WT/REG358/3  
 
7 November 2018  
(18-6921) Page: 1/42 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English/Spanish  
 
 
TREATY ON THE EURASI AN ECONOMIC UNION  (GOODS AND SERVICES ) 
QUESTIONS AND REPLIE S 
 The following communication, dated 31 October  2018, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegations of Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation.  
 
_______________  
 
 
Questions from the delegation of Canada  
 
1.1.  Paragraph 3.57  in Section 3.4.1 on Standards states that the Consultative  Committee 
is an advisory body to the Collegium that develops proposals for technical regulations and 
sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary measures on the basis of agreed positions of the 
EAEU member States ' authorized bodies.  
 Are there procedures/processes establ ished to address agreed positions of 
EAEU  member States that are stricter than established international standards and 
requirements?  
 
 For the moment there are no examples when EAEU member States had stricter agreed 
positions than established in the international standards, nevertheless when developing the SPS 
measures more stringent than international standards the principle of scientific justification is applied 
as provided for in the WTO SPS Agreement . 
 
1.2.  Paragraph 3.60 in Section 3.4.1.1 on Sanitary  and Phytosanitary Measures states 
that member States retain their rights to introduce temporary SPS measures.  
a. What are the parameters or conditions under which a member State can impose 
measures that are more restrictive than EAEU SPS policy?  
 Articles 56 , 58 (p.8) and Annex No. 12 of the EAEU Treaty provide the EAEU member States 
the right to unilaterally introduce temporary SPS measures.  
 
 Meanwhile the procedure for cooperation between the EAEU member States while introducing 
such measures was adopted b y Council Commission Decision of 16 May 2016 No. 149, Customs 
Union C ommission Decision of 18 October  2011 No. 835.  
 
 Taking the decision on introduction of temporary restrictive measure different factors should 
be taken into account by the competent auth ority of the EAEU member State, e.g. current 
epidemiological situation of a member State, available pertinent information, relevant scientific 
justification, etc.  
 
b. Will/Can the EAEU Commission intervene when a member State 's temporary 
SPS measure is not sc ientifically justified?  
 We suppose that it will be more appropriate to discuss members' individual measures, taken 
on its national level, with members' themselves. We assume that the measures of the EAEU 
members do not confront with its commitments within  the EAEU and the WTO.  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 2 - 
 
  c. What process would unfold if deemed unjustified?  
 Both, the WTO and the EAEU forums provide the mechanisms enabling to resolve any disputes 
deriving from taken commitments. Means of bilateral consultations have the priority.  
 
 The o rder of cooperation of the competent authorities of the EAEU when introducing the 
provisional SPS -measures is set out by the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission as of 
16 May 2016 No. 149.  
 
1.3.  Paragraph 3.61 in Section 3.4.1.1 on Sanitary and Phytosani tary Measures states 
that certain categories of products may be subject to conformity assessment procedures 
conducted in the course of registration with the competent authorities of the member 
States.  
a. If an imported product does not meet the technical regu lations of the product, 
will it be banned?  
 Yes, if the technical regulation of the EAEU entered into force, all goods (subject of this 
technical regulation), domestic and imported, must meet the mandatory requirements and must 
pass the mandatory conformit y assessment procedures.  
 
b. Does this measure only affect labelling requirements for the products?  
 This measure affects not only labelling requirements, but also requirements of product safety.  
 
1.4.  Paragraph 3.62 in Section 3.4.1.1 on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures states 
that SPS measure must be based on international and regional standards, except when 
their application on a scientific basis results in a higher level of protection. This paragraph 
also states that international standards, guid elines and recommendation of the 
Codex  Alimentarius Commission, the OIE, and the IPPC prevail over the more stringent 
rules applicable in the Union to the extent there is no scientific justification for the 
application of the latter.  
a. What kind of scientifi c basis is accepted for imposing a higher level of protection? 
Is the scientific basis limited to mean a risk assessment as defined by the 
WTO  SPS Agreement?  
 Risk assessment based on available scientific evidence is the only basis accepted for a higher 
level of protection. Temporary measures could be imposed on the basis of available pertinent 
information, including that received from the relevant international organizations and measures 
applied by other Members as it is provided in the WTO SPS Agreement.  
 
b. Who determines whether there is a scientific justification for the application of 
more stringent rules in the Union instead of the international standards?  
 The developer of the proposal, EAEU Member State or EAEU  Commission, which develops a 
draft proposal, determines where there is a scientific justification. Prior to the consultations detailed 
information on whether these draft requirements correspond to the existent international standards, 
guidelines and recom mendations is provided. If the draft measure is supposed to be more stringent 
or the relevant international standard does not exist, it is up the developing Member to provide all 
relevant scientific data.  
 
c. If a third country finds EAEU standards more strin gent than international 
standards, can a process be initiated to use the international standard rather 
than the EAEU standard? What is the process?  
 The Customs Union Commission Decision of 7 April 2011 No. 625 provides for a specific 
provision on bringing  an SPS Measure, that was deemed by any stakeholder (including the 
government of a third country) more stringent than a relevant international measure in case this 
SPS measure lacks appropriate scientific justification as it is provided by SPS WTO Agreemen t. WT/REG358/3  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.5.  Paragraph 3.63 in Section 3.4.1.1 on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures states 
that account shall also be taken of relevant economic factors, including the potential 
damage in terms of loss of production or sales  in the event of entry.  
 Are these relev ant economic factors limited to those associated with mitigating 
SPS risks, or are other non -SPS-risk economic factors considered in market access 
decisions?  
 
 The term "economic factors " is used within the meaning of the WTO SPS Agreement.  
 
1.6.  Paragraph 3.67  in Section 3.4.1.1 on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures states 
that exporters may either use the EAEU common form of veterinary certificate, or 
alternatively, a bilateral export certificate that reflects the particular conditions of the 
exporting countr y. 
a. Can you confirm that amendments to existing bilateral export certificates can be 
bilaterally negotiated for use by exporters even when common veterinary 
requirements exist?  
 According to the Customs Union Decision of 18 June 2010 No. 317 amendments to e xisting 
bilateral export certificates may be bilaterally negotiated upon being agreed by the other EAEU 
member States.  
 
b. Can a bilaterally negotiated certificate between an EAEU member and a 
3rd country be used to export product to another EAEU member so lo ng as the 
second EAEU member 's competent authority approves the bilateral certificate?  
 Yes. Such a bilateral certificate can be used for export to the second EAEU country if there is 
an approval of the second EAEU member´s competent authority.  
 
1.7.  Paragraph 3.67 in Section 3.4.1.1 on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures states 
that bilateral export certificates that differ from the EAEU's common certificate and 
requirements can be negotiated between EAEU member States' competent authorities and 
an exporting co untry (Decision No 726 "On Veterinary Measures" of 15 July 2011), 
provided that the exporting country had made such a substantiated request prior to 
1 January 2013.  
a. What would constitute a substantiated request?  
 A substantiated request is constituted with its willingness to negotiate on such bilateral 
certificates and indication of the concrete reasons in the request that had been made prior to 
1 January  2013.  
 
b. Does this refer only to new bilateral certificates?  
 We could confirm that. This refers to new bilateral certificates in the EAEU -Third Country 
format.  
 
Questions from the delegation of Chile  
 
1.8.  Once the EAEU is established as a customs union between the five member  countries 
and the process of trade negotiations with third countries is launched, what would be the 
mechanism for initiating trade negotiations with the EAEU? We would also like to receive 
some information as to which countries have succeeded in completin g a negotiation 
process and which might be the next ones . 
 Both EAEU member States or potential negotiating partner (third party) can act as an initiator 
of trade negotiations process between the EAEU and third party. Such an initiative should be 
conveyed to the EEC and afterwards examined by member States of the EAEU. Decision -making 
procedures are a bit different depending on the format of an international agreement that is proposed 
to be negotiated on (concluded). At the same time all international negot iations involving the EAEU WT/REG358/3  
 
- 4 - 
 
  can only be launched by the respective decision of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council 
(according to the Article 7 of the Treaty on the EAEU).  
 
 That said a positive consensus must be reached by all of the member States of the  EAEU to 
launch negotiations. If it is proposed to launch negotiations on a preferential trade agreement and 
such a proposal is supported initially by all of the member States of the EAEU a joint feasibility study 
(JFS) should obligatorily be held prior to  revision of the draft decision of the Supreme Eurasian 
economic council on launch of respective negotiation on a PTA or FTA. A special group of experts of 
the EEC, EAEU member States and potential negotiating partner prepares JFS report that must be 
prese nted to the bodies of the EAEU. The Supreme Eurasian economic council is being advised to 
take a decision on launch of respective negotiations only in case when JFS report clearly shows 
potential benefits of a proposed PTA or FTA. On the other hand if it i s proposed to launch negotiations 
on a non -preferential agreement (that will not include provisions on reduction or elimination of 
customs duties) JFS is not obligatory.  
 
 As of now the EAEU  has concluded the following international agreement with third parties:  
 
 - Free Trade Agreement between the Eurasian Economic Union and Its Member States, 
of the one part, and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, of the other part of 29  May 2015 
(in force ); 
 
 - Interim Agreement leading to formation of a free trade area between the Eurasian 
 Economic Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Islamic Republic of 
 Iran, of the other part of 17 May 2018 (pending for entry into force);  
 
 - Agreemen t on economic and trade cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Union 
 and Its Member States, of the one part, and the People's Republic of China, of the 
 other part of 17 May 2018 (pending for entry into force).  
 
 That said, with the above -mentioned cou ntries the EAEU have completed respective 
negotiations.  
 
 The decisions on launch of negotiations on conclusion of FTAs with Egypt, India, Israel, Serbia 
and Singapore have been taken by the Supreme Eurasian economic council as up to date.  
 
1.9.  We would welcom e additional background information regarding the situation of 
Belarus, an EAEU member which is negotiating agreements with third countries as a block, 
while at the same time being engaged in a lengthy process of accession to the WTO. In 
this regard, is an  estimated date foreseen for the accession of Belarus to the WTO?   
 Indeed, Belarus is in the process of its accession to the  WTO and hopes to become a 
full-fledged WTO Member in the near future. However, this is not an obstacle for concluding 
agreements w ith third countries. EAEU was established after the accession of the Russian Federation 
to the WTO. Hence, the EAEU legislation is based on the WTO r ules. That is why being an 
EAEU  member State Belarus de facto observes the WTO rules.  
 
1.10.   The recently announced agreements negotiated by the EAEU with China and Iran 
will be implemented on a partial and temporary basis over the coming years. In this 
regard, we would like to know the reasons for such partial and temporary implementation.  
 Interim Agreement leading to formation of a free trade area between the Eurasian Economic 
Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, of the other part has 
been concluded on the 17 May 2018. As of its nature (interim agreemen t leading to formation of a 
free trade area) interim agreement with I.R. Iran does not constitute itself a full -fledged FTA but 
contains a clear obligation that a full -fledged FTA must be concluded in no later than three years 
from the date of entry into f orce – and thus represents a clear plan of formation of a free trade area. 
That said, a limited time -frame for (temporary) application of interim agreement with I.R. Iran is 
set. 
 
 As for the non -preferential Agreement on economic and trade cooperation between the 
Eurasian Economic Union and Its Member States, of the one part, and the People's Republic of China, WT/REG358/3  
 
- 5 - 
 
  of the other part that has been concluded on the 17 May 2018, it provide s for neither partial nor 
temporary application (implementation).  
Questions from the delegation of Ecuador  
 
1.11.   On page 18, in paragraph 2.12(c) of section 2 "Characteristic elements of the 
Agreement", under the heading 2.1 "Background information", it is stat ed that: "an 
EAEU  member State that is not a WTO Member can deviate from the provisions of the 
WTO  Agreement in certain cases. When that member State becomes a WTO Member, 
however, any deviation from the WTO Agreement would be allowed only as specifically 
provided for in the terms of accession to the WTO of that member State".  
What is the estimated time -frame for an EAEU member State that is not a 
WTO  Member to complete its accession process?   
 Indeed, Belarus is in the process of its accession to the WTO a nd hopes to become a 
full-fledged WTO Member in the near future.  
 
