
forget the mandated issues  to be discussed under the 1998 W ork Programme .  
3.26.   When the Moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions had been  extended by 
the G eneral Council  in December 2019, this had been  done with an understanding that the Work 
Programme would  be reinvigo rated with an objective of achieving clarity on issues related to the 
scope of the Moratorium , the definition of electronic transmissions , as well as its impact. Many 
Members did  not yet fully comprehend the implications of e -commerce on competition and ma rket 
structures , issues related to transfer of technology , data storage , automation and its impact on 
traditional jobs , and the gaps in e -commerce policy and regulatory  frameworks in developing 
countries.  
3.27.   Therefore, Members needed to start discussing th ose issues , which require d multilateral 
solutions.  The digital revolution was still unfolding and t here was an existing and widening digital 
divide among Members, which ha d been exposed further during the ongoing COVID -19 crisis. On 
that issue, India ha d been emphasizing how important it was  for Members to first understand the 
complex and multi -faceted dimensions of issues related to e -commerce, including the scope of the 
existing temporary Moratorium on custom dut ies on electronic transmission s, its pote ntial impact on 
the sustainability of the domestic industry and negative impact on job creation and revenue 
generation. The urgent need  was to build the capacity in areas such as digital skills and digital 
infrastructure, rather than negotiating binding ru les on e -commerce in a plurilateral framework. 
Making rules at th at stage would  only freeze the non -level playing field in support of existing players 
and against the interests of new players from developing countries.  
3.28.   India was of the firm belief that mul tilateral avenues based on consensus were the most 
effective means to achieve inclusive development -oriented outcomes. In th at context, her 
delegation , along with South Africa, ha d recently made a submission in the General Council titled 
"Legal status of J SIs and their negotiated outcomes " (document WT/GC/W/819 ), wherein, inter alia, 
India's concerns on the plurilateral negotiations on e -commerce taking place under the Joint 
Statement Initiative (JSI) had been  articulated. Given that the Work Programme on e-commerce 
clearly ha d a non -negotiating and exploratory mandate, which ha d been reaffirmed in successive 
Ministerial Decisions, India believe d that rule -making on trade -related aspects of e -commerce by a 
group of Members would  be tantamount to negating the  decisions of past Ministerial Conferences 
and would be severely detrimental to the rules -based multilateral trading system under the WTO.  
3.29.   The representative of South Africa  noted that the 1998 Work Programme state d that "the 
Council for Trade in Services shall examine and report on the treatment of electronic commerce in S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 11 - 
 
  the GATS legal framework ". The issues  mandated  to be examined include d: scope; MFN; 
transparency; increasing participation of developing countries; domestic regulation, standards, and 
recognition; competition; customs duties; classification issues etc. Structured discussions on the 
issues within the mandate of th e CTS were critical if the CTS was to make progress. Th at could  be 
done through identification of topics to be discussed in each o f the CTS meetings , to enable advanced 
preparation by Members.  
3.30.   Her delegation remind ed Members th at the  Work Programme mandate was to examine all 
trade -related issues relating to global electronic commerce within the mandate of th e CTS , "taking 
into account the economic, financial, and development needs of developing countries, and to report 
on the progress of the work programme, wit h any recommendations for action ". But th at aspect  had 
been absent for a while at that point .  
3.31.   The Work Program me could be mutually supportive for Africa and the work underway in the 
continent to harness the opportunities of e -commerce and digital trade , to fas t-track the 
achievement of the AfCFTA and BIAT Action Plan 's objectives of increasing intra -African trade by 
25%, as well as improving Africa 's share of international trade, which currently stood  at less than 
3%  
3.32.   She also thanked the  Chair man for his  Note on information related to digital capabilities 
shared by Members. While such information was helpful, it however  did not respond to the issues 
within the mandate of the Council  under the Work Programme.  
3.33.   The C TS should not only facilitate information -sharing activities but should be intensely 
occupied with activities that truly reinvigorate d the work under the Work Programme as agreed by 
the G eneral Council  in December 2019.  
3.34.   South Africa had  highlighted , in a joint paper with India submitted recently in the General 
Council,  and contained  in document WT/GC/W/819 , the legal, systemic and developmental concerns 
in discussing issues with a multilateral mandate outside of the multilateral trading system. Th ose 
issues require d reflection by the Membership. Wi thout th ose multilateral discussion s as envisaged 
under the mandate , the digital entrepreneurship ecosystem in Africa w ould not achieve its growth 
potential.   
3.35.   Bridging the digital divide was fundamental , as too many informal service jobs of the Global 
South could not  be performed from a 'home office ', and so it seem ed inevitable that the pandemic 
would  reinforce the digital divide if their circumstances continue d to be ignored by a rejection of the 
mandat ed Work Program me.  
3.36.   The representative of China  thank ed the  Chairman for his hard work and leadership in 
promoting e -commerce discussions under the Work Programme. The Note he had circulated provided 
an overview of the main elements of the experience and information  shared by Members , and was 
helpful and useful to guide Members ' future discussions and information sharing under th at agenda 
item.  
3.37.   At the CTS meeting in December, China had shared relevant information on South -South 
cooperation in e -commerce. At that meeting , her delegation  would continue to share China 's 
experiences on how to play the leading role of e -commerce to promote high -quality business 
development.  
3.38.   First, with regard to the application of digital technology, China was actively undertaki ng 
digita lly-enabled transformation and digital business service innovation initiatives, while encouraging 
enterprises to carry out innovation with the application of advanced information technology in 
business such as 5G, big data, artificial intelligence , Internet of Things and blockchain, expanding 
the scope of application of electronic invoices, electronic contracts and electronic documents, and 
enhancing the application of new business models and scenarios such as contactless services and 
cloud exhibit ions, to provide robust support for the recovery of economic activities during the 
COVID -19 pandemic.  
3.39.   Second, China further empower ed rural development with technologies and g ave full play to 
e-commerce to achieve targeted poverty alleviation. China 's rural market was vast, but the facilities S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 12 - 
 
  were poor and under -exploited. Therefore, China had  urged  e-commerce enterprises to strengthen 
the construction of rural e -commerce infrastructure , such a s logistics and distribution, and promote 
the synergistic development of e -commerce and express logistics. Moreover, China was actively 
improving the level of e -commerce on agricultural products. For example, China promote d the 
certification of "non-pollut ed, green food, organic and geographical indications " applied on 
agricultural products, encourage d the brand building of th ose products as well as the development 
of 'contract farming ' in order to facilitate sales via e -commerce.  
3.40.   In addition, in the contex t of C OVID -19, China was committed to promot ing the digital 
upgrade of consumption. With the arrival of the Chinese lunar new year, China ha d taken pragmatic 
measures to promote online consumption, such as holding the "Brands and Qualities  Online Shopping 
Festival " and the "National Online New Year Festival ", encouraging e -commerce enterprises and 
businesses to better participate in e -commerce and stimulating consumers ' consumption potential. 
Statistics show ed that during the nearly one -month "New Year Fest ival", China 's online retail sales  
had reached CNY 905.7 billion, and online food and beverage sales had increased by 48.5% 
compared to the same period in 2020 . Moreover, China had  also further revised relevant laws and 
regulations, improved industry stand ards, fostered new consumption and business models, and 
encouraged e -commerce platforms to develop customization to meet diversified consumption needs.  
3.41.   Finally, China welcome d and encourage d Members to carry out constructive exchanges under 
that agenda ite m and would  continue to engage in information sharing regarding trade -related e -
commerce topics with the M embership in the future.  
3.42.   The representative of the United States  said that he had not intended to intervene but was 
spurred by South Africa and India introducing their joint General Council paper  to the discussion  
under that  agenda item , which had been a bit surprising and a distraction from the rich exchange  of 
informa tion the Council had been having . He had participated in the Work Programme deliberations 
for almost 20 years and he had seen the Work Programme  reinvigorate d a number of times . The 
United States had made a number of contributions to the W ork Programme  but most of the ideas 
put forward had not gained traction , mainly  because certain Members ha d not been constructive in 
their dialogue.  
3.43.   In response to the interventions  by India and South Africa , as his delegation had  stated earlier 
that week in the G eneral C ouncil, the United States believe d that  plurilateral negotiations at the 
WTO could  be a useful means to advance issues of interest to Members and to keep the WTO 
relevant. The United States  did not view plurilateral negotiations and outcome s as undermining 
multilateral ones ; in fact , plurilateral initiatives could foster  new ideas and approach es and buil d 
momentum towards multilateral outcome s. The various  rigid positions expressed in the paper that 
India and South Africa put forward seem ed to foreclose  Members ' ability to pursue  creative and 
flexible approaches at the WTO to  the challenges of today and tomorrow. His delegation  noted  that 
India's attempt to insert their paper in the CTS discussion was a likely contributing factor to the 
pursuit  by many Members of  substantive discussions on important services -related  topics outside of 
the CTS , such as  in the areas of e -commerce and domestic regulation .  
3.44.   The representative of Australia  noted the statements made by India and South Africa. On the 
issues raised in relation to the Moratorium, Australia consider ed that a permanent Moratorium on 
customs duties on electronic transmissions had to  be central to WTO discussions on e -commerce ; it 
was indispensable to the modern trading system, providing business better access to markets, and 
consumers more choice. A permanent Moratorium would reduce digital trade barriers and keep 
supply chains moving, which was crucial in Members'  efforts to promote global economic recovery. 
Studies show ed that the economic benefits of the Moratorium far outweigh ed any potential tariff 
revenue loss from digitalised goods and services, including for both developed and developing 
countries, and particularly MSMEs.  
3.45.   On progress against the Work Programme, she referred to her delegation's immediately 
preceding  statement.  
3.46.   On the General Council paper referred to by South Africa and India,  Australia was a participant 
in all the current JSI negotiations and strongly support ed that important work in the WTO. Plurilateral 
initiatives were neither novel nor revolutionary to the multilateral trading system. They ha d always 
been a part of the WTO architecture and ha d constituted the predominant form of rulemaking in the S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 13 - 
 