1.12.   On page 19, in paragraph 3.3 of section 3.1 "Provisions on trade in goods", it is 
stated that: "Modifications to the Union's nomenclature and tariff rates, including tariff 
preferences and e xemptions, are the competence of the Commission. The WTO accession 
commitments of Kazakhstan as well as the provisions of the Treaty on the 
Multilateral  System are also of relevance for understanding the trade in goods aspects of 
the Union (see paragraphs 3.15 and 3.17 below)".  
How would the common customs regulations of the EAEU member States be affected 
by the WTO accession commitments of Belarus?   
 The implementation mechanism of the WTO commitments of an EAEU member State – a new 
WTO Member is set in th e Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union within the Framework of 
the Multilateral Trading System.  
 
1.13.   On page 20, in paragraph 3.9 of section 3.2 "Trade with third parties", it is stated 
that: "The foreign trade policy of the EAEU is implemented throu gh international 
agreements with third parties concluded by the EAEU unilaterally or collectively with the 
EAEU member States, in the spheres where Bodies of the EAEU are entitled to make 
binding decisions, participation in the international organizations or autonomous 
application of measures and foreign trade policy mechanisms (Article 33). MFN treatment 
shall be applied as provided for by international treaties of the EAEU with a third party, 
as well as by international treaties of the member States with a third party (Article 34; 
see also paragraph 5.49. below). The EAEU common external tariff (CET) is the basis of 
the EAEU external trade regime (Article 25)".  
Which are the international agreements with third parties concluded by the EAEU  
unilaterally or collectively with the EAEU member States?  
 Since the formation of the Customs Union in 2010, as well as since the functioning of the 
Eurasian Economic Union since 1 January 2015, the EurAsEC member States have been conducting 
common foreig n trade policy, according to which the issues of changing the trade regime and 
granting preferences are adopted by decisions of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council at the 
level of the Heads of the Parties . 
 
In this regard, the Republic of Kazakhstan, tog ether with its partners in the EurAsEC, is 
working to negotiate new preferential and non -preferential trade Agreements with third countries.  
 
Thus, o n 29 May 2015, the first preferential agreement within the framework of the EurAsEC 
was signed – the Free T rade Agreement between the Eurasian Economic Union and its member 
States, on the one hand, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, on the other hand. This agreement 
came into force in October 2016.  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 6 - 
 
  On 17 May 2018, within the framework of Astana Economic Forum, the Interim Agreement 
leading to the formation of a free trade zone between the Eurasian Economic Union and its member 
States, on the one hand, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, on the other hand, and the Agreement 
on Trade and Economic Cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Union and its member States, 
on the one hand, and the P eople's Republic of China, on the other were signed. At present both 
agreements are undergoing domestic procedures for ratification.  
 
All the above three agreements were c oncluded by the EAEU jointly by its Member States. 
There are no examples of international agreements concluded by the EAEU with third part ies 
unilaterally as up to date . 
 
1.14.   On page 49, in paragraph 3.129(b) of section 3.4.5 "Customs -related procedures", 
unde r the heading 3.4.5.1 "The EAEU Customs Code", reference is made to: "creation of a 
single window for all customs operations by economic operators (Article 80 of the 
Customs Code)".  
What is the current status and modus operandi  of the single window of the 
EAEU  member States? Does this system interconnect the customs services of each 
EAEU  member State? Which modules are currently enabled?  
 Each EAEU member State develops its national single window on its own in accordance with 
approved plans and concepts. In 2017 the Eurasian Economic Commission appraised the status of 
development of national single windows of the EAEU member States. The results of the se estimates 
are available in English on the official website of the Eurasian Economic Commission by following 
reference: 
http://www.eurasiancommission .org/ru/act/tam_sotr/edinoe _okno/Documents /9281012 -en.pdf. 
 
In accordance with the main directions in development of the single window mechanism in the 
system of regulation of foreign trade activities (adopted by the decision of the Supreme Eurasian 
Economic  Council No. 68 of 29  May 2014) and the plan of their realization (adopted by the decision 
of the Sup reme Eurasian Economic Council No. 19 of 8 May 2015) the EAEU member States 
endeavor to coordinate their efforts in developing national single wind ows in order to ensure the 
interoperability between them and possibility of informational exchange. There are no plans for 
creation of one integrated regional mechanism "single window" for all EAEU member States.  
 
Questions from the delegation of the Europ ean Union1 
 
Characteristic elements of the agreement  
 
1.15.   Paragraph 2.12, page 17: According to the Factual Presentation, paragraph 2.12 
describing the Treaty of Functioning of the Customs Union within the Multilateral Trading 
System of 19 May 2011, which form s an integral part of the legal system of the EAEU, 
states that "[…] EAEU member States which are WTO Members are required to adopt 
measures […] so that the EAEU legal framework complies with the WTO Agreement and 
the relevant Protocols of Accession; pendi ng these being made compatible, the WTO 
disciplines shall prevail over respective provisions of the EAEU legal framework. […] 
temporary exceptions from the EAEU disciplines/CET are granted to the Party that would 
have otherwise breached WTO disciplines. Pe nding the end of this transition period,[…]".  
 Please provide a list of the current (temporary) exceptions granted to the individual 
EAEU member States in relation to their contended WTO incompatibility. When is the end 
of the "transition period" to fully comply with the Treaty on the Multilateral System by all 
EAEU member States?  
 
 Response to be provided.  
 
                                                
1 Questions were submitted to the Parties on 19 October 2018 (four weeks, three days before 
the meeting).  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 7 - 
 
  Provisions on trade in goods  
 
1.16.   Paragraph 3.5, page 20: According to the Factual Presentation, "the EAEU  Treaty 
provides for an internal market with free movement of goods…" and "[o]nce a good is 
within the territory of the Union, trade is carried out without customs declarations and 
controls such as transport, sanitary, veterinary, etc."  
 Currently availabl e information indicates that Russia's customs authorities regularly 
approach foreign trucks entering the Russian territory from Belarus, i.e. after being 
checked by Belarus's authorities (including a check -up in the context of exceptions to the 
free circul ation, as indicated by para. 3.6 of the factual presentation) and check their 
cargo, customs declarations, etc. and often ban their further transit on the EAEU territory. 
How does this practice correspond to the provisions of the EAEU Treaty?  
 
 Response to  be provided.  
 
Trade with third parties  
 
1.17.   Please describe the EAEU -Iran provisional agreement on trade liberalization for a 
limited number of commodities and how it would be comp atible with Article XXIV of 
the GATT.  
Response to be provided.  
1.18.   Para 3.21, page 27: According to the Factual Presentation, as regards imports of 
goods with lower than CET to Kazakhstan, "customs control at internal borders will not 
be resumed, but the control services will monitor the movement of excepted goods, within  
their competences. In particular, a special control system based on electronic invoicing 
and sharing of information online has been established by the Rules for Electronic 
Invoicing adopted by Order of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan  
No. 301 of 12 May 2017."  
 According to the information available, the "special control system based on 
electronic invoicing and sharing of information online" is not yet been applied or not 
uniformly in Kazakhstan's customs territory. As a consequence, ci rculation and transit of 
goods has experienced regular instances of burdensome customs checks and delays at 
the border. EU would like to ask EAEU authorities to provide more details on the 
monitoring of the movement of goods that have been imported to Kaza khstan at lower 
tariff than the CET. Could you please explain the practical operation of this control system? 
By when does the EAEU plan to have the said control system fully operational throughout 
its border crossing points?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.19.   Please explain how the smooth movement of goods subject to more liberal import 
conditions in one EAEU Member state is ensured in importa tion for transit via other 
EAEU  member States which may have imposed (temporary) restrictions on imports of 
those goods.  
Response to be provided.  
1.20.   Paragraph 3.16, page 24 and 3.21, page 27: According to the Factual Presentation, 
Kazakhstan's WTO accession commitments provide that no earlier than three years and 
six months from the date of full implementation of all the final bound tariff rates contained 
in its Accession Schedule for goods for which the WTO rate is lower than the CET, 
Kazakhstan would seek to align the Accession Schedule with the final bound tariff rate of 
the Russian Federation as set out in its Protocol of Ac cession; commence negotiations 
with affected WTO Members; and notify WTO Members of its intention to commence these 
negotiations six months before they start and provide Members that had concluded 
bilateral goods market access protocols with Kazakhstan all  data relevant for the 
negotiations.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 8 - 
 
   When Kazakhstan plans to commence negotiations on tariffs alignment/ 
compensation?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.21.   Part 3.4.1 Standards, page 33: According to numerous representations from 
economic operators, the Customs au thorities of the Russian Federation reject conformity 
certificates issued in other members of the EAEU. What is the legal basis for that?  
Response to be provided.  
1.22.   Interested industries report that adoption of, and amendments to, technical 
regulations of th e EAEU encounters numerous delays. How did the EAEU ensure tangible 
improvements in this regard following the adoption of the new rules on adoption and 
amendments of technical regulations in 2016?  
Response to be provided.  
1.23.   Following the entry into force of the Treaty on the EAEU the competent national 
authorities no longer recognize the laboratory tests conducted in third countries e.g. by 
bodies accredited in the EU. At the same time, national authorities of the EAEU member 
States, in particular Russia, rec ognize the existence of the problem of fake or fictitious 
certification by competent bodies based in the EAEU, which implies that the new rule has 
the opposite effect to that expected. As a result, a significant number of goods appear on 
the EAEU market ba sed on fake certificates and laboratory tests or documents certifying 
de facto  fictitious tests. Are there any legislative changes foreseen in this regard?  
Response to be provided.  
1.24.   Paragraph 3.43, page 31: According to the Factual Presentation, export duti es are 
not applied in intra -EAEU trade.  
 Please inform since when the last intra -EAEU export duties have been abolished, 
most notably for Russian exports of mineral products to Belarus.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.25.   Paragraphs 3.60 and 3.63, pages 34/35: According to the Factual Presentation, the 
Treaty establishes a coordinated SPS policy for the Union. However, member States retain 
their rights to introduce temporary SPS measures, e.g. in cases of justified risk […] The 
Treaty provides that procedures of  interaction between authorized bodies of the EAEU 
member States for implementing these temporary SPS measures are to be developed by 
the Commission (Article 56.4). These procedures, adopted  by the EAEU Council Decision 
No. 149 of 16 May 2016, provide the time-frames for informing other EAEU member States 
on the temporary SPS measure and require the member State introducing the measure to 
provide a description of the measure as well as the reason for, and date of, its 
implementation.  
 Does the EAEU have a role in preventing the introduction of SPS trade barriers by its 
Member States towards non -EAEU countries in violation of the SPS Agreement and, if yes, 
please provide examples where this role has been exercised.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.26.   Paragraphs 3.64 and 3.68, pages 35/36: The Factual Presentation describes the 
change of the veterinary certificates system of the EAEU.  
 Please describe the state of play in putting the harmonised system of recognition of 
veterinary certificates between the EAEU member St ates issued to third countries. How 
many EAEU level veterinary certificates have been agreed with third countries to date, 
and with which partners? How do the EAEU member States ensure uninterrupted trade in WT/REG358/3  
 