  multilater al trading system for decades. WTO -consistent plurilateral trade agreements, with broad 
participation, play ed an important role in complementing global liberalization efforts. The current 
JSIs ha d the potential to deliver vital outcomes that strengthen ed the WTO 's rulemaking function 
and the organization' s health more generally.  
3.47.   As her delegation had  outlined at the General Council meeting earlier that week , Australia  did 
not agree with the legal analysis in the paper by India and South Africa . In the case  of the e -
commerce JSI, participants were  still exploring the legal structure options they could  best use to 
incorporate eventual outcomes into the WTO legal framework , but they were confident that those 
pathways could  be found. Participants were  all committed to improving the effectiveness of the 
WTO's rulemaking function. Australia encourage d all WTO Members to participate in , or at least to 
keep an open mind on , those plurilateral discussions, so that Members could  get outcomes that 
modernise d and enhance d WTO rules for the whole membership.  
3.48.   The representative of Nigeria  said that this delegation had been consisten t in calling  on the 
Membership to  reinvigorat e the 1998 Work Programme and to explore ways of addressing the 
difficulties undermining  the gains  of developing countrie s from global digital trade.  It was for that 
reason that Nigeria had  co-sponsored the proposal on exploratory discussions on supporting d igital 
capabilities of business es and consumer s in the CTS , and  his delegation was pleased that the 
Membership was engaging  constructively  in those  discussion s and sharing information .  
3.49.   Regarding the opinion expressed in the paper by India and South Africa on the JSIs, echoing 
the statement s from the United States  and Australia,  Nigeria did not agree  with the assertion  that 
the JS Is were likely to undermine the multilateral trading system . In Nigeria's view, p lurilateral 
agreements had  always been critical building blocks to the multilateral  trading system , even during 
the GATT era.  
3.50.   The view s expressed in the paper regarding  the likely implication of introducing new rules 
resulting from the JSI negotiations into the WTO due to their  perceived inconsistenc ies with the WTO 
Agreements  was premature . The negotiations were on-going, an d participants were working towards 
achieving balanced and equitable WTO -consistent outcomes . For instance, participants under the 
JSI on  Services  Domestic Regulation  were working to wards inscribing additional commitments  into 
their GATS schedule , in accordance with  Article XVIII , which would confer  benefits to every  Member , 
including non -participants,  on an MFN basis. Th at would further strengthen the multilateral trading 
system and should be commended and encouraged.  
3.51.   He added that the legal opinion o f one or more  Members on the scope of application of specific 
provisions of the Marrakesh or WTO Agreements might not  always  be accurate . 
3.52.   Regarding the d evelopment implications o f the JSIs  contained in the paper , Nigeria believed 
that it was within the sov ereign right of each Member to  determine and  pursue its respective  
development priorities in the WTO and other international fora. Nigeria  was confident that the final 
outcome s under  the respective  JSIs would take into account its  development priorities an d avail 
Nigeria of the requisite  tools to unlock its economic potential.  
3.53.   In conclusion, Nigeria believed that the JSIs were of critical importance if the WTO was to 
respond to the economic realities of the XXI century, and called on Members, and especiall y 
developing countries which were non -participants, to join the JSI s in order to collectively shape the 
discussion and to  deliver  a development -friendly outcome.   
3.54.   The representative of Canada  acknowledge d that India and South Africa  had presented their 
new communication at the last General Council  meeting . In that context, Canada had stated that it 
did not agree  with the argumentation presented in th at communication.  
3.55.   Canada believe d that the work of the JSI initiative was not in violati on with the WTO 
framework. Canada was a strong supporter of the multilateral trading system and ha d been 
participating constructively on a broad range of trade -related issues, including e -commerce, under 
various configurations offered by the WTO framework.  In a number of th ose areas, creating new or 
modified trade rules was more than overdue. While in some cases, Members might  be able to proceed 
multilaterally, in other instances, the Joint Statement Initiative model was the best avenue for 
interested Membe rs to pursue common objectives.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 14 - 
 
  3.56.   As already expressed by others, the JSIs ha d been conducted as open, transparent and 
inclusive process es, wherein any interested Members could  participate and share their views. Th at 
interest was growing , and Canada was  pleased by the increased participation of developing Members 
and by the progress made until then . As each initiative was unique and evolving at its own pace, 
each JSI process offer ed the best vehicle to discuss specific views by Members.  
3.57.   Through the JSI, there was  an opportunity to achieve meaningful outcomes in time for the 
next WTO Ministerial Conference, which would  deliver a boost to the Organization and demonstrate 
that success was possible. Therefore, Canada  would encourage constructive participation by  any 
interested Member in the JSI discussions. As Canada had done , it was important to remember that 
the true test of any outcome, either plurilateral or multilateral, was whether it promote d 
development and sustainable growth and secure d an increase in the predictability of the global 
trading environment.  
3.58.   The representative o f United Kingdom  thanked India and South Africa for their joint  General 
Council  paper and interventions at that meeting . However, as her delegation had  made clear at the 
General Council  earlier th at week, the United Kingdom did  not share the view that the work of the 
Joint Statement Initiatives was inconsistent with the rights and obligations of Members or the 
appropriate functions of the WTO.   
3.59.   As such , the United Kingdom remain ed a strong supporter of the on -going JSI discussions on 
e-commerce , Domestic Re gulation, Investment Facilitation for Development and MSME s. The United 
Kingdom  also remain ed a strong supporter of making the Moratorium on  customs duties on electronic 
transmission s permanent . As Australia and Nigeria ha d mentioned, plurilateralism ha d always been 
an integral part of the WTO  and the JSI discussions ha d brought much needed energy and dynam ism 
to the WTO , enabling a significant proportion of the Membership to make  vital progress on areas 
where new rules and commitments were urgently needed . The J SIs were open, transparent and 
inclusive and her delegation  would encourage all Members to keep an open mind and to engage in 
those initiatives .  
3.60.   The representative of the European Union  thanked the Chairman for the Note, which provide d 
a useful account of the information exchange on supporting digital capabilities that Members  had 
had in the Council in 2020 . The European Union  welcomed  the interest expressed by Members in 
those discussions in the context of the e -commerce  Work Programme. T he COVID -19 pandemic ha d 
highlighted  the importance of e -commerce and  the European Union  was pleased with the useful 
exchanges on the development dimension of e -commerce that Members had had, for example in the 
CTS the previous y ear and the information  that Members continued to  provide in that perspective. 
Her delegation remain ed open to continu ing those disc ussions on the issues of interest  to Members .  
3.61.   On the Moratorium on customs duties  on electronic transmissions , the European Union  wished 
to reiterate  its strong support for a permanent WTO Moratorium . As the European Union  had done  
in the past,  the repres entative underline d and recall ed the several recent economic studies that 
provided scientific ally solid  new evidence on the positive  economic implications of the Moratorium . 
The European Union  remain ed committed  to engag ing in the structured discussion on the Moratorium 
in line with the  General Council d ecision of December 2019 , taking into account the new evidence 
that ha d been published since then.   
3.62.   Finally, in response to the interventions by India and S outh Africa  on the JSIs, the 
representative referred back to the EU statement on that  issue delivered at  the General Council  
earlier that week. She would not repeat th at statement, but she stress ed that the European Union 
believed that the JSI s, which  were transparent and open for  any WTO Member to join , provide d an 
opportunity to advance the global trade agenda on the key issues , including on digital trade. Also , 
as the European Union  had noted in the General Council , there were ways in which plurilaterals could  
be incorporated in  the WTO and participants would  be considering all those options , including  in the 
e-commerce  JSI, at the appropriate  time.  
3.63.   The representative of Japan  express ed his delegation's  appreciation to the Chair man for his 
Note that compil ed Members'  discussions at the CTS.  He also wished to thank Chile, Korea and China 
for sharing their experiences at that meeting .  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 15 - 
 