- 9 - 
 
  previously certified products (by individual EAE U member States) pending the EAEU -level 
agreed certificates with affected third countries?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.27.   Paragraph 3.65 (d), page 36: We have reports that the EAEU  member States often 
do not follow the list of Common Veterinary Requirements and apply measures not 
foreseen according to that list: e.g. the Russian Federation requiring the exporting 
establishments for dairy products and animal feed to be included in a register. Please 
clarify whether the EAEU monitors the correct implementation of the Common 
requirements. Does it have the competence to ask Member States to comply with EAEU 
rules and, if so, provide examples of relevant actions?  
Response to be provided.  
1.28.   Paragraph 3.66, page 36: According to the Factual presentation, the EAEU common 
requirements in the SPS area apply equally to external and internal trade in the EAEU.  
 Are common SPS requirements also applicable to goods produced and traded only 
in the nat ional territory of a single EAEU Member State? In principle less stringent national 
requirements apply in such cases. If that is the case, how would you justify the 
discrimination against imported products comparing to domestic ones, in violation of WTO 
principles?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.29.   Paragraph 3.73 (d), page 37: According to the Factual presentation, "EAEU  
disciplines on technical regulations are based on the provisions of the WTO TBT 
Agreement, in particular: establishment of a single information/enquiry point on SPS and 
TBT".  
 The EU is not informed of a functioning single information enquiry point on SP S. 
Please provide a reference to it or explain why it is not in existence.  
Response to be provided.  
1.30.   Paragraph 3.125(b) and (c), page 48: According to the Factual presentation, 
Kazakhstan removed before the deadlines indicated in  indents (i) and (ii) the 
TRIMS-incompatible customs duty and tax exemptions, as well as local content, export 
performance and trade balance requirements applied in SEZs and free warehouses, as 
well as measures applied under the relevant industrial assembly agreements which were 
WTO -incompatible. It furthermore contends that the Russ ian Federation had until 
1 July 2018 to end the tax and customs privileges for industrial assembly agreements in 
the automotive sector.  
 Please confirm that these Kazakh and Russian measures have indeed be en removed. 
Please indicate the legal acts of Kazakhstan, Russian Federation and/or the EAEU that 
formalise the change of the above -describe regime.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.31.   The EU would like to know whether Kazakhstan and Belarus profited from customs 
privileges granted to the Russian Federation in the automotive sector, i.e. whether 0% 
import duties on inputs were applied only on imports to the Russian Federation or on the 
territory of the whole EAEU.  
 In case Kazakhstan and Belarus did not benefit from  the above -mentioned customs 
privileges temporarily available to the Russian Federation, the EU would welcome an 
explanation why these two EAEU members are opposing termination of these measures 
at the EAEU level (provided the EAEU decision on this is stil l pending).  
Response to be provided.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 10 - 
 
  1.32.   Paragraph 3.129 (a) page 49: According to the Factual Presentation, "in the EAEU  
Customs Code (a) customs declarations are electronic and written customs declaration 
are only possible in exceptional cases – e.g. goods in transit or sent by international post, 
etc. (Article 104 of the Customs Code). Customs declarations can be submitte d without 
additional documentation to confirm the declaration; these will only be required in case 
of doubt following the risk assessment system (Article 109 of the Customs Code)".  
 According to the information from EU businesses, still this year (2018), t here have 
been plenty of cases where written (paper) declarations were still required and all 
questions and modifications to the declaration could only be made on paper. When will 
the electronic system be made fully operational?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.33.   Paragraph 3.129 (b), page 49: According to the F actual Presentation in the 
EAEU  Customs Code the creation of a single window for all customs operations by 
economic operators is foreseen (Article 80 of the Customs Code).  
 Kazakhstan in its notification (G/TF A/N/KAZ/2) to the WTO of 13 July 2018, 
circulated by WTO on 18 July, about its remaining TFA commitments (categories B and C) 
has informed that the Single Window System will be applied only by February 2023. We 
are reliably informed from counterparts in Ka zakhstan that there is no certainty as for 
when this will occur and extensive assistance is deemed necessary, as per the same 
notification. When will the said Single Window system be actually available to economic 
operators?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.34.   Paragraph 3.129 (c), page 49: According to the Factual Presentation, the automatic 
release of goods (without direct participation of the customs authorities) should be 
allowed within four hours from the registration of the customs declaration (instead of one 
working day following the day of the registration of the customs declaration) (Article 119 
of the Customs Code).  
 This does not correspond to the information on the ground and no average time for 
release is published. Timeline for complying with related TFA  commitment for Kazakhstan 
is foreseen for 2023. When is the EAEU planning to effectively implement this provision 
of its Customs Code?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.35.   Paragraph 3.129 (j), page 49: According to the Factual Presentation, any legal 
entity incorporated under the legislation of an EAEU member State involved in 
international trade can apply for an authorized economic  operator (AEO) status 
(Chapter  61 of the Customs Code), recognized throu ghout the Union (Article 434) on the 
basis of a self -assessment questionnaire. Such status is granted upon recognition by the 
national customs authority of compliance with international safety standards; a registry 
of AEOs is also established.  
 Currently, in Kazakhstan very few operators are regis tered as AEOs (only six as of 
end 2017) and regis tration is not only linked to " compliance with  international safety 
standards"  and a self -assessment questionnaire but also other requirements notably 
including a le vel of financial guarantee that have so far discouraged registration. When 
will the AEOs system be made more easily accessible to economic operators by adapting 
national practices to the EAEU Customs Code provisions?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.36.   Paragraph 3. 137, page 51: According to the Factual Presentation, "[t]he 
development of legal instruments that implement EAEU cooperation and coordination of 
industrial policy is work in progress; economic sectors are progressively subject to EAEU 
regulations aimed at the development of the "EAEU industrial policy"".  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 11 - 
 
   In 2017 started a discussion on EAEU level to add cement to the list of goods for 
which certificates are necessary. It's not clear yet what kind of rules would apply once 
the EAEU  regulations enters into force. Please provide information on the matter.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.37.   Paragraph 3.139, page 51: According to the Factual Presentation, "[t]he EAEU's 
Agreement on Common Principles and Rules for the Circulation of Medicines, a s well as 
the Agreement on Common Principles and Rules for the Circulation of Medical Devices 
(Medical Products and Medical Equipment), ratified on 26 April 2016, required the 
adoption of 24 and 11 acts, respectively. Following their adoption, all instrume nts entered 
into force and on 6 May 2017 single markets for circulation of both medicines and medical 
devices started to operate. Both Agreements provided for the introduction of transitional 
periods. National markets of medicines and medical products will  continue to operate until 
31 December 2021, in parallel to the single market; at the choice of producers, products 
can be registered according to either the single market or the national rules. At the same 
time, the circulation of medicines registered und er national rules will be terminated from 
31 December 2025, while for medical products the EAEU r egistration is required as of 
1 January 2022."  
 A draft decision of the Board of the EEC on Good Manufacturing Practice certificate 
requirements for pharmaceut ical products is under discussion. The adoption of these 
decisions may require changes in legislation of the EAEU members. What is the current 
state of play of the respective discussion at the EAEU level? Furthermore, please explain 
how the uniform applica tion of the common system can be ensured across all five EAEU 
members.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
Provisions on trade in services and investment  
 
1.38.   Paragraphs 4.4, 4.25, 4.93, pages 52, 55 and 70, respectively: The EAEU  provides 
for a common market for labour. Member States are free to apply requirements relating 
to education, experience, qualifications of employees. MRAs for service suppliers may be 
agreed in certain liberalized sectors, but no specific agreements have been concluded in 
that respect. However, the S&I Protocol states that when a single services market is 
functioning in a specific sector, each member shall recogni ze the professional 
qualifications of service suppliers. Please confirm that this is indeed the case for all single 
market sectors. Please clarify whether that treatment (in single market sectors) also 
extends to employees that are not service suppliers. Pl ease confirm our understanding 
that the lack of MRAs for service suppliers concerns only sectors not subject to single 
market.  
Response to be provided.  
1.39.   Paragraph 4.5, page 52: Please clarify whether the definition of "establishment" 
refers to the process o f establishing an entity or rather to the outcome of that process. In 
the latter case, please clarify whether "establishments" are to be considered a type of 
"investment".  
Response to be provided.  
1.40.   Paragraph 4.7, page 52: Please clarify whether Section VII on Investment concerns 
only post -establishment, or otherwise.  
Response to be provided.  
1.41.   Paragraphs 4.8, 4.94 pages 52 and 70, respectively: Please explain the treatment 
of subsidies. We understand they are neither carved out from the scope of the Treaty, no r 
subject to specific disciplines. How are they covered by the schedules of the parties?  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 12 - 
 
  Response to be provided.  
1.42.   Paragraphs 4.16 -4.20 and 4.22, page 54: Please confirm whether 4.16 -4.20 refers 
to pre -establishment and 4.22 to post -establishment.  
Response to be provided.  
1.43.   Paragraph 4.24, page 55: According to the Factual Presentation, "The EAEU Treaty 
provides for the free movement of personnel (mode 4),  …". 
 Please indicate the specific EAEU provisions relating to free movement of personnel 
(mode 4). Please  clarify what is the current status of implementation of those disciplines 
in each EAEU member State.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.44.   Paragraph 4.26 page 55: Please indicate where the sectors of strategic economic 
importance are listed.  
Response to be provided.  
1.45.   Paragraph 4.29, page 55: According to the Factual Presentation, "A member State 
may nevertheless apply any of the mentioned measures provided they are listed in its 
Schedules of Horizontal Limitations or of Additional Limitations."  
 Please provide a gener al assessment of the commitments of each EAEU MS with 
respect to performance requirements.  
Response to be provided.  
1.46.   Paragraph 4.30, page 55: Please clarify whether there is a minimum threshold of 
equity holding in order to fall within scope of SOE  provisions of Section V.  
Response to be provided.  
1.47.   Paragraph 4.36, page 56: According to the Factual Presentation, "A standstill clause 
is included in Article 66 of the Treaty, whereby member States agree not to adopt new 
discriminatory measures from the d ate of entry into force of the Treaty. The standstill 
disciplines do not apply to national treatment for investment…"  
 Please clarify whether indemnities apply in the event of new discriminatory 
measures being imposed on existing investments. Please explai n the functioning of the 
reservations listed against the standstill clause; please confirm whether those only 
concern cross border trade.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.48.   Paragraph 4.37, page 56: "The EAEU provisions on services and investments 
provide  …" 
 Pleas e clarify whether ratchet applies.  
Response to be provided.  
1.49.   Paragraph 4.39, page 57: "… services commitments have evolved  …". 
 Could you please clarify whether the number of subsectors is based on the 
155 subsectors of the Services Sectoral Classification List MTN.GNS/W/120?  
 
Response to be provided.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 13 - 
 
  1.50.   Paragraph 4.59, pages 62/63: According to the Factual Presentation, "Under the 
EAEU, the Russian Federation's horizontal reservations are listed in its Schedule of 
Horizontal Limitations  …". 
 Please clarify whether the reservations listed under indents a, b, c are GATS minus.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.51.   Paragraph 4.62, page 63: Please clarify whether the requirement to establish a legal 
entity for any type of activity that requires licensing is GATS minus.  
Response to be provided.  
Table 4.2 Russian Federation: Comparison between the GATS and EAEU liberalization 
commitments (excluding mo de 4 and horizontal limitations), pages 63/64  
 
1.52.   Please clarify the status of sub sectors not covered  by single market under 
indents  4.b and 4.c.  
Response to be provided.  
1.53.   Paragraph 4.73, page 67: According to the Factual Presentation, "limitations have 
been placed for foreign participation in a media organi zation, editorial office, or entity 
engaged in broadcasting" . 
 Please clarify whether the limitations placed for foreign participation in a media 
organi zation are GATS minus.  
Response to be provided.  
General provisions of the agreement  
 
1.54.   Paragraph 5.12, page 79: According to the Factual Presentation, General exceptions 
to internal trade in goods are contained in Article 29 of the EAEU Treaty; they reflect some 
of the exceptions of GATT Articles XX and X XI. More precisely, they authorize member 
States to apply restrictions in their mutual trade in goods provided these measures do not 
serve as unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade, if such restrictions 
are necessary for the prote ction of (i) human life and health; (ii) public morals and public 
order; (iii) the environment; (iv) animal and plant species and cultural values; and for the 
implementation of (v) international obligations; and (vi) the defence  and security of the 
member State. Accordingly, sanitary, veterinary as well as quarantine measures could be 
imposed on internal trade in accordance with the procedures of Articles 56 -59 of the 
Treaty, and the movement ("turnover") of certain categories of goods can be limited.  
 Can you inform regarding publicity of the justification and duration of such measures 
(when and where they are published) in so far as they may affect third parties exports 
and any remedies made available to third parties? Have any of such measure s been 
decide d for longer than six  months (including through extensions)? If so, please list those.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
1.55.   Paragraph 5.54, page 88: According to the Factual  Presentation, "as of 
1 January  2015 , national treatment is granted in all procurement of goods, works and  
services by each member State". It further notes that exemptions may be introduced in 
exceptional cases and for a period not exceeding two years.  
 Please list the exemptions from the nat ional treatment principle currently applied 
by the EAEU member State in public procurement between them.  
 