  3.64.   Regarding the paper by India and South Africa, as Japan had  said at the General Council, 
Japan very much appreciate d the Joint Statement  Initiatives as an essential framework to allow the 
WTO to address, in a flexible and realistic manner, the changing global economic needs of the 
XXI century. Japan  believe d that  the JSIs would  contribute to updating the WTO rulebooks and to 
ensuring the r elevance of the WTO in t oday's world.  
3.65.   The JSI meetings were organized in an open, transparent and inclusive manner. The fact that 
many WTO Members were participating in the JSIs and actively engaging in negotiations in a creative 
and innovative way clearl y showed the importance that Members attach ed to those initiatives. Japan  
did not agree with the assessment that the  JSIs were "inconsistent " with the WTO.  
3.66.   The representative of Chile echoed what previous delegations had said by way of reaction to 
the pape r by India and South Africa to the General Council. Based on its experience as a developing 
country, Chile was convinced of the benefits of the continuation of the Moratorium for its 
development and was looking for its permanent extension or, if that was not possible, for its 
extension for a set duration of time, as Members had done until then.  
3.67.   He had noted , from the outset,  the request by some Members to discuss the scope and 
implications of the Moratorium, discussions  which Chile had joined in a participatory and constructive 
spirit. Over several months, Members had engaged in conversations on those topics, and seminars 
had also been held , all of which had been helpful to clarify various issues related to the Moratoriu m. 
For that reason, his delegation was surprised that some Members did not recognise that all that 
work had been undertaken.  
3.68.   On the other hand , Chile  was very supportive of the e -commerce negotiations under the JSI 
and was convinced of the opportunities t hat that process could offer to integrate developing Members 
into the digital economy.  
3.69.   The JSIs were addressing t hemes that were fundamental to trade in the XXI century and for 
development, and were doing so in an open, transparent and inclusive manner, c onsistent with the 
legal framework of the WTO. Chile would be very glad if multilateral results could be achieved on 
those issues, in view of the significant benefits that that would bring for the WTO and every one of 
its Members. However, Chile also respe cted the decision of those Members that preferred not to join 
those Initiatives; however, they also needed to respect the decision of those Members that had 
decided to participate and make progress in those negotiations, as their rights would in no way be 
diminished by those processes.  
3.70.   Bearing in mind that the JSIs had started  a pragmatic, respectful and necessary process to 
overcome the stagnation of the fundamental negotiating function of the WTO, Chile encouraged 
Members to start a reflection on how to c reate a more expedient avenue to integrate agreements 
based on joint initiatives into the WTO legal framework.  
3.71.   With regard to the paper by India and South Africa on the legal status of the JSIs , the 
representative of Brazil  said that, in particular  with r egard to  the JSI on Domestic Regulation , a 
number of the points raised in the paper were not new and ha d been addressed elsewhere.  For 
example, it ha d been noted that the mandate contained in GATS Article VI:4 was not affected by 
the fact that a subset of the WTO membership undertook  additional commitments in accordance 
with GATS Article XVIII. Participants of that initiative ha d made it clear that they would  give legal 
effect to the disciplines on Domestic Regulation by incorporating them in their respecti ve GATS 
schedules, so that they would  be applied on a n MFN basis.  
3.72.   In that context, Brazil wished to make two points.  First, nothing in the WTO Agreements 
prevent ed a group of Members that was willing to improve their commitments from doing so, either 
individually or collectively.  
3.73.   Second, a revision of the WTO architecture should be part of any package on WTO reform. 
Members should be able to do more than just improving commitments in their sch edules.  If that was 
not done, the world would  not stop and wait for the conclusion of multilateral agreements in the 
WTO. New rules for international trade were already badly needed, and if they were not crafted in 
the WTO , they would  be agreed elsewhere.  Members needed to find a better way of incorporating 
the results of plurilateral negotiations into the WTO framework.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 16 - 
 
  3.74.   Besides, Brazil was convinced that the best way for Members to defend their interests and 
concerns was to participate in all negotiating i nitiatives in the WTO, multilateral or plurilateral.  
3.75.   The representative of Singapore  wished to register a few points its response to the comments 
on the Moratorium and the JSIs.  
3.76.   On the Moratorium, Singapore remained a firm supporter of its extension. Her delegation 
appreciated the extensive discussions held on that issue in 2020 and recognised that Members had 
engaged already on that issue ; that fact should not be ignored.  
3.77.   On the JSIs, the representative noted, first, that the initiatives were in line with  the workings 
of the WTO. Plurilaterals had existed within the WTO and had been complementary to the broader 
multilateral framework. More crucially, it was worth noting that the JSIs had been open,  transparent 
and inclusive to all WTO Members.  
3.78.   Second, the  legal architecture was a topic that was still premature across most of the JSIs. It 
was prudent to determine the substance of the agreement before considering  the legal mod alities. 
Naturally, on many of the issues participants had both commonalities and d ifferences in position, 
but Singapore was of the view that participants should build on  the comm onalities as they had done 
in many of the discussions, while concurrently discussing how to narrow the gaps on the differences 
that they had.  
3.79.   Third, the JSIs we re very critical to maintaining the relevance of the WTO. There had been 
significant interest in the JSIs  from key stakeholders, which had been  evident from the considerable 
support that the business  community  had extended to those initiatives. In a time o f crisis for the 
WTO, the JS Is were a  bright spot for the Organization and had brought together a vast majority of 
Members .  
3.80.   The JSIs were capable of producing tangible results that would be of key interest to Members 
and stakeholders . Overall, Singapore believed that the JSIs continued to be a l egitimate  avenue  to 
advance  issues  and provided Members with an  opportunity to think  creatively  about the future of 
the WTO.  
3.81.   The representative of Switzerland  appreciate d the additional information share d by several 
Members at that meeting . The representative wished to react to the interventions made by India 
and S outh Africa regarding their communication introduced at the G eneral Council  and to echo 
reactions from other Members such as the United States , Australia,  Nigeria  and many others.  
3.82.   As his delegation had  already said that at the G eneral Council that week, Switzerland  saw the 
JSIs as an appropriate instrument to reinforce the negotiati ng functions of the WTO . The JSIs allowed 
Members  to identify th e current challenges  and were an effective and efficient approach which was 
neither new nor something that worked against the multilateral approach . The JSI s did not affect 
the rights or obligations of  non-participating  Members. They were transparent , open to all Members 
and in keeping with the multilateral spirit.  
3.83.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  wished to respond to the interventions made by I ndia 
and S outh Africa regarding the status of the JSI s. As his delegation had articulated at the G eneral 
Council  meeting earlier th at week, Hong Kong, China  disagree d with the views of th ose two Members. 
In particular, Hong Kong, China  believe d that the JSIs were contributing to reinvigorating the efforts  
of the WTO in making new ru les that respon ded to the aspirations of consumers and  business 
communit ies across the globe.  
3.84.   Those initiatives did not affect the existing mandate, the multilateral mandate or the on -going 
work of other WTO  bodies and provide d a more flexible and innovat ive avenue for like-minded 
Members to discuss and move forward on issues of importance to the world trading system. It would 
be premature to judge the legal format of th ose initiatives , which were still under discussion . Hong 
Kong, China was sure that participants would ensure that the outcome would be incorporated into 
the WTO framework in accordance with WTO rules and procedures.  
3.85.   Hong Kong, China  also wished  to stress  that those initiatives were Member -driven, 
transparent, inclusive and ope n to all WTO Members. His delegation would  therefore encourage more S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 17 - 
 
  Members , in particular those who were still considering whether to participate,  to join  the JSIs to 
reflect their  views, work together and engage constructively for a meaningful outcome fo r the WTO.  
3.86.   The representative of New Zealand  echoed the comments of a number of other Members who 
had spoken to emphasize the value of JSIs processes and the consistency of the JSIs with the WTO 
framework. Plurilateral initiatives play ed a constructive ro le in the WTO and ensured that  the 
Organization was able to tackle issues of trade relevance in  the XXI century. The JSI p rocesses were 
transparent and were open to whole  Membership , should they wish to participate.   
3.87.   The representative of Republic of Korea  echoed the positions expressed by the United States , 
Australia and many other Members with regard to the JSIs . Korea was actively participa ting in the 
WTO JSI s, such as  on Domestic Regulation  and e-commerce.  
3.88.   Turning to the Moratorium, Korea ha d been a strong supporter of the Moratorium since 1998. 
The Moratorium could  lead to greater  global production, lower prices, more consumer surplus, more 
producer surplus and less deadweight loss despite the loss of tariff revenu es. So, consumers could  
enjoy a greater variety of digital products and services transmitted across borders at more affordable 
prices. Moreover, businessmen and women had opportunities to access new markets and expand 
existing markets. He also noted the lo ng-term dynamics in addition to the reduction in transport 
costs. The Moratorium could  create a more business -friendly climate and innovative culture as 
corporations procure d indispensable digital products and services abroad at lower prices in order to 
pursue their competitive advantage.  
3.89.   The representative of Costa Rica  said that his delegation  strongly support ed the extension of 
the Moratorium ; Costa Rica's  position ha d been and remain ed that t he Moratorium  should be made 
permanent.  
3.90.   With regard to the com ments on joint initiatives, Costa Rica associate d itself with th e 
statements by the United States;  New Zealand;  Hong Kong, China;  and others.  Costa Rica 
participate d in all of the JSIs  and d id so with the conviction that they ha d a solid legal basis in the 
WTO Agreements and  that they were  a way to contribute to the multilateral trading system, 
strengthening its negotiating role.  
3.91.   As a small developing country, Costa Rica ha d a strong interest in the WTO operating within 
the legal framework agreed by Members. Costa Rica  reject ed any attempt to be forced to comply 
with new obligations  that would be  imposed on it without its consent. The reason was simple: Costa 
Rica recognise d the need to adapt t o the trade policy challenges of the XXI century.  
3.92.   Therefore , his delegation was  disappointed that the right of any WTO Member or groups of 
Members to improve their services commitments was being questioned.  
3.93.   The Joint Initiatives  continued to be  open and transparent, and all Members were welcome to 
join their meetings and to engage constructively with participants to ensure that the outcome 
benefit ted services suppliers worldwide and include d as many Members as possible.  
3.94.   The representative of Colombia  said that he could not let that opportunity pass without 
registering Colombia's position on the Moratorium and the JSIs.  
3.95.   With regard to the Moratorium, Colombia considered that discussions had been quite useful 
in understanding the importance and implications  of that instrument and reiterated its support for 
its extension.  
3.96.   With regard to the JSIs, he associated his delegation with the statements of the participants 
who had preceded him and referred to Colombia's statement at the General Council.  
3.97.   Colombia wis hed to underscore that it did not agree with the legal analysis presented by India 
and South Africa. On the contrary, Colombia was convinced that each and every one of the Initiatives 
had gone through the proper procedures to be formal negotiations. Moreov er, they were processes 
that had been characterised by openness, inclusivity  and transparency. Th at has been proven by the 
formal participation of many developing countries.   S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 18 - 
 
  3.98.   There were, of course, substantial differences in the level of progress of each o f the Initiatives, 
so it was premature to assess the outcome and structure of the discussions on e-commerce and 
Investment Facilitation . Colombia was  working, together with the other participants, to ensure 
balanced provisions that respond ed to the interests and sensitivities of all, within the parameters 
set out in the WTO.  
3.99.   Being a developing country that faced great economic challenges, Colombia was of the view 
that the different J SIs were a great step towards strengthening the WTO. Colombi a was convinced 
both of their consistency with the rules and procedures of the WTO, and of their positive impact on 
international trade in services , which was  a priority interest for many developing countries that, like 
Colombia, ha d great potential in th at area. 
3.100.   The representative of Uruguay  wished, first of all, to acknowledge the circulation of the 
Chairman's Note concerning information on the digital capacities shared by Members under the Work 
Programme, as well as the experiences presented at that meeting , and the delegations of India and 
South Africa for the pres entation of their submission, which was being considered further in his 
Capital .  
3.101.   Uruguay wished to recall its intervention at the General Council. His delegation concurred 
with the importance of respecting international law and the WTO Agreements. In addi tion, in the 
current international context and challenges of the international economic system, and without 
losing sight of pending discussions, it was of the utmost importance to be able to respond in a timely 
manner to new realities, needs and challenges . 
3.102.   This require d discussing all relevant issues, including legal and formal issues, as well as 
substantive issues, with the intent of achieving concrete results that would  benefit the development 
of Members'  economies and societies.  
3.103.   Uruguay noted that at t he bilateral and regional levels, Members were adopting 
commitments, rules and disciplines in th ose areas. The JSIs, with their multilateral vocation and 
being respectful of the rights and obligations of Members within the framework of the WTO 
Agreements, were intended to be an opportunity to provide answers  at the multilateral level , to 
avoid  fragmentation among the different approaches to th ose issues and to ac hieve higher levels of 
international co -operation and co -ordination.  
3.104.   Uruguay would continue to  follow Members'  discussions  closely . 
3.105.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  thanked the Chair man for his Note on the information 
shared by Members regarding their initiatives and practices for promoting e -commerce development. 
His delegation was of the view that the information contained therein was of great reference value 
to Members and thanked the Chairman very much for his efforts.  
3.106.   Regarding the paper by India and South Africa on the legal status of JSIs, since it had been 
discussed at that week's General Council  meeting, he would not be repeating his delegation's  
statement and position on th at issue. He just wished to briefly emphasize the essence of his 
delega tion's  views.  
3.107.   Chinese Taipei was of the view that, as the world evolve d, the WTO had to  evolve as well. 
The various JSIs being negotiated among Members allow ed the WTO to face XXI century challenges 
and move forward so as to deliver and respond to the nee ds of Members'  businesses and consumers. 
Since the JSIs negotiations ha d been and were being conducted in an open and transparent manner, 
Chinese Taipei did not  believe that they would undermine Members ' rights  or lessen Members ' 
obligations under the WTO. His delegation  encourage d those non -participating Members to 
favourably consider joining  the JSI negotiations , in order to defend their rights and achieve results 
that they considered balanced.  
3.108.   The Chairman thanked Members for the interesting and rich discussion. In his view, t he 
discussions had highlighted three points. First, e -commerce continued to be an extremely important 
issue, especially in the wake of the COVID -19 pandemic, during which Members had seen evidence 
of e-comm erce accelerating and reach ing new heights.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 19 - 
 