Response to be provided.  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 14 - 
 
  1.56.   Paragraph 5.63, page 90: According to the Factual Presentation, "[t]he principle of 
the regional exhaustion of exclusive rig hts applies to trademarks and EAEU trademarks".  
 To our knowledge, the EAEU plans to introduce exemptions from the currently 
applicable principle of regional exhaustion principle for trademarks (Annex 26 - Protocol 
on the Protection and Enforcement of Intel lectual Property Rights, section V.16). Once 
new rules would enter into force, the international exhaustion principle will be applied to 
certain goods circulating within the EAEU market. Allowing the international exhaustion 
principle only for certain good s, i.e. only those not produced in the EAEU, would result in 
"unjustifiable discrimination" or a "disguised restriction of trade" within the meaning of 
Article XX GATT. Could you please provide explanation on the matter?  
 
Response to be provided.  
 
Questions from the delegation of Mexico  
 
1.57.   On page 49, in Chapter 3, paragraph 3.129(b), reference is made to the creation of 
a single window for all customs operations by economic operators .  
a. What procedures can currently be conducted by means of the single  window ? 
b. Is it possible to carry out the advance clearance of goods through the single 
window ? 
(a, b):  
 Each EAEU member State develops its national single window on its own in accordance with 
approved plans and concepts. In 2017 the Eurasian Economic Comm ission appraised the status of 
development of national single windows of the EAEU member States. The results of these estimates 
are available in English on the official website of the Eurasian Economic Commission by following 
reference:  
http://www.eurasiancommission .org/ru/act/tam_sotr/edinoe _okno/Documents /9281012 -en.pdf. 
 
 In accordance with the main directions in development of the single window mechanism in the 
system of regulation of foreign trade activities (adopted by the decision of the Supreme Eurasian 
Economic Council No.  68 of 29  May 2014) and the plan of their real ization (adopted by the decision 
of the Sup reme Eurasian Economic Council No.  19 of 8 May 2015) the EAEU member States endeavor 
to coordinate their efforts in developing national single windows in order to ensure the 
interoperability between them and possi bility of informational exchange. There are no plans for 
creation of one integrated regional mechanism "single window"  for all EAEU m ember States.  
 
1.58.   On page 49, in Chapter 3, paragraph 3.129(j), it is stated that there are three types 
of authorized economic  operator (AEO) certificates, each implying a balance between 
requirements to be met and facilitation accorded .  
a. What requirements apply to each of the three types of AEO ? 
b. What is the main difference ?  
 (a, b):  
Provisions concerning the activities of authorized economic operators in the EAEU are 
established in Chapter 61 of the Customs Code of the EAEU.  
 
 In accordance with paragraph 1 Article 430 of the Customs Code of the EAEU, the authorized 
economic operator is a juridical person established in acc ordance with the legislation of the Member 
States and included in the registry of authorized economic operators in accordance with the 
procedure and on the terms established by Chapter 61  of the Customs Code of the EAEU.  
 
 Article 432 of the Customs Code of the EAEU states that Certificate of Inclusion in the Registry 
of Authorized Economic Operators (hereinafter – the "certificate") can be of three types. The 
conditions for inclusion of a juridical person in the registry of authorized economi c operators are WT/REG358/3  
 
- 15 - 
 
  provided in Article 433 of the Customs Code of the EAEU and differ according to the type of 
certificate.  
 
 Special simplifications provided to the authorized economic operators are described in 
Article  437 of the Customs Code of the EAEU an d also divided according to the type of certificate.  
The unofficial translation of the Customs Code of the EAEU in English is available  on the official 
website of the Eurasian Economic Commission by following reference:  
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/en/act/tam_sotr/dep_tamoj_zak/Pages/Customs -Code-of-
the-EAEU.aspx . 
 
1.59.   On page 50, in Chapter 3, paragraph 3.132, it is stated that importers must request 
preferential treatment at the time of declaration of the goods and present supporting 
documentation . 
a. If at the time of importation it is not possible to produce the proof of origin 
documents or tariff preference request, can this be done after  importation? If so:   
b. For what period of time following importation would it be possible to present 
such documentation?   
 (a, b):  
If the importer is not in possession of a proof of origin at the time of importation, the applied 
MFN customs duty shall be pa id. In such a case the importer may make a claim for preferential 
treatment and refund of any excess import customs duty within 12 months from the time of 
registration of the import customs declaration provided that all requirements for application of 
preferential treatment have been met.  
 
 In accordance with paragraph 2 Article 446 of the Customs Code of the EAEU, if the importer 
is not in possession of a proof of origin at the time of importation, the applied MFN customs duty 
shall be paid. In such a case  the importer may make a claim for preferential treatment and refund 
of any exc ess import customs duty within one  year from the time of registration of the import 
customs declaration provided that all requirements for application of preferential treatment have 
been met.  
 
1.60.   Page 71: Paragraph 4.98. With respect to licences to operate within established 
territorial boundaries, what are the cases in which an additional authorization is 
appropriate and which authorities are competent to issue it ? 
 In accordance w ith the EAEU Treaty (paragraph 6 of Appendix 1 to the Protocol on Trade in 
Services, Establishment, Activities and Investment), activities in the provision of telecommunication 
services are implemented  on the basis of national licenc es issued by the compet ent authorities of 
the member States within the established territorial borders.  
 
 All the procedures and condit ions of obtaining of such licenc es or any other authorizations are 
regulated by the national legislation of the EAEU member States.  
 
1.61.   Page 71: Paragraph 4.100. With respect to the setting of tariffs for 
telecommunication services, are member States allowed to set tariffs for any type of 
telecommunication service, including international (or long distance) roaming ? 
The Agreement on the EAEU does n ot prohibit the establishment of tariffs for 
telecommunications services, including roaming. These tariffs for telecommunication services shall 
be based on the legislative requirements of the respective Member State.  
 
Moreover, by 1 January 2020, the Council of the Commission should approve a common 
approach for pricing of traffic transmission services of the Member States.  
 
1.62.   When setting tariffs for telecommunication services, are member States obliged to 
use a specific cost model? If so, which model d o they use ? 
 According to the Agreement on the EAEU, the EAEU member states do not have commitments 
regarding the application of a certain cost model for telecommunications services.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 16 - 
 
   At the same time, by 1 January 2020, the Council of the Commission shoul d approve a 
common approach to the pricing of traffic transmission services of the Member States.  
 
 With regard to the types of telecommunications services the tariffs for which are not subject 
to state regulation, the Member States shall ensure the availa bility and effective application of the 
competition law in order to prevent any distortion of the terms of competition between suppliers and 
recipients of telecommunications services of the Member States . 
 
1.63.   Page 91: Paragraph 5.70(b). What types of penalty are imposed in response to 
violation of the principles and rules of competition identified in the treaty ? 
 This issue is regulated by the 16 of section IV. "Penalties for Violation of the General Rules of 
Competition in cross -border markets imposed by the Commission" of the Protocol on General 
Principles and Rules of Competition (Appendix No. 19 to the EAEU Agreeme nt of 29 May 2014 
(hereinafter the "Agreement")). Under the Calculation Methodology and the Procedure for Imposing 
Fines (approved by the Commission) and Article 76 of the Agreement the Commission imposes fines 
for violations of general competition rules i n cross -border markets, as well as for failure to submit 
or late submission to the Commission at its request of information (Info) or for submission of 
deliberately false information (data) to the Commission in the following amounts:  
 
(1) unfair competitio n inadmissible under paragraph 2 of Article 76 of the Treaty shall be 
subject to penalties in the amount of RUB 20,000 to 110,000 for officials and individual 
entrepreneurs and RUB 100,000 to 1,000,000 for juridical persons;  
 
(2)  conclusion by an economic  entity (market participant) of an agreement inadmissible 
under paragraphs 3 -5 of Article 76 of the Treaty, as well as participation therein, shall 
be subject to a penalty in the amount of RUB 20,000 to 150,000 for officials and 
individual entrepreneurs, a nd, for juridical persons, in the amount of 1 to 15% of the 
proceeds gained by the offender from selling goods (works, services) in the market of 
which the violation occurred or the amount of expenditure of the offender on the 
purchase of goods (works, ser vices) in the market of which the violation occurred, but 
not more than one -fiftieth of the overall proceeds of the offender from selling all goods 
(works, services) and no less than RUB 100,000; and if the amount of proceeds of the 
offender from selling g oods (works, services) in the market of which th e violation 
occurred exceeds 75% of the total proceeds of the offender from selling all goods (works, 
services) the penalty in the amou nt of three thousandth to three  hundredths of the 
amount of the proceeds g ained by the offender from selling goods (works, services) in 
the market of which the violation occurred or of the amount of expenditure of the 
offender for the purchase of goods (works, services) in the market of which the violation 
occurred, but not more  than one -fiftieth of the overall income of the offender from 
selling all goods (works, services) and no less than RUB 100,000;  
 
(3)  coordination of economic activities of economic entities (market participants) 
inadmissible under paragraph 6 of Article 76 of the Treaty shall be subject to penalties 
in the amount of RUB 20,000 to 75,000 for natural persons, RUB 20,000 to 150,000 for 
officials and individual entrepreneurs, and RUB 200,000 to 5,000,000 for juridical 
persons;  
 
(4)  committing by an economic  entity (market participant) holding a dominant position in 
the commodity market of actions constituting an abuse of the dominant position and 
inadmissible under paragraph 1 of Article 76 of the Treaty shall be subject to a penalty 
in the amount of RUB 20, 000 to RUB 150,000 for officials and individual entrepreneurs, 
and, for juridical persons, in the amount of 1% to 15% of the proceeds gained by the 
offender from selling goods (works, services) in the market of which the violation 
occurred or the amount of  expenditure of the offender on the purchase of goods (works, 
services) in the market of which the violation occurred, but not more than one -fiftieth 
of the overall proceeds of the offender from selling all goods (works, services) and no 
less than RUB 100, 000; and if the amount of proceeds of the offender from selling goods 
(works, services) in the market of which th e violation occurred exceeds 75% of the total 
proceeds of the offender from selling all goods (works, services) the penalty in the 
amount of th ree thousandth to three hundredths of the proceeds gained by the offender 
from selling goods (works, services) in the market of which the violation occurred or of WT/REG358/3  
 
- 17 - 
 
  the amount of expenditure of the offender on the purchase of goods (works, services) 
in the m arket of which the violation occurred, but not more than one -fiftieth of the 
overall income of the offender from selling all goods (works, services) and no less than 
RUB 100,000;  
 
(5)  non-submission or late submission to the Commission of information (da ta) provided 
for by Section XVIII of the Treaty and in this Protocol, including failure to provide 
statements (information) at the request of the Commission, as well as deliberate 
submission to the Commission of knowingly false statements (information), sh all be 
subject to a penalty in the amount of RUB 10,000 to RUB 15,000 for natural persons, 
RUB 10,000 to 60,000 for officials and individual entrepreneurs, and RUB 150,000 to 
RUB 1,000,000 for juridical persons.  
 
1.64.   Page 92: Paragraph 5.74. With respect to o ther provisions, what provisions are 
established to ensure the application of a coordinated policy in regard to consumer rights 
protection ? 
 In accordance with Clause 1 of Article 61 "Consumer Protection Policy" of Section XII 
"Protection of Consumer Rights" of the Agreement, the Member States shall conduct agreed policy 
in the sphere of consumer protection aimed at creating equal conditions for the nationals of the 
Member States in order to protect their interests against dishonest activities of econo mic entities.  
 
 According to paragraph 2 of this article, agreed policy in the sphere of consumer protection 
shall be ensured in accordance with Treaty and the legislation of the Member States concerning 
consumer protection based on the principles according to Annex 13 to this Treaty.  
 
 Thus, pursuant to Section V, paragraph 6, of Section V. "The Commission's Powers" of the 
Protocol on Conducting a Coherent Policy in the Sphere of Consumer Rights Protection 
(Appendix  No. 13 to the Treaty), the Commi ssion establishes advisory bodies on the protection of 
consumers' rights of Member States.  
 
 In accordance with the Regulation on the Advisory Committee on Consumer Protection of the 
member States of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) approved 
by the Decision of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 59 of  25 May 2015, the 
Committee is the advisory body of the Commission, which prepares proposals, recommendations 
and conducting consultations on the implementati on of the coordinated policy in the field of 
consumer protection by the member States of the Eurasian Economic Union.  
 