  3.109.   Second, he thanked Members for sharing their additional experiences. E -commerce had 
brought benefits to the rural community in China, which had focused on agricultural e -commerce 
products, MSMEs and women.  
3.110.   Third,  Members had emphasised that e -commerce was the future and the question Members 
had to ask themselves was whether they wanted to embrace the future or to stop a train that had 
already left the station.  
3.111.   He had been  encouraged by the comments  he had  heard on the Note issued under his own 
responsibility . Being mindful of the fact that the Note was, at that time , contained in a restricted 
JOB document and that certain Members might  wish to share the Note with their stakeholders, once 
all the minutes that were referenced in the document ha d been derestricted, he said that he would 
be reissuing the Note  as an unrestricted document.  
3.112.   He suggested that the Council take note of the statements made and said that the Council 
would revert to this item at its next meeting.  
3.113.   It was s o agreed . 
4  ITEM D: UPDATE OF THE SECRETARIAT BACKGROUND NOTE ON MODE 4 – REQUESTED 
BY INDIA  
4.1.  The Chairman  indicat ed that that item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of India.   
4.2.  The representative of India said that, as has been emphasized by her delegation  on several 
previous occasions, India reiterate d its request for the up date of Secretariat Background Notes on 
all four modes of service  supply and also support ed Secretariat work on inter -modal linkages, as 
requested by one delegation.  
4.3.  As her delegation had  clarified previously, while India welcome d the US proposal on the issue 
of inter -modal linkages, th at should not substitute the request to update the separate modal 
Background Notes by the Secretariat. India urged the U nited States  to reconsider its position , as 
having  an inter-model linkage Note ma de no sense without first updating  the modal Notes. 
4.4.  The representative once  again request ed all Members to positively consider her delegation's 
proposal , which was  inclusive and comprehensive. India believe d that  it would be a very useful 
exercise for th e Counc il. 
4.5.  As previously stated in the CTS, the representative of  the United States  said that his delegation 
did not support an updated Secretariat Background Note on mode 4. The US  position on that issue 
had been clear for the past couple of years.  
4.6.  As his delegation had  stated repeatedly in the past, the United States  had suggested a 
compromise to India which they believe d accurately reflect ed the interests of many  Members. The 
United States were  not demandeur s of those types of papers but  were trying to be  constructive. His 
delegation continue d to be disappointed that the compromise kept being  rejected by India and that 
India had refused to demonstrate any complementary flexibility.  
4.7.  If India were to agree to the compromise proposal for the Secretariat to p repare a paper on 
the interlinkage of the modes of supply , the United States  would be happy to support it . Again, th at 
suggestion was a direct outgrowth of India 's mode 4 seminar held a few  years earlier . It would 
reflect an updated and timely way to look at that evolving issue and  was based on the comments 
that had come  directly from the Indian participants in the mode 4 seminar. The United States did  
not support a revised paper that perpetuate d an anachronistic view of the various modes of supply , 
as his delegation had  explained a number of times.  
4.8.  The representative of South Africa  reiterate d its position expressed in  December 2020 and 
support ed India's proposal for a Note on mode 4 , especially considering that the information in the 
2009 Note was outdated.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 20 - 
 
  4.9.  Her delegation  wished to u rge those delegations who did not see value -added in the Note that 
they should not  stand in the way of analytical work that other  delegations found  useful for promoting 
and facilitating knowledge -building. It made  no sense to have a Note on the modal  interlinkages 
without updated Note s on the different modes. All Members had experienced the dampening effects 
of the pandemic on their mode 4 exports and imp orts and so there was absolutely no harm in having 
an updated Note.  
4.10.   The representative  remind ed those delegations who maintain ed there was no value for such 
a Note that mobility -related pandemic measures had turned sources of employment and growth into 
a vulnerability for developing countries and LDCs ; they had also impacted investment and mode  3-
related mobility. South Africa  urged Members to reconsider their position and support the updat ing 
of the  Note, which  would  benefit all Members, purely  because it would  update dynamic changes in 
mode 4 trade occurring over the years since the date of the last Note.  
4.11.   South Africa note d the objections from some delegations and wished to  ask them whether 
they maintain ed educational policies that require d children studying calculus in 2021 to utilise 
outdated curricula and textbooks from 1942 . South Africa request ed Members to reflect on that 
question when responding  to the role updated Notes provide d for improving technical support  to 
WTO Members . 
4.12.   The Chairm an suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
4.13.   It was s o agreed . 
5  ITEM E: CYBERSECURITY MEASURES OF CHINA AND VIET NAM – REQUESTED BY JAPAN 
AND THE UNITED STATES  
5.1.   The Chairman  indicated that the item ha d been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegations of Japan and the United States.  
5.2.  The representative of the United States  said that for several years, the United States had raised 
concerns in the Council that various Chinese draft and final measures, including in connection with 
China's Cybersecurity Law and its National Security Law, might restrict cross -border data flows and 
required localization of data.  In the December 2020 CTS meeting, the United States had raised 
concerns rega rding aspects of China's October 2020 draft Personal Information Protection Law that 
could impact companies' ability to transfer personal information across borders.  
5.3.  The United States noted a particular concern that Article 40, in connection with Article 3 9 of 
the draft Law, would impose a data localization requirement on operators of critical information 
infrastructure and personal information processors that processed personal information whose 
volume had reached a certain threshold. Those entities would be subject to a "security assessment" 
before being able to transfer any personal information out of China. The United States had repeatedly 
raised its concerns about Chinese measures and policies that proposed those types of security 
assessments on data tr ansfers. Imposing unduly restrictive requirements on data transfers, simply 
because they were cross -border, unfairly disadvantaged foreign suppliers, and did not enhance 
protections for personal information. The United States repeated its request for China  to remove 
Article 40 from the draft Law.  
5.4.  In addition, the United States raised a concern that Article 52 of the draft Law would require 
that data processors outside of China established an office or appointed a representative in China. 
The United States n oted that cross -border services suppliers seeking to supply services consistent 
with China's GATS commitments should not be required to establish a commercial presence in China 
as a condition to supply those services.  At the December 2020 CTS, China had committed to forward 
the concerns raised by WTO Members to its Capital for further consideration. The United States 
welcomed China's update on how it planned to revise the draft Law to address those concerns.  
5.5.  With respect to Viet Nam, for the past three year s the United States had raised concerns in the 
Council about Viet Nam's data localization and local presence requirements in its Cybersecurity Law 
and its draft implementing Decree. As his delegation had explained, those requirements would 
undermine the pr ovision of services foundational to the digital economy, ranging from e -mail to 
electronic payment to cloud computing services, which were frequently provided on a cross -border S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 21 - 
 
  basis. The United States would welcome any update Viet Nam could provide regard ing the status of 
that draft Decree.  
5.6.  The United States was also very concerned to see that on 9 February, Viet Nam had released 
a draft Decree on Personal Data Protection (PDP), which appeared to replicate and indeed expand 
the scope and restrictiveness of  data localization requirements. The United States appreciated that 
Viet Nam had provided interested stakeholders with the opportunity to submit written comments 
before 9 April. The United States was continuing to carefully study that draft PDP Decree and 
intended to submit written comments to the Government of Viet Nam.  
5.7.  Implementing sweeping requirements that companies store data locally, or that they seek 
government approval prior to transferring any personal data across borders, could seriously impede 
the supply of cross -border services in many sectors where Viet Nam had GATS commitments. 
Moreover, such requirements did not contribute to, and could in fact be counterproductive to the 
objective of protecting data privacy. The United States urged Viet Nam t o seriously consider the 
comments of the United States and other WTO Members on those measures and to consider options 
for taking a less trade -restrictive approach to protecting personal data.  
5.8.  The representative of Japan  said that his delegation had been e xpressing its concerns about 
China's cybersecurity -related laws and regulations at past meetings of the Council. However, China 
had not addressed, to date, Japan's concerns or made improvements in its legislative  process in 
response to the concerns. In tha t meeting , Japan would like  again  to lay out its general concerns on 
those laws and regulations. Japan hoped to receive clear answers from China and to see 
improvements to that situation going forward.  
5.9.  Japan's major concern with the cybersecurity -related l aws and regulations was the substance 
and the ambiguity of the terms used in those  laws. Japan  feared that the broad definitions used 
would unnecessarily affect, directly or indirectly, many businesses in China. Japan,  therefore , 
request ed China to further clarify the definitions and contents of those  laws and to ensure 
transparency in their implementatio n. Japan  believe d that a business environment that ensure d the 
free flow of data was very important for foreign companies that use d data to conduct business 
activities in China and globally. Such a favourable environment would also contribute to China's 
economic development.  
5.10.   In that regard, Japan wished to point out the following facts. Firstly, laws and regulations 
such as the "Measures for Security Assessment of Cross -border Transfer of Personal Information 
and Important Data" and the "Guidelines for Data  Cross -Border Transfer Security Assessment" 
require d network operators to conduct safety evaluations in order to transfer "important data" to 
places outside China.  Secondly, the "Regulations on Critical Information Infrastructure Security 
Protection," the "Draft of Personal Information Protection Law of the People's Republic of China" and 
other laws and regulations had provisions requiring data locali sation.  
5.11.   Japan reiterated that, depending on the actual operation and interpretation of those 
provisions, they could impose additional burdens on foreign businesses compared to Chinese ones, 
which might lead to the violation of the national treatment obligation under Article XVII of the GATS.  
5.12.   Japan appreciated China's efforts to seek public comment s from domestic and foreign 
stakeholders in view of transparency. Japan also noted that China had been engaging in discussions 
at the Council. However, Japan believed that its concerns remained unaddressed. Once again, Japan 
requested that the concerns exp ressed by Japan and other Members be addressed in China's 
legislation in a manner that was both balanced and consistent with the GATS rules . 
5.13.   With regard to Viet Nam's measures, Japan recognized that the Government of Viet Nam was 
still deliberating the dra ft Decree relating to the Law on Cybersecurity and that the Government of 
Viet Nam had submitted its draft Decree on Personal Data Protection for public comments in 
February. Japan reiterated its request that those measures should not unfairly impede equal  
competition between foreign and local enterprises in Viet Nam and should be consistent with the 
GATS.  
5.14.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated her delegation's questions and concerns 
with respect to the Cybersecurity Law of China,  in particular  with respect to the scope, the S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 22 - 
 
  requirements, and terms contained therein . For example, it was not clear when a company 
constituted a network operator or a Critical Information Infrastructure operator. That was very 
relevant given the more stringent obliga tions for the latter. Moreover, t he definition of critical 
information appeared to cover many commercial activities and whole sectors that had no bearing on 
national security.  
5.15.   Furthermore, the European Union referred to  a growing number of administrative r eview 
processes , such as cybersecurity reviews, cybersecurity information -sharing scheme and 
cybersecurity inspections, pre -sale certification process for "critical network equipment and network 
security products" as well as approval, assessment and report ing requirements established for 
collection and cross -border transfer of data under data security measures.  The European Union had 
observed that many of those requirements were contained in different procedural laws and under 
different Government entities , which posed a challenge for foreign companies to comply.  
5.16.   The European Union also expressed its concerns with respect to the  requirements  related to 
the cross -border transfer of a wide range of data. Those requirements  effectively prevent ed network 
operators from transferring personal information or important data , collected or generated during 
their operations in China , to anyone outside without completing an official security assessment. For 
foreign companies operating in the services sect or in Chin a, that implie d shouldering  an additional 
burden that domestic companies would not bear , since they would typically not need to transfer 
important data overseas.  
5.17.   Moreover , the draft Data Security Law cover ed "data activities" within China , but also beyond 
the territorial mainland of China, which  might harm China's national security or public interest.  The 
European Union was concerned about the broad scope of the draft Law. In addition, it  seemed to 
give the power to local authorities to identify their own important data. That could lead to a lack of 
harmonization of the term, making it impossible for companies to comply when conducting cross -
border data transfers. As per her delegation's comments during the consultations conducted, the 
European Un ion would welcome a common definition set at the central level , with clear boundaries 
identifying which data were considered "important". Or, at the very least, that the list defining 
"important data" be only released at the central level by the relevant i ndustry department, and not 
by local authorities.  
5.18.   Regarding  the Vietnamese Cybersecurity Law, the European Union shared other Members' 
concerns and reiterated its remarks about the potential economic impact and the compatibility of 
that Law with Viet Nam's  commitments under the WTO. The European Union was concerned about 
certain provisions of the Cybersecurity Law, in particular as regard ed the data localisation and local 
presence requirements and the liability of foreign companies.  
5.19.   The European Union  considered that the framework for implementation of data localisation 
and local office requirements need ed to be clearer on the specific conditions based on which foreign 
companies would  be requested to open local branches or localise the data they process ed or hosted.  
5.20.   The representative of Canada  thank ed the United States and Japan for adding that item to 
the agenda. In previous meetings, Canada ha d raised its concerns regarding  the new measures on 
cybersecurity.  Canada referred  to those previous statements an d reiterate d its concerns. In general 
terms, Canada  subscribe d to the comments by the United States , Japan and the European Union  
with regard to cybersecurity.  
5.21.   The representative of Australia  appreciated China's efforts to consult with interested parties 
on its draft measures relating to cybersecurity. Australia had been pleased to make submissions to 
the Chinese Government as part of public consultations on its cybersecurity framework , includ ing 
most recently, China's draft Personal Information Protection Law and draft Data Security Law.  
5.22.   Her delegation was concerned that China was considering introducing provisions that had the 
potential to create inconsistencies with WTO rules. Australia note d that any measure or 
countermeasure taken under those  laws should only be applied consistently with China's WTO 
obligations. Australia continued to urge China to take into account the concerns of business es and 
Members in the implementation of those measu res and development of future measures.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 23 - 
 
  5.23.   Her delegation appreciated Viet Nam's engagement on its cybersecurity measures. As her 
delegation had raised in previous CTS meetings, like other Members, Australia remained concerned 
with several concepts in Viet Na m's Cybersecurity Law and urged Viet Nam to ensure that its 
legislative measures aligned with its WTO obligations. Australia looked forward to continuing to work 
with Viet Nam on that Law and related measures.  
5.24.   The representative of China  thank ed Members wh o had taken the floor for their continued 
attention to China 's cybersecurity -related legislation. China ha d already responded to Members ' 
remarks and questions at several previous meetings. In that meeting , China would not repeat its 
responses  again.  
5.25.   As em phasi sed previously, the drafting process of those  legislations ha d been open and 
transparent. China welcome d and attache d great importance to the constructive suggestions from 
all stakeholders. China had formulate d the cybersecurity -related laws and regul ations with the 
purpose of guaranteeing cybersecurity, data security and personal information protection, as well as 
addressing the development needs of the digital economy, which was compliant with the 
international practices and WTO rules. China also ha d comprehensively referred to various 
experiences of other Members in th at regard. For the next step, China would  continue to formulate 
and improve supporting measures of relevant laws and regulations and was willing to work with 
Members to promote the sustainable development of  the global digital economy.  
5.26.   The representative of Viet Nam  thanked the United States, Japan, the European Union, 
Canada and Australia for their continued interest in Viet  Nam's legislative drafting process for the 
Decree to imple ment certain articles of the Cybersecurity Law. As already explained in the 
December  2020 Council meeting and previous Council meetings, Viet Nam's process for the Decree 
had been transparent. All stakeholder's comments had been reviewed for continuing int ernal 
consideration.  
5.27.   With regard to the new draft Decree on Personal Data Protection , following legislative 
procedures in line with domestic and international transparency obligations , on 9 February 2021 the 
Ministry of Police , which was the drafting agenc y, had completed the draft and made it available on 
its website for public consultations for a period of two months.  
5.28.   That Decree aimed at providing for the scope of personal data, personal data processing as 
well as for purposes of data protection measure s, rights and obligations with regard to personal data 
handling, establishment of a personal data protection committee dealing with personal data 
breaches , and responsibilities of relevant agencies, organisations and individuals for protecting 
personal dat a.  
5.29.   Such a Decree was urgently needed for Viet Nam in the current context of digital 
transformation , to properly protect personal data in sync with the efforts of many Members sharing 
the same objective. Viet Nam took note of the specific comments by Japan  and the United States in 
that regard and would convey them to Capital for consideration.  
5.30.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
5.31.   It was so agreed . 
6  ITEM F: 5G -RELATED MEASURES OF AUSTRALIA – REQUESTED BY CHINA  
6.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of China.  
6.2.  The representative of China  said that regarding Australia 's 5G-related restrictive measures, his 
delegation  had raised concerns at the CTG and CTS meetings several times since 2018, but the 
related issues had yet to be effectively addressed. At that meeting, China would  not repeat the 
specific questions and concerns and hope d that Australia would  rectify its discri minatory practices 
as soon as possible and provide further clarification on the relevant restrictive measures which were 
inconsistent with the provisions of Articles II, VI, XVI and XVII of the GATS, as well as the provisions 
of paragraph 5 of the GATS Ann ex on Telecommunications Services and paragraphs 2 and 5 of the 
Reference Paper on Telecommunications.  S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 24 - 
 