Questions from the delegation of Thailand  
 
1.65.   Regarding the Treaty o n the Eurasian Economic Union, d o the members of EAEU 
recognize a perman ent residen ce? If so, could the permanent residence  of EAEU' s member 
enjoy the same benefit  of this treaty as the citizen of the countries?  
 The issues of permanent residency are regulated by national legislation of the EAEU member 
States. Practically in all the EAEU member States such forms of residency are recognized but the 
benefits of the EAEU Treaty related to labo ur issues applied only to citizens of the EAEU member 
States.  
 
1.66.   Paragraph 4.16: National treatment disciplines  are embodied in paragraphs 21 -26 
of the Services and Investment Protocol. They require each Member State to provide, in 
respect of:  
a. all measures affecting trade in services by any other member State, service 
suppliers and service consumer; and  
b. establishm ent and activities of any other member State's natural or juridical 
persons, treatment no less favorable than it accords in like circumstances to its 
own like services, service suppliers, service consumers and persons, 
respectively.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 18 - 
 
   According to paragraph  4.16, page 54, EAEU stated that National Treatment applies 
on all measures affecting services by any other member State, service suppliers, service 
consumers and persons. Please give further clarification on p roviding treatment no less 
favorable than it a ccords in like circumstances to its own like service consumers and 
persons. Are there any criteria or measures adopted by EAEU member States to define 
"like consumer"?  
 
 There are no criteria or measures established by EAEU to define "like consumer ". 
 
Ques tions from the delegation of Ukraine  
 
Characteristic elements of the agreement  
 
1.67.   The GATT/WTO permits its members to establish a free trade agreement, although 
it constitutes a major derogation from the MFN principle. The basic rationale here is that 
a free trade agreement will bring about a trade creation effect to world trade by remo ving 
all the barriers between the members to the agreement, and that the trade creation effect 
will exceed the trade diversion effect resulting from the non -MFN arrangement. It has 
been about more than two and half years since the Treaty on the EAEU came i nto force.  
 Have the Parties undertaken any studies of the possible effects of the Treaty on the 
EAEU on third parties? If so, what were their findings?  
 Since the EAEU Treaty has been formed to ensure the interests of the member States of the 
EAEU, no su ch studies have been conducted.  
1.68.   Paragraph 2.1 provides that "in case of conflict between international agreements 
within the EAEU system and the EAEU Treaty, the latter takes precedence (Article 6) ".  
 Can the Parties to the Treaty indicate the precise sco pe of this clause as far as their 
obligations as WTO Members are concerned?  
 Member States of the Eurasian Economic Union carefully consider their WTO obligations before 
concluding any agreement within the EAEU.  
Provision on trade in goods  
 
Anti-dumping, countervailing, and safeguard measures  
 
1.69.   Paragraph 3.111 states that "Generally the provisions regarding anti -dumping and 
countervailing measures are in line with those of the WTO Agreements on Implementation 
of Article VI of GATT 1994 and on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. […]. The 
EAEU  Treaty does however specify time -limits for the notification of decisions taken in 
connection with the investigation, which are not specified in the WTO Agreements ". 
 However, there is no time limit for decision -makin g process, which results in 
significant time gap between the end of the investigation within the meaning of the Treaty 
and decision imposing measure.  
 
a. Please explain what procedures are to be followed when the investigating 
authority does not reach the de cision whether to apply the measure or when 
such decision is not made within the deadline set forth in Article 5.10 of the 
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 (further – ADA).  
 The EAEU law does not contain formal procedures in this regard.  
b. It is still unclear how the EAEU member States ensure that given a time gap 
between the end of investigation and implementation of a decision trade 
remedies measures would be in line with Article 3 of the ADA, in particular the 
requirement that th e injury determination should be "based on positive 
evidence" that includes evaluation of the most recent information?  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 19 - 
 
   The Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union in the Framework of the Multilateral 
Trading System, signed on 19 May 2011, ensures conformity of the law and practice of the EAEU 
with regard to application of trade defence measures with the rel evant WTO  Agreements. 
Article  2 (1) provides that the Parties shall take measures in order to bring the legal system of the 
Customs Union and the decisions of its bodies in conformity with the WTO Agreement, insofar as it 
is stipulated in the Protocol on Accession of each of the Parties, including the obligations of each 
Party taken as one of the conditions of its accession to the WTO.  
 
 In accordance with the Decision of the Board of the EEC No. 1 of 7 March 2012 the 
investigating authority responsible for conduct ing trade remedy investigations is the Department for 
Internal Market Defence of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – DIMD).  
 The standards for investigations conducted by the DIMD and the rules governing the 
imposition of anti -dumping, counter vailing measures and safeguards in the EAEU are in conformity 
with the relevant WTO Agreements.  
 With regard to Article 3 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement, the DIMD follows the interpretation 
elaborated by the Appellate Body in US – Hot-Rolled Steel . Specific ally, the Appellate Body clarified 
that "[t]he term "positive evidence" relates, in our view, to the quality of the evidence that 
authorities may rely upon in making a determination. The word "positive" means, to us, that the 
evidence must be of an affirma tive, objective and verifiable character, and that it must be credible".2 
Therefore, an investigating authority cannot base its injury determination on information that is not 
credible, affirmative, objective and verifiable.  
 In addition, in order to eval uate the most recent information the DIMD establishes the period 
of investigation in accordance with the Recommendation Concerning the Periods of Data Collection 
for Anti -Dumping Investigations adopted by the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices on 
5 May 2000 (G/ADP/6). In this regard, the periods end as close to the date of initiation as 
practicable.  
c. It also remains unclear how the EAEU trade remedies legislation complies with 
Articles 5.10 and 11.4 of the ADA given a time gap between the conclusions of 
investigating authority (report) and implementation of a decision?  
The EAEU  trade remedy legislation related to decision -making and implementation of a 
decision is in full compliance with Articles 5.10 and 11.4 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement. Please see 
paragraphs 109 and 217 of the Protocol.  
1.70.   Paragraph 3.112 indicates that "The D epartment for Internal Market Defen ce of the 
Commission is the responsible authority for conducting anti -dumping and countervailing 
investigations ". 
a. How the position of the each party to the EAEU  Treaty within the trade remedies 
proceedings is brought into consideration by the Department for Internal Market 
Defen ce of the Commission?  
 The EAEU law does not specify a formal procedure. In practice, the position may be brought 
to the DIMD through con sultations process and in the framework of the Advisory Committee.  
b. Does the assessment procedure on whether the proposed measure would be in 
interest of the each party to the EAEU exist?  
 The WTO law does not require such assessment procedures.  
                                                
2 Appellate Body Report, US – Hot-Rolled Steel , para. 192.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 20 - 
 
  Other expor t-related measures  
 
1.71.   Paragraph 3.46: The EAEU envisages developing a series of measures for export 
development – in particular, insurance and export credit, introduction of common 
labelling for goods of the EAEU and their promotion.  
 Please provide the det ailed information on export development measures applied 
within the EAEU.  
Article 41 of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union stipulates the possibility of 
applying  measures for export development in accordance with WTO rules and regulations, includin g 
insurance and export credits, as well as the introduction of a common system of labelling for the 
EAEU and their promotion.  
 
 Meetings of export credits' agencies are actually held on regular basis with the purpose of 
sharing experiences and general coor dination of their activities.  
 
 The exhibition forum "Eurasian Week" is organized annually and alternately in the territory of 
each of the member States. It was held in Moscow in 2016, in Astana in 2017. It was held in Yerevan 
in October 2018 and planned i n 2019 to be held Bishkek and in 2020 in Minsk.  
 
Level of harmonization  
 
1.72.   Paragraph 3.16: Does the Republic of Kazakhstan plan to reduce prior to 2020 its 
tariff commitments for those goods where the WTO rate is lower than the CET aligning 
them with the final bound tariff rate of the Russian Federation and thus to begin earlier 
the appropriate negotiations with affected WTO Members?  
 To date, this issue is not under consideration.  
 
Exclusive rights  
 
1.73.   Paragraphs 3.38 and 3.39: According to the information p rovided in paras 3.38 and 
3.39 of the Factual Presentation the Commission identifies goods for which an exclusive 
right of export and/or import is granted. The list of traders with exclusive rights should 
be published on the official website of the Commiss ion. As of April 2018, no such list has 
been established.  
When does the Commission plan to submit the aforementioned list of traders?  
 Since the adoption of the EAEU Treaty, no exclusive rights regarding any goods have been 
introduced. With regard to the norms introduced before (Decision of the Commission's Collegium 
No. 134 of 16 August 2012), the application procedure of exclusive rights, including publishing of 
the list of participants of the foreign trade activity, is determined according to national l egislations 
of the member States of the EAEU.  
 
Sanitary and phytosanitary measures  
 
1.74.   Paragraph 3.65: Concerning the CU Commission Decision No 607 of 7 April 2011 on 
the approval of common forms of veterinary certificates for controlled products please 
clarify the procedure of certificates issuance. The samples of certificates in the heading 
cover the import from the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian  Federation. Please explain the procedure for use of these forms for other 
EAEU M embers such as the Republic of Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic.  
 Acts taken at the EAEU level equally apply to all the EAEU member States including Armenia 
and the Kyrgyz Republic.  
 According to CU Commission Decision No. 317, goods included in the list o f goods subject to 
veterinary control must be accompanied by a veterinary certificate . 
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 21 - 
 
   To obtain the veterinary certificate (approved by the Customs Union Commission decision as 
of 7 April 2011 No. 607) for each party of goods (products) the exporter should contact the 
veterinary competent authority of the exporting country.  
 
Technical b arriers to trade 
 
1.75.   Paragraph 3.87: Article 55 of the EAEU  Treaty foresees the development of an 
"Agreement on procedure and conditions of elimination of technical barriers to mutual 
trade with third countries". Under this Agreement, the elimination of TBT would be 
possible on the basis of international agreement s of the EAEU with third countries.  
a. Did the EAEU conclude any international agreement with third country ( -ies) 
concerning elimination of TBT?  
No. 
 
b. If no, please clarify whether it is the EAEU 's intention to conclude such 
international agreements or othe rwise to eliminate technical barriers in the near 
future. If so, please identify when.  
 After the signing and entry into force of the Agreement on the procedure and conditions of 
elimination of technical barriers to mutual trade with third countries, agree ments with interested 
third countries can be negotiated and concluded.  
 
1.76.   Paragraph 3.76 states that "In practice, technical regulations adopted at the EAEU 
level have direct effect in its territory (Article 52.1 of the Treaty). Products for which a 
technica l regulation has entered into force shall move freely within the territory of the 
Union, provided the necessary conformity assessment has been undertaken ". 
a. How is it planned to implement mentioned above in the legislation of each party 
to the EAEU Treaty?  
 According to Article 52 of the Treaty on the EAEU technical regulations of the EAEU have a 
direct effect.  
 No changes in national legislation are required.  
 According to Article 53  of the Treaty on the EAEU the m ember States shall ensure the 
circulation  of products conforming to the requirements of the technical regulations of the EAEU on 
its territory without introduction of any additional requirements to such products in excess of those 
set out in the technical regulations of the EAEU and without any a dditional conformity assessment 
procedures.  
b. What does "the necessary conformity assessment" mean and is this procedure 
harmonized in each party to the EAEU Treaty?  
 Each technical regulation of the EAEU describes the necessary conformity assessment 
proced ures. 
 
c. Does each party to the EAEU Treaty recognize the results of each and every 
procedure of conformity assessment of any other party to the EAEU Treaty 
without exceptions? What is a procedure therefor (if applicable such)?  
 Yes. 
 
Agricultural subsidies and Industrial subsidies  
 
1.77.   Paragraphs 3.118 -3.125: The Russian Federation 's notification G/SCM /N/284/RUS 
on subsidies includes support of agriculture machinery modernization and innovative 
development within the State Programme of the Russian Federation "Development of 
Agriculture and Regulation of Agricultural Products, Raw Materials and Foodmarke ts for WT/REG358/3  
 
- 22 - 
 
  2013 -2020". The Policy objective of these measures is to improve the efficiency and 
competitiveness of agricultural producers through technical and technological 
modernization of production. Please clarify the reasons for not including such measures  
in Domestic Support (DS:1) Notifications?  
 This question is not related to the rules of application of subsidies within the EAEU.  
 