  6.3.  The representative of Australia  said that that was the fourth occasion that China had raised 
that issue in the Council, having first raised it elsewhere in the WTO in late 2018. Throughout that 
period, Australia had engaged constructively and in good faith with China to explain in detail the 
rationale for its position, including in relation to the protection of Australia's national security.  
6.4.  Australia was  committed to upholding and actively participating in a rules -based multilateral 
trading system and its position on 5G networks was country -agnostic, transparent, risk -based, non -
discriminatory, and fully WTO -consistent. Australia continued to welcome fore ign business 
involvement in the market, which was essential for the efficient and effective operation of Australia's 
telecommunications sector.  
6.5.  The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
6.6.  It was so  agreed . 
7  ITEM G: RUSSIAN FEDERATION SOFTWARE PRE -INSTALLATION MANDATE (FEDERAL 
LAW DATED 2 DECEMBER 2019 NO. 425 -FZ "ON AMENDING ARTICLE 4 OF THE LAW OF 
THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 'ON PROTE CTION OF CONSUMER RIGHTS'") – REQUESTED BY 
THE UNITED STATES  
7.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of the United States.  
7.2.  The representative of the United States  noted that his dele gation had had a number of other 
items related to measures by the Russian Federation on previous CTS agendas. The United States 
had removed those items from the agenda and was discussing them bilaterally. However, his 
delegation might revert in future CTS meetings on those issues. In that meeting, the United States 
focused on the pre -installation of software issue.  
7.3.  The representative recalled that, in the past few meetings, his delegation had raised concerns 
about Russia's software pre -installation mandate created by Federal Law No.  425-FZ and had 
provided written questions to the Russian Federation regarding that mandate. Despite the 
conversations in that Council, those questions remained relevant and the United States still awaited 
written responses.  
7.4.  To da te, the responses from the Russian Federation had not adequately explained how the 
requirement that certain Russian software be pre-installed in certain "technical devices" complie d 
with Russia's services commitments.  In the l ast CTS, other Members had also identified certain 
telecommunications services and computer and related services as the ones most affected by those  
measures.  
7.5.   The latest amendment to that Law (Law No. 460 -FZ, amending Law No. 425 -FZ) add ed a 
further requirement that pre -installe d browsers must provide the ability to use "by default" the 
search engine of the Russian Federation or  another Member of the Eurasian Economic Union.  Those 
new amendments accelerated a dangerous trend of the Russian Government eliminating consumer 
choice a nd dictating what browser and search engine the consumer had to use, which might 
undermine certain GATS commitments, such as on telecommunications or computer and related 
services.  
7.6.  It was unclear whether implementing regulations for the latest amendments h ad been adopted , 
as the amendments required that that mandate be in accordance with procedures established by the 
Russian Federation. The representative asked whether the delegate from the Russian Federation 
could provide an update on whether implementing regulations for the new amendments had been 
adopted, or when those regulations would be adopted, and whether concerns raised by WTO 
Members would be considered so that those regulations did not further undermine commitments 
made by the Russian Federation i n the WTO.  
7.7.  The representative of Japan  said that, as pointed out at the last CTS meeting, his delegation 
had a concern that the Russian measures in question could , depending on the details of the 
regulations and implementation, impede the entry of foreign  enterprises to the Russian market and S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 25 - 
 
  violate the principle of non -discrimination. Japan  request ed the  Russia n Federation  to ensure that 
its measures were in compliance with GATS rules and obligations.  
7.8.  The representative of Canada  said that, as indicated in the past CTS meetings, her delegation 
was concerned about the Russian Federation's software pre -installation mandate. More particularly, 
Canada  was concerned that those  requirement s might  not be consistent with  Russia's  GATS National 
Treatment commitmen ts, such as on electronic mail , as the requirement might  modify the condition s 
of competition  in favour of Russian digital service provider s. Canada  was of the view that that would  
be problematic for foreign firms seeking  to enter  the Russian market  and could negative ly impact  
trade.  
7.9.  Canada c ontinue d to appreciate receiving more information on the next steps, including the 
timeframe for relevant implementing regulation s, as ensuring timely access to information would  be 
essential for c ompanies impacted by those  measures. Canada u nderstood that , at the previous  CTS 
meeting, the Russia n Federation  had itself referred to having posed questions.  Canada  would 
appreciate receiving those  questions in writing. Canada also note d that it had subm itted questions 
in writing and was still  waiting for the response s. Canada looked forward to continuing to work with 
the Russia n Federation  and other interested Members on that matter.  
7.10.   The representative of the European Union  shared the concerns expressed by the United States 
and other Members that had intervened on the Russian Federation's software pre -installation 
mandate. As previously requested, the European Union would appreciate more information from the 
Russian Federati on on the type of equipment that would be covered and on the list of Russian 
software that must be pre -installed.  
7.11.   Moreover, the European Union would welcome clarifications on how the obligation to pre -
install certain Russian software would comply with the National Treatment commitments that the 
Russian Federation had made in computer and related services and in telecommunications services.  
7.12.   The representative of the Russian Federation  referred to its previous statements regarding 
full conformity of the measu res in question with Russia's WTO commitments. Her delegation also 
inform ed Members that the date of entry into force of that measure had been  postponed based on 
the consultations with interested companies, including foreign companies. As a result of those  
consultations, the Law was expected to enter into force on 1 April 2021.  
7.13.   Throughout the process of developing the draft Law, the comments submitted by stakeholders 
had been  taken into due account. The current version of the Law provided for a number of 
flexibilities. In particular, there were several options for the pre -installation of software and the 
product manufacturers were free to choose the ones most convenient for them. If the programme 
was not compatible with the operation system, the Law did not require pre -installation. The software 
in question was already available in manufacturers' digital stores, so the Law did not require the 
installation of applications incompatible with compan ies' rules and policies.  
7.14.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
7.15.   It was s o agreed . 
8  ITEM H: MEASURES OF THE UNITED STATES RESTRICTING TRADE IN SERVICES – 
REQUESTED BY CHINA  
8.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation o f China.  
8.2.  The representative of China  recalled that his delegation had expressed concerns about a series 
of trade -restrictive measures taken by the United States on TikTok and WeChat in the CTS meetings 
in October and December 2020, while the US delegate ha d only made general statement s on the 
grounds of national security ; however, China did not see the rational e. 
8.3.  China continued to express concerns in that regard. In addition, the Trump administration had 
issued an Executive Order in January 2021, prohibiti ng the use of eight Chinese software, including 
Alipay, QQ Wallet and WPS. The US practices discriminated against Chinese enterprises and violated S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 26 - 
 
  WTO rules, and China requested that the United States immediately revoke the above -mentioned 
executive orders . 
8.4.  The representative of the United States  said that, as stated in its response in December, the 
actions cited in China's intervention had been taken by the United States to protect the US national 
security.  
8.5.  The representative of China  requested the United States to stop abusing the excuse of national 
security.  China noted that on 10 and 11 February, the US Government had asked a Federal Court to 
suspend the ban on TikTok and WeChat , respectively, in order to re -examine the threat to US 
national security posed by the relevant mobile apps. The representative asked whether the United 
States could explain the progress of the relevant work in the next meeting  and w hat criteria would 
be applied to conduct such a review. Particularly, in terms of the "thorough review" mentioned in 
the US interventions of the December meeting,  the representative asked whether the United States  
could  provide further information abo ut that and explain how TikTok and WeChat had affected the 
national security of the United States .  
8.6.  Lastly, China had always required Chinese enterprises operating overseas to comply with the 
laws and regulations of host Members and was willing to work wit h the Membership, including the 
United States, to maintain open and transparent business environments and international rules. 
China welcomed the suspension of the ban by the United States regarding TikTok and WeChat and 
hoped that the United States would lift the ban as soon as possible , as well as on other Chinese apps 
and software to create a sound business environment for enterprises.  
8.7.  The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
8.8.  It was so agreed . 
9  ITEM I: MEASURES OF INDIA RESTRICTING TRADE IN SERVICES – REQUESTED BY 
CHINA  
9.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of China.  
9.2.  The representative of China  said that, at the CTS meetings in October and December 2020, 
China had raised concerns about India's tightened investment approval policy, the ban on Chinese 
apps and a series of other measures restricting trade in services. However, India had ignored China's 
concer ns and had not  as yet rectified its restrictive measures. India's actions and restrictive 
measures seriously violated the basic principles of the WTO and India's specific commitments under 
the GATS.  
9.3.  China hoped that India could provide further clarificati ons on the violations of Articles II, III, 
VI, XVI and XVII of the GATS. China firmly opposed any discriminatory and restrictive measures 
against Chinese enterprises and continued to express strong concerns about such restrictions. China 
reserved the right  to take further actions in the future.  
9.4.  The representative of India reiterated h er delegation 's commitment  to upholding its obligations 
at the WTO. India valued and was committed to protect ing the democratic rights of its citizens, 
including access to good s and services , while reserving the right to take measures to ensure the 
protection of privacy, data security, and national security. India firmly believed that the two 
measures, raised under that agenda item, were fully consistent with India's GATS commit ments . 
9.5.  The representative of China  responded that her delegation raised concerns based on the claims 
from Chinese investors in India, whose legitimate interests had been seriously impaired by the Indian 
Government 's restrictive measures. To that end , China  kindly remind ed that the restrictive measures 
did not only harm the local employment supported by the Chinese investors but also impact ed the 
livelihoods of numerous local content -creators and MSMEs. 
9.6.  She further noted that China ha d always required Chines e enterprises to abide by international 
rules, operate in compliance with the laws and regulations of the host countries, and respect local 
public order and customs in their overseas operations. China  urged India to respect WTO rules and S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 27 - 
 
  its commitments an d to provide an open, transparent and non -discriminatory business environment 
for services suppliers from all WTO M embers.  
9.7.  The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
9.8.  It was so agreed . 
10  ITEM J: OTHER BUSINESS  
10.1.   The Chairman  made a brief statement regarding the Chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies to 
the Council for Trade in Services for 2021. In accordance with the Guidelines for the Appointment of 
Officers to WTO Bodies (WT/L/510), the outgoing Chairperson of the C TS was to conduct 
consultations on the appointment of the new Chairpersons for the CTS subsidiary bodies.  
10.2.   As he had  announced at the General Council earlier  that week , he would be consulting with 
delegations with a view to arriving at a proposed slate of names of Chairpersons for 2021 that would 
enjoy the wide support of the Membership. In order to ensure the balance of the slate, as mentioned 
in the Guidelines, he would also be coordinating with the Chairman of the Goods Council and would 
be making suffic ient time available to meet with Members. The Chair would conduct such 
consultations starting on 19 March and informed delegations that he would be sending out a 
communication about the organisational aspects shortly.  
10.3.   The representative of the United State s raised a reminder to WTO delegates to carefully 
handle restricted documents of the WTO and not to share them with outside parties that did not 
have clearance from the WTO to view them. The delegate also reminded WTO Observers to 
appropriately protect the  information that had been entrusted to them at the WTO. In order to have 
candid discussions and negotiations in the WTO , it was crucial that all Members felt confident that 
their interventions and negotiating positions were protected in accordance with th e rules that 
Members had agreed to and that those documents and information were not leaked publicly.  
10.4.   The representative of Australia  registered its support for the statement made by the United 
States. It was important that Members and Observers to the WTO  handled restricted documents 
appropriately and in accordance with the relevant requirements , to ensure Members could engage 
confidently and comfortably in discussions at the WTO, including in negotiations.  
10.5.   The representative of Singapore  echoed the views  raised on the careful treatment of WTO -
restricted documents. As Members of the WTO, it was important to respect the confidentiality of the 
documents , to enable an environment that was conducive to candid exchanges and information -
sharing.  
10.6.   The representati ve of Japan echoed the United States and other Members on the importance 
of handling restrictive i nformation provided to Members with care  to have  candid discussion s at the 
WTO.  
10.7.   The representative of China  echoed the concerns raised by other Members that h ad taken the 
floor. 
10.8.   The Chairman  also echoed the concerns raised.  
10.9.   The representative of Norway  drew the Council's attention to a report on protectionism in 
maritime economies that had been launched  on 24 February. The report had been commissioned by 
the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), the global trade association of the shipping industry.  
10.10.   Norway welcomed maritime issues on the agenda in trade policy discussions. Without going 
into the details of the findings of the report, Norway believed that the  report was a pertinent input 
that warranted the Council's attention, as discussing trade in services going forward post -COVID . 
The report addressed a broad spectrum of maritime aspects of trade, although trade in services was 
at the heart of it.  
10.11.   The Counc il for Trade in Services had not formally considered maritime transport services 
as a topic for in -depth discussions for a long time. However, maritime transport remained by far the S/C/M/14 5 
 
- 28 - 
 
  leading mode of transport for goods in bulk. In fact, ships carried around  90% of global trade. Th at 
made maritime transport the lifeblood of the world economy. Maritime transport, therefore, would 
also have to play a vital role in the global post -COVID  economic recovery.  
10.12.   In that context, Norway was pleased to note that the Secretariat was in dialogue w ith the 
ICS about the planning of an event on the study later that year. Norway supported those steps and 
was looking forward to further ing information to delegations.  
10.13.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
10.14.   It was so agre ed. 
11  ITEM K: APPOINTMENT OF THE NEW CHAIRPERSON  
11.1.   The Chairman  said that, b ased on the consensus reached in the General Council, he was 
pleased to pass on the Chairmanship of the Council for Trade in Services to Ambassador Villalobos 
of Mexico. He was confident that, with his experience, knowledge and wisdom, Ambassador 
Villalobos would guide the future work of the Council capably and efficiently. He had enjoyed working 
with all  delegations  and had truly appreciated their cooperative and constructive sp irit in fulfilling 
the mandate of the Council.  He then proposed that the Council elect Ambassador Villalobos by 
acclamation.  
11.2.   It was so agreed . 
11.3.   The new Chairman , Ambassador Villalobos , thanked Ambassador Tan for his kind words and 
hard work during the previous year. He commended him for his efforts, vision and guidance, 
particularly in view of the exceptional circumstances, and challenges, that 2020 had presented for 
all.  
11.4.   He thanked Members for their trust and support and affirmed he would do his best to ch air 
the Council for Trade in Services in the most efficient way possible and was confident that with 
delegations' cooperation, and the Secretariat's assistance, the  Council's  work would move forward 
smoothly and fruitfully.  
11.5.   The meeting  was adjourned . 
_____ _____