Provisions on trade in services and investment  
 
Sectoral commitments – transport services  
 
1.78.   Paragraph 4.74: According to Art.  86 of the Treaty the EAEU carries out coordinated 
(correlated) transport policy aimed at ensuring economic integration, consistent and 
gradual creation of a single transport space on the principles of competition, openness, 
security, reliability, availabi lity and environmental compatibility.  
 How do the Russian Federation 's actions regarding a ban on international transit 
cargo from the territory of Ukraine to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Kyrgyz Republic through the territory of the  Russian Federation correlate with the 
provisions of the above -mentioned Article of the Treaty?  
 Kazakhstan, Belarus : This question refers to the Russian Federation . 
 
 Response from the delegation of the Russian Federation : In Russia 's view, it is not appropriate 
to raise the issue subject to the current dispute settlement procedures. Such discussion appeared 
to be not in line with the DSU, according to which it is the matter of the DSB to inform of "any 
developments in disputes relat ed to provisions of the respective covered agreements ". 
 
General provision s of the agreement  
 
Dispute settlement  
 
1.79.   What is the mechanism for the settlement of disputes on the EAEU trade issues and 
is this mechanism consistent with the dispute settlement p rocedures established under 
the WTO?  
The EAEU DS mechanism is established by article 112 of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic 
Union  and the Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union (Annex 2 to the Treaty on the 
Eurasian Economic Union). The E AEU DS mechanism and the WTO DS mechanism are two different 
ones. 
 
1.80.   When a conflict concerns a matter that may be dealt with both in the EAEU Treaty 
and in the WTO, does the Treaty give the complaining party the option to choose either 
forum to settle the d ispute?  
 The EAEU Treaty does not specify this matter.  
 
1.81.   Whether a Member of the EAEU is prevented from engaging in double proceedings 
(in the Court of the EAEU and in the WTO) under the EAEU Treaty?  If a Member is not 
prevented and in case of different decisions of the Court of the EAEU and of the WTO which 
decision would be implemented?  
 The EAEU Treaty does not specify this matter.  
 
1.82.   If a party to the EAEU opts to seek dispute settlement under the Tr eaty vis-à-vis 
another party to the Treaty, how does the Treaty ensure that any subsequent remedial 
actions taken by a party will be implemented in a manner consistent with its obligations 
under the WTO vis-à-vis other parties, particularly in respect of i ts obligations on 
MFN treatment?  
 The EAEU Treaty does not regulate the matter.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 23 - 
 
  Additional questions  
 
1.83.   Joining the WTO in addition to the WTO rules, concerning the state -owned, 
state -controlled (SOEs), and state -trading enterprises (STEs), the RF agreed tha t SOEs 
and STEs, when engaged in commercial activity, would make purchases that were not 
intended for governmental use and sales in international trade in a manner consistent 
with the WTO Agreement. Such enterprises would make purchases and sales of goods and 
services in accordance with commercial considerations, such as price, quality, 
marketability, and availability, and afford enterprises of other WTO Members the 
opportunity to compete for participation in such purchases and sales. The EAEU has many 
state-owned enterprises and state -controlled enterprises that operate in the commercial 
sphere and has taken various steps to eliminate special privileges for most of those 
companies. We are seeking more clarification on further steps of the EAEU aiming at 
diminishing the SOEs ' and STEs ' impact to the multilateral trading system.  
 The main objective of the Union is to create proper conditions for sustainable economic 
development of the Member States in order to improve the living standards of their population.  
 
 The aim to diminish the SOEs' and STEs' impact on the multilateral trading system is not 
invoked by the provisi ons of the EAEU T reaty.  
 
The Union does not pursue the aim to evaluate or eliminate the possible impact of SOEs' and 
STEs' on the multilateral trading system.  
 
 At the  same time in the WTO the EAEU m ember States participate in the discussion of such 
issues in the related working group (WGSTE).  
 
 The EAEU members determine its policy, aims and responsibility in respect of ST ES/SOES 
regulation individually.   
 
 Since 2014, the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan has adopted two privatisation 
programmes:  
 
• the Comprehensive Privatisation Plan for 201 4-2016 (hereinafter – CPP 2014);  
 
• the Comprehensive Privatisation Plan for 2016 -2020 (hereinafter – CPP 2016).  
 
 The CPP 2014 was adopted by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
"On Certain Issues of Privatisation " of 31 March 2014 and contained 781 companies. In 2015, the 
Government of Kazakhstan by its resolution of 30 December 2015 adopted the CPP 2016 containing 
881 companies. This CPP 2016 terminated the previous CPP 2014.  
 
 As of 30 September 2018, within th e CPP 2016 the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
sold 437 entities for 242,8 billion Kazakhstani tenge3 or 670,1 million US dollars. In general, the 
objective of the privatisation  is to reduce state participation in the economy to 15% in GDP, to the 
level of the OECD countries. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that Kazakhstan is actively 
cooperating with the OECD in terms of exchanging the best practices on decreasing the rol e of the 
state in the economy and ensuring the level playing field between SOEs and private companies.  
 
 Moreover, in 2015 Kazakhstan eliminated the local content requirements from the 
procurement rules of state -owned enterprises. Thus, Kazakhstani state -owned enterprises make 
purchases and sales of goods and services in accordance with commercial considerations, such as 
price, quality, marketability, and availability, and afford enterprises of other WTO Members the 
opportunity to compete through participat ion in such purchases and sales.  
 
 As to the Russian Federation  in December 2017, the Decree of the President of the Russian 
Federation on government policy on promotion of competition of 21 December 2017 No. 618 was 
adopted. The main principles of the Dec ree are:  
 
                                                
3 As of 1 October 2018, pursuant to official exchange rate established by the National Bank of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan 1 US dollar=363.07 Kazakhstani tenge.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 24 - 
 
  -  reduction the participation of state in the total number of economic entities,  
-  equality of conditions for economic activities,  
-  investments aimed at promotion of competition.  
 
 The decree provides for inter alia  the privatis ation proces s activities.  
 
1.84.   Ukraine would like to get more detailed explanation regarding the application 
procedure of the EAEU antidumping legislation, in particular, the timing for consideration 
by the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC) governing bodies of the report s of the 
Department for Internal Market Defence of the EEC based on the results of the 
antidumping investigations/revisions, as well as the procedure for reviewing the appeals 
of interested exporters regarding the application of price obligations. In this context we 
would like to underline that the report of the Department for Internal Market Defence of 
the EEC concerning the results of the sunset review of antidumping measures on imports 
of certain types of steel pipes originating from Ukraine as of 4 Octo ber 2017 has not still 
been considered by the ECE governing bodies.  
 The timing for consideration by the EEC of the reports of the DIMD is governed by the general 
procedures set forth in the Decision of the Supreme Eurasian E conomic Council No. 98 dated 
23 December 2014 "On Rules of Procedure of the Eurasian Economic Commission".  
 
 As regards procedures concerning price undertakings, please refer to paragraphs 90 -99 of the 
Protocol.  
 
 With regard to  the sunset review of the anti -dumping measure on imports of certain types of 
steel pipes we note that the report was considered by the Board of the Commission on 2 June 2016. 
The Commission decided to extend the anti -dumping measure until 1 June 2021.  
 
1.85.   Ukraine is seeking more clarification on the procedure and grounds for the 
territorial application of the EAEU trade regime, in particular, the application of 
the EAEU  Common Customs Tariff, the extension of its trade restrictive measures, in the 
territory o f the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.  
 Kazakhstan, Belarus : This question refers to the Russian Federation . 
 
Response from the delegation of the Russian Federation : Intern ational treaties of 
the Russian  Federation, including the EAEU Treaty, form an integra l part of its legal system and are 
applied to the whole territory of the Russian Federation . 
 
1.86.   The EAEU partners have integrated the Customs Valuation Agreement 's (CVA) basic 
provisions into the EAEU  legal framework. However, some companies report that 
Customs  Services, namely the Federal Customs Service of Russia, are continuing to use 
reference prices that seem inconsistent with the invoice valuation. We are seeking more 
clarification regarding the measures to ensure full implementation of the EAEU partners ' 
commitments on customs valuation.  
 The Customs Code of the EAEU that came into force on the 1 January 2018 is the basic 
document that regulates issues of  customs valuation of goods in the Eurasian Economic Union 
(Chapter 5 of the Customs Code of the EAEU).  
 The Customs Code of the EAEU was elaborated on the basis of the WTO Agreements and other 
WTO documents that regulate customs relationship, inter alia , the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 inclu ding its interpretative notes and 
also the documents concerning customs valuation of goods, adopted by the WTO Committee on 
Customs Valuation and WTO Technical Committee on Customs Valuation. Consequently acting in the 
EAEU international treaties and acts in the area of customs regulation comply with rules and 
principals of the WTO.  
 In accordance with Article 39 of the Customs Code of the EAEU  the customs value of imported 
goods shall be the transaction value thereof, that is, the price actually paid or pa yable for those 
goods when they are sold for export into the customs territory of the EAEU. In this case the 
transaction value of imported goods can be used for determination of customs value if the number WT/REG358/3  
 
- 25 - 
 
  of conditions (listed in the paragraph 1 of Articl e 39 of the Customs Code of the EAEU) are fulfilled. 
One of these conditions is that the buyer and seller are not related.  
 
 Nevertheless, the fact that the buyer and the seller are related shall not in itself be grounds 
for regarding the transaction value  as unacceptable for determining the customs value of imported 
goods. In this case the circumstances surrounding the sale shall be examined. If the above 
relationship did not influence the price actually paid or payable, the transaction value shall be 
regarded as acceptable for determining the customs value of imported goods.  
 
 In the framework of the above -mentioned analysis (that is made by customs authorities) the 
declarant has the right to prove that the relationship between the seller and the buyer did  not 
influence the price actually paid or payable  by presenting to the customs authority documents and 
information  confirming that the transaction value of imported goods closely approximates to one of 
the following test values occurring in the same or com parable period of time, in which goods were 
imported into the customs territory of the EAEU:  
 
- the transaction value of identical or similar goods in sales of those goods to buyers who are 
not related to the seller for export into the customs territory of t he Union;  
 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods.  
 
 In this case in accordance with paragraph 8 Article 39 of the Customs Code of the EAEU such 
test values  shall be used at the initiative of the declarant  and only for comparison purposes and may  
not be used as a basis for determining the customs value of imported goods.  
 
 Such approach fully complies with provisions of Article 1 of the WTO Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 . 
 
In the Custo ms Code of the EAEU  there is no other cases of using test values.  
 
 Kazakhstan has been implementing its commitments on customs valuation in accordance with 
WTO's Customs Valuation Agreement.  
 
1.87.   Ukraine would like to get more detailed explanation concerning the procedure of 
the establishment of the EAEU single services market and its further territorial 
application.  
 In accordance with the EAEU Treaty the single services market should comprise the  maximum 
number of services sectors.  
 
 The procedure of the establishment of the EAEU single services market includes the following 
stages:  
 
- services sectors that should be included into the single services market need to be 
approved by the EAEU  Supreme Council on the basis of proposals of the member States 
and the Commission;  
 
- the liberalization plans which enables services sectors to be included into the single 
services market after transitional period also need to be approved by the EAEU Supre me 
Council on the basis of proposals of the member States and the Commission.  
 
 For the moment 49 subsectors of services has already been included into the single services 
market (43 subsectors was included immediately after the entry into force of the EA EU Treaty and 
six subsectors – as a result of further liberalization). During the period 2019 -2021 the rules of the 
single services market will also spread on 21 sectors more.  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 26 - 
 
  Questions from the delegation of the United States  
 
Characteristic e lements of  the agreement  
 
Background information  
 
1.88.   Paragraph 2.11: Does Annex 31 of the EAEU Treaty "Protocol on Functioning of the 
EAEU within the Multilateral Trading System" incorporate the full text of the 2011 Treaty 
on the Multilateral System? Are all EAEU memb ers bound by the Protocol and/or 
the 2011  Treaty?  
 Yes, the "Protocol on Functioning of the EAEU within the Multilateral Trading System" 
incorporates the full text of the 2011 Treaty on the Multilateral System . 
 
 Yes, EAEU  members are bound by the Protocol and the 2011 Treaty.  
 
Provisions on trade in g oods  
 
1.89.   Paragraph 3.1: Aside from Kazakhstan's deviations from the common external 
tariff, please identify the other exceptions to the single internal market for goods, 
common c ustoms regulations, and common external trade regime.  
 In accordance with Articles 25 and 42 of the EAEU Treaty the Common External Tariff (CET) 
is applied in the customs territory of the  EAEU.  
 
Exceptions to the CET are applied by members acceding to the  EAEU (Article 42:6  of the EAEU 
Treaty ), in accordance with the list of goods and rates approved by the Commission based on the 
accession agreement. The acceding State must ensure that import  of products facing lower tariffs 
are for domestic consumption and adopt measures to prevent flow of such goods to other Member 
States without additional payment of import customs duties . As of January 2018 this is of relevance 
for Armenia and the Kyrgyz R epublic.  
 
Common external tariff  
 
Structure  
 
1.90.   Paragraph 3.13: The penultimate sentence of this paragraph states that "In 2015, 
around one -third of imports from third parties entered the Russian Federation on a duty -
free basis (using 2014 import figures)." W hat percentage of imports entered the other 
member States duty free in 2015?  
In 2015, around one -third of imports from third parties entered Kazakhstan on a duty -free 
basis.   
 
 In Belarus duty -free import accounted for 46.82% in 2015 .  
 
Non-tariff measures  
 
1.91.   Paragraph 3.26: With regard to the transparency disciplines of the Protocol on 
NTMs, are interested operators of non -member States that do business in the EAEU 
consulted about the introduction and application of NTMs?  
The Collegium and/or the Council of the EEC adopt NTMs in line with the Rules of the Procedure 
of the EEC (adopted by the Decision o f the Supreme Eurasian Council No.  98 of 23  December 2014) 
and the Rules of Procedure for Elaboration, Adoption, Amendment an d Abolishment of the EAEU 
Technical Regulations (adopted by the Council Decision No. 48 of 20  June 2012).  
 
According to these Rules public discussion is required to assess the regulatory impact.  
Therefore, interested operators that do business in the EAEU have the opportunity to participate in 
the discussion to provide their comments. Draft regulations ar e published on the official web site of 
the Eurasian Economic Commission prior to 60 days fo r TBT and SPS measures, 30 days – for other WT/REG358/3  
 
- 27 - 
 
  measures. However, i n exceptional cases, which require immediate response and decision has to be 
made and adopted within ten days, public discussions are not held . 
 
Tariff -rate quotas  
 
1.92.   Paragraph 3.36.b.i: How is it decided whether a TRQ allocation is done by the 
Eurasian Econ omic Commission (EEC or Commission) or by a member State? Who makes 
that decision?  
In accordance with Articles 44, 45 of the EAEU Treaty and Annex No. 6 thereto, the adoption 
of decisions on the establishment of tariff rate quotas for certain agricultural  goods and the 
distribution of tariff rate quotas between the member States falls within the exclusive competence 
of the Commission.  
 
Nevertheless, the allocation of the tariff rate quota among third countries is carried out by the 
Commission or, in accordance with the decision of the Commission – by a member State, based on 
the results of consultations with all significant suppliers from third countries . 
 
Exclusive rights  
 
1.93.   Paragraph 3.39: Please explain the delay in publishing the list of traders wit h 
exclusive rights to import or export goods. When does the Commission plan to publish the 
list?  
 The EEC has not provided any trader with  exclusive rights to import or export goods  yet. 
 
Licensing  
 
1.94.   Paragraph 3.40: The first sentence of this paragraph su ggests that automatic 
licen ces used only with regard to trade within  the EAEU. Please clarify whether automatic 
licen ces can apply to trade between the EAEU and third countries.  
 The first sentenc e suggests that automatic licenc es are used to monitor foreign  trade  of the 
EAEU member States with third countries . We confirm that according to the EAEU Treaty automatic 
licensing ( surveillance ) can be applied to  trade between the  EAEU and third countries . 
1.95.   Paragraph 3.40: The text of th is paragraph states that "Licenc es issued by the 
authorized body of one member State are recognized by all other member States." By 
contrast, paragraph 443 of Russia's WTO Working Party Report states that "an import 
licen ce or permit authorised the licensee or permit holder t o import the relevant good into 
only the EAEU member State that issued the licen ce or permit." Similarly, Kazakhstan's 
WTO Working Party Report provides that "an import licen ce or permit authorized the 
licensee or permit holder to import the relevant good into only the  CU Party that issued 
the licenc e or permit." (Kazakhstan's WPR, paragraph 398).  
a. Please clarify whether an importer can rely on an import licen ce issued by one 
EAEU member State to import goods into another EAEU member State.  
 An import lice nce or permit authorized the licensee or permit holder to import the relevant 
good into only the EAEU member State that issued the licen ce or permit.  The suggestion that licences 
issued by the authorized body of one member State of the EAEU  are recognized by all other member 
States means that regardless the country of issue , the licenc e is valid to entry to the customs 
territory of the Union through  the territory of any member State.  
b. If, as reported in the Working Party Reports of Russia and  Kazakhstan, an import 
licen ce covers imports into only the member State that issued the import licen ce, 
please explain how the EAEU meets the GATT article XXIV.8(ii) requirement  that 
"subject to the provisions of paragraph 9, substantially the same duties  and 
other regulations of commerce are applied by each of the members of the union 
to the trade of territories not included in the union."   WT/REG358/3  
 
- 28 - 
 
   According to the Treaty on the EAEU, licen ces issued by the authorized body of one member 
State of the EAEU are rec ognized by all other member States of the EAEU. This means that regardless 
the country of issue, the licenc e is valid to entry to the customs territory of the Union through the 
territory of any member State.  
 
 Nevertheless  the Customs Code of the EAEU  stipulates the principle of residence, which means 
that the customs clearance of a good in the customs territory of the EAEU has to be done in the 
member State where a participant of foreign trade activities is registered.  
 
 This provision does not contra dict to the rules of the GATT article XXIV.8(ii), since the EAEU 
applies the common non -tariff regulation in trade with third countries . 
 
Other export -related measures  
 
Fees and charges connected with importation and exportation  
 
1.96.   Paragraphs 3.44 and 3.47:  Paragraph 3.44 notes that export duties are governed 
by the member States and paragraph 3.47 explains that "customs fees are the competence 
of the member States individually". Please explain how the resulting divergent treatment 
of imports and exports amo ng EAEU member States meets the GATT article XXIV.8(ii) 
requirement that "subject to the provisions of paragraph 9, substantially the same duties 
and other regulations of commerce are applied by each of the members of the union to the 
trade of territories not included in the union."   
Customs fees are not a measure of the regulation of  commerce , their size is determined by 
the cost of services rendered, which varies in different  member States of the Union.  
 
Export duties are applied individually by individual members in respect of several dozen  tariff 
lines. The substantial  part of  Common Commodity Nomenclature falls under the same regulation, 
without export duties. 
 
Regulatory provisions on trade in goods  
 
Standards  
 
1.97.   Paragraph 3.56(a): The report notes that a "Developer" – a member state or the 
Commission – is appointed to lead the discussion on a draft TBT or SPS measure within a 
Working Group.  
a. How is it determined whether a member State or the Commission will take t he 
lead the discussion on a particular regulation?  
 According to the Rules of Procedure of Drafting, Adopting, Amendment and Abolishment of 
the EAEU Technical Regulations (adopted by Eurasian Economic Commission the Council 
Decision  No. 48 of 20  June 2012,  Decision 48) the EEC adopts the plan of development of technical 
regulations and its amendments. The plan defines a Developer of technical regulation (member state 
of the EAEU or the EEC). Usually  the initiator  becomes the Developer . 
 
b. Please provide information on the process and criteria for appointing a 
"Developer" to lead discussion on a measure within a Working Group.  
 According to the Decision 48 the member States of the EAEU define a national authorit y 
responsible for the develop ment ( Developer) and authorities involved in the development process 
(Co-developers). If the EEC is responsible for development the EEC is a Developer. Decision 48 does 
not set up special criteria for appointing a "Developer" . 
 
c. How are the members of a Wor king Group appointed? Please provide information 
on how a "Developer" forms a Working Group.  
 According to the Decision 48 a "Developer " forms a Working group of representatives of the 
EEC, co -developers, national authorities and other stakeholders. The "Developer " provides 
information about the formation of the Working group to co -developers and national authorities. WT/REG358/3  
 
- 29 - 
 
  Co-developers and national authorities have 30 days from receiving this information to send to the 
"Developer " names of participants of the W orking group . 
 
d. Do discussions within a Working Group allow for stakeholder input from 
stakeholders that are not part of the Working Group?  
 Yes, stakeholders that are not a part of the Working Group are allowed to submit their 
proposals and comments durin g the public consultations.  
 
1.98.   Paragraph 3.56(b): Please explain the relationship between the 
Consultative  Committee and the Working Group.  
 The Consultative Committee is the advisory body of the EEC responsible for the development 
of proposals, recommendations and consultations in the sphere of technical regulation and SPS  
measures . 
 
 The Working group is the advisory body, responsible for the development of draft technical 
regulation.  
 
 The Working group presents first draft documents at the Con sultative Committee's meeting.  
  
The Consultative Committee may approve draft documents or send them for revision . 
 
1.99.   Paragraph 3.56(d): What process is used to obtain prior review and approval by the 
relevant national authorities? Since prior review and approval is required "in general," in 
what circumstances is it not required?  
 The EEC provides all draft documents to the member States of the EAEU to obtain prior review 
and approval.  
 
 The Decision 48 does not provide for special circumstances when prior review and approval 
by the relevant national authorities is not required . 
 
1.100.   Paragraph 3.57: The report notes that the Consultative Committee is an advisory 
body to the Collegium that develops proposals for technical regulations and 
SPS measures.  
a. Please provide information on the difference between a Consultative Committee 
and a Working Group, including differences in the ir makeup and their function.  
 The Consultative Committee is the advisory body of the EEC , responsible  for the development 
of proposals, recommendations and consultations in the sphere of technical regulation and SPS 
measures.  
 
 The Working group is the ad visory body, responsible for the development of draft technical 
regulation.  
 
 The Working group presents first draft documents at the Consultative Committee 's meeting.  
 
 The Consultative Committee may approve draft documents or send them for  revision . 
 
b. Who participates on the Consultative Committee, and how are they appointed?  
 The Decision of the Collegi um of the EEC No.  161 of 18  September 2012 (as last amended on 
6 March 2018) sets up the rules of procedure of the Consultative Committee.  
 
 The heads (deputy heads) of national competent authorities are members of the Consultative 
Committee.  
 
 On the proposals of member States, the representatives of the business community, academia 
and non -governmental organizations and other independent experts may be  appointed as members 
of the Consultative Committee . WT/REG358/3  
 
- 30 - 
 
  c. Please provide information on how the Consultative Committee develops 
proposals for technical regulations and SPS measures.  
 The Consultative Committee considers proposals of the chairman of the Consult ative 
Committee and of the national competent authorities. The procedure is described in the Decision of 
the Collegium of the EEC No. 161 of 18  September 2012 (as last amended on 6 March 2018).  
 
Figure 3.1 Procedures for the adoption of common EAEU  TBT and SPS measures  
 
1.101.   "Initial phase":  
a. Under what circumstances would the EEC initiate a draft TBT or SPS measure? 
Please describe this process, including what bodies within the EEC are 
responsible for initiating draft TBT or SPS measures.  
 The EEC devel ops the Plan of the development of the technical regulations based on the 
proposals of the member States of the EAEU. The Council of the EEC adopts the Plan.  
 
b. How much information does the member State or EEC have to provide to start 
the initial phase?  
 The proposal should contain information on objects of regulation, scope and reasons. The 
Decision 48 set s up the list of documents necessary to start the initial phase.  
 
c. Does the EEC solicit input on what measures would be of interest to 
stakeholders?  
No, it does not.  
 
d. If so, how is that input solicited?  
- 
 
1.102.   "Development":  
a. Please describe the process the Working Group takes to discuss a draft TBT or 
SPS measure, and the process by which the Working Group elects to approve a 
draft TBT or SPS measure.  
 According to the Decision 48 the "Developer" submits to the Working Group the first draft of 
documents. The Working Group discusses the first draft at the meeting. Following the discussion, 
the minutes of the meeting are drawn up.  
 
b. Does the Working Group allow  for stakeholder or interested party input at this 
stage?  
 Yes, s takeholders that are not a part of the Working Group are allowed to participate in the 
development of the document by providing proposals and comments to the draft document during 
the public consultations.  
 
c. Does the EEC process allow for appeals of Working Group decisions?  
 The decisions of the Working Group are advisory.  
 
 A member who does not agree with decision may submit a special opinion.  
 
d. Please provide additional information on the process by which, "comments can  
… be made in the context of WTO notification/transparency procedures."  
 All stakeholders may send to the EEC comments and suggestions during public discussion.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 31 - 
 
   The EEC sends comments and suggestions to a "Developer".  
 
 A "Developer" has one month for consideration of comments and suggestions received.  
 
e. At what point in the process do the member States who are WTO Members notify 
the WTO of draft TBT and SPS measure that are with the Consultative Committee?  
 Member  States notify to the WTO the draft TBT and SPS measure upon receipt from the EEC 
the decision of  the Consultative Committee on public discussion of draft documents . 
f. Who is responsible for ensuring that the draft is notified to the WTO?  
 National authorities are resp onsible for notification to the WTO.  
 
g. How are comments received as a result of notifying the WTO of a draft measure 
taken into account in the development of a draft TBT or SPS measure? Is each 
EAEU member State responsible for notifying the Consultative Co mmittee of 
comments it receives regarding draft measures that it notified in accordance with 
the WTO TBT and SPS transparency obligations?  
 All stakeholders are allowed  to send to the EEC comments and suggestions during public 
discussion.  
 
 National enquir y points provide  to the EEC comments and suggestions received.  
 
 The EEC sends comments and suggestions to the "Developer".  
 
 A "Developer" has one month for consideration of comments and suggestions received.  
 
 The Consultative Committee review a summary prepared by a "Developer".  
 
 The summary is published on the website of the EEC.  
 
h. Does the time -frame "Within 30 days from their receipt  …" refer to receipt of the 
comments by the EEC? Or receipt by the Developer?  
 The time -frame "Within 30 days from thei r receipt  …" refers to  receipt of the comments by 
the developer . 
 
i. Who takes part in the Developer -lead Working Group discussion? Please describe 
the process by which comments are considered and accepted or rejected.  
 A "Developer" prepare s a summary togeth er with the Working Group.  
 A "Developer" must provide justification for accepting or rejecting of each comment or 
suggestion.  
j. If comments are accepted, please describe the process by which the draft TBT or 
SPS measure is revised to incorporate the comment s. 
 A "Developer" modifies draft documents taking into account the comments received and 
presents new version at the meeting of the Working Group.  
k. Where in the ECC's website does it publish summaries of comments and 
reactions?  
 Summaries of comments are pu blished on:  
www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/texnreg/deptexreg/tr/Pages/projectsPublic.aspx .  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 32 - 
 
  1.103.   "Approval":  
a. Please provide additional information on the  process by which the 
Consultative  Committee reviews and approv es the revised draft TBT or 
SPS measure.  
 After adoption of the draft documents by the Working Group, the Consultative Committee 
includes the issue into the agenda and sends all necessary docum ents to members of the 
Consultative Committee. Draft measure is considered at the  meeting of the Consultative Committe e. 
 
b. Can a measure be amended at this point in the process if it is not initially 
approved?  
Yes, it can.  
 
c. Which national authorities review and approve the draft TBT or SPS measure?  
 Each member State of the EAEU independently determines  national authorities for review and 
approv al of the draft TBT or SPS measure.  
 
i. Are national authorities entitled to recomme nd revisions of the measure at 
this stage?  
Yes, they are.  
 
ii. Are all member States' national authorities required to approve a draft 
measure for it to move to adoption?  
No, they are not.  
 
d. Please describe the process for the Collegium or Council's adoption of a revised 
draft TBT or SPS measure.  
 When the Collegium and /or the Council of the EEC adopts a revised draft TBT or SPS measure 
it operates in accordance with  the Rules of Procedure of  the EEC (adopted by the Decision of the 
Supreme Eurasian Council No.  98 of 23  December 2014) . 
 
e. Is there a process by which Collegium or Council decision to adopt a draft TBT or 
SPS measure can be appealed? If so, please describe this process.  
 The Rules o f the Procedure of the EEC  (adopted by the Decision of the Supreme Eurasian 
Council No.  98 of 23  December 2014) stipulate rules and the  cases when the decision may be 
withdrawn or revised . 
 
f. After the Collegium approves a measure and the Council adopts it, or after the 
Collegium adopts a measure, and the measure is published on the EEC's website, 
at what point does the measure come into legal effect in the member countries?  
  The Decision of the Collegium or the Council determines the date of the entry into force of the 
adopted measure.  
 
g. What steps do member States need to take to implement the regulation?  
 None. The technical regulations of the EAEU have direct effect  in the territory of the member 
States . 
 
Sanitary and phytosanitary measures  
 
1.104.   Paragraph 3.60:  
a. Paragraph 3.60: What is meant by "a coordinated SPS policy for the Union"?  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 33 - 
 
   It means that within the territory of the EAEU common general principles are laid out and 
common safety (sanitary and epidemiological, veterinary and phytosanitar y) requirements to goods 
are adopted. In accordance with Article 56 of the EAEU Treaty coordinated or agreed policy shall be 
implemented through the Member States ' joint development, adoption and implementation of 
international treaties and acts of the Com mission in the application of SPS measures.  
 
b. Are the member States harmonizing their SPS regimes?  
 Implementation of the agreed policy also presumes legal harmonization at the EAEU  level to 
the necessary extent. Meanwhile the Members shall have the right to develop and apply temporary 
SPS measures individually . 
 Pursuant to the CU Commission Decision No. 721 of 22 June 2011 "On Application of 
International Standards, Guidelines and Recommendations" in cases in which the CU Commission 
(now the Eurasian Economic Commission) or national authorities have not established mandatory 
requirements in the veterinary, phytosanitary, sanitary epidemiological, or hygienic spheres, the 
Member stat es may apply standards, recommendations, and guidelines of the OIE, IPPC, and the 
Codex Alimentarius. Similarly, if the EAEU veterinary, phytosanitary and sanitary epidemiological 
and hygiene mandatory requirements in effect in the territory of the EAEU ar e more stringent than 
relevant international standards, guidelines and recommendations – and in the absence of scientific 
justification of risk to human, animal, or plant life or health – relevant international standards, 
guidelines, and recommendations, o r parts thereof, may be applied.  
 Significant steps towards full harmonization have been taken, the particular results are 
published  on the EAEU Commission official website, Section "Documents ". Nevertheless, the 
harmonization is an ongoing process due to the changes in the inter national standards and risks 
re-evaluation.  
c. Is there a timeline or schedule for such harmonization? Please explain that 
process, and how that process is proceeding.  
 There is no specific schedule for harmonization as well as  any sp ecific process. The 
EAEU  Treaty prescribes the list of documents to be developed on the EAEU level.  
1.105.   Paragraph 3.62: According to this paragraph, Article 56.1 of the EAEU Treaty 
provides that "SPS measures must be based on international and regional standa rds, 
except when their application on a scientific basis results in a higher level of protection." 
(Emphasis added)  
a. Please explain how the reference to regional standards comports with Article 3.1 
of the SPS Agreement that directs Members to "base their s anitary or 
phytosanitary measures on international standards, guidelines or 
recommendations  …". 
 Provisions of the EAEU Treaty are in full conformity with the WTO SPS Agreement.  
 
b. What does the EAEU consider to be "regional" standards?  
 The EAEU considers the standards that were set by regional organizations operating within 
the framework of the IIPC as regional standards. For instance, the Russian Federation and the 
Eurasian Economic Union apply among others the standards of the European and Mediterranean 
Plant Protection Organization.  
 
c. Does the EAEU still apply GOST standards?  
 Pursuant to the EAEU  Treaty Article 52.3  "[t]o meet the requirements of the technical 
regulations of the EAEU and to assess conformity with the requirements of the technical regulations 
of the EAEU, international, regional (intergovernmental) standards, and in their absence ( prior to 
the adoption of regional (intergovernmental) standards), the national (state) standards of the 
member States can be applied on a voluntary basis".  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 34 - 
 
  Technical barriers to trade 
 
1.106.   Paragraph 3.72: We note that the definition for technical regulation included in 
the Factual Summary, reflecting the Protocol on Technical Regulation, is not the same as 
the definition in the WTO TBT Agreement.  
a. Why has the EAEU changed the definition?  
 According to the EAEU Treaty a technical regulation of the EAEU is a specific document 
contain ing mandatory requirements and mandatory conformity assessment procedures.  
 
b. Please explain how the EAEU's definition meets the requirements of the 
WTO  TBT Committe e Decision on Principles for the Development of International 
Standards, Guides and Recommendations with Rela tion to Articles 2, 5 and 
Annex  3 of the Agreement . 
 Furthermore, we note that the definition includes "product characteristics and 
related process es – namely design … ". We are concerned about the focus on 
design.  
 
 The EAEU's de finition does not contradict the WTO rules.  
c. How do the EEC member States that are WTO Members ensure that technical 
regulations base their "product requirements in terms of performance rather 
than design or descriptive characteristics", wherever appropriate? (WTO TBT 
Art. 2.8). 
 According to the Decision of the Council of t he EEC No.  50 of 21  August  2015 it is prohibited 
to determine by the technical regulation the mandatory design or descriptive requirements design 
or descriptive characteristics , except the cases when it is necessary to fulfil a legitimate objective . 
 
1.107.   Paragraph 3.73.b: How does the EAEU define international standards? Please 
explain how the EAEU has implement ed the WTO TBT Committee Decision on Principles 
for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations with 
Relation to Articles 2, 5 and Annex 3 of the Agreement .  
 According to the EAEU Treaty an international standard is a standard adopted by international 
organiz ation on standardization.  
 
1.108.   Paragraph 3.73(g): The report describes EAEU disciplines based on the provisions 
of the WTO TBT Agreement, including, "notification to the WTO of a draft technical 
regulation that would affect inter national trade takes place at the same time as it is open 
for public consultations, which shall last at least 60 calendar days."  
 How do Russia and Kazakhstan comply with the WTO obligation to ensure that draft 
EAEU technical regulations that would affect  international trade are notified to the WTO 
at an early and appropriate stage, in accordance with their individual WTO TBT Agreement 
Article 2.9.2 obligations?  
 
 According to the Decision 48 the period for public consultations cannot be less than 60 days . 
 The Collegium of the EEC adopted a Guidelines for the interaction between  the EEC and the 
national competent authorities to ensure implementation of the WTO notification obligations by EAEU 
member States . 
 
1.109.   Paragraph 3.74: The report notes that the EAEU  Treaty provisions and Decisions 
aim at progressively achieving several outcomes, including the, "harmonization of 
standards and the implementation of relevant international standards as a basis for the 
elaboration of technical regulations."  
 How does the  EAEU Treaty ensure that member States follow the TBT Committee 
decision on principles for the development of international standards, guides, and WT/REG358/3  
 
- 35 - 
 
  recommendations with relation to Article 2, 5, and Annex 3 of the Agreement, which was 
developed to help WTO Members identify international standards for use in the 
preparation for adoption and application of technical regulations, conformity assessment 
procedures, and the Code of Good Practice?  
 
 According to the EAEU Treaty an international standard is a stand ard adopted by international 
organi zation on standardization. International standards are used as a basis for the elaboration of 
technical regulations.  
 
1.110.   Paragraph 3.76: Please explain the process by which the Unified List of Products 
(CU Commission Decisio n 526/11) was developed. What factors were considered in 
including product groups on the list? Does the Commission consult with the public in the 
development of the list?  
 The Unified List of Products was developed based on the proposals of the EAEU member  
States.  
 
The regulatory impact assessment (including  30 days of  public discussion)  has been carried 
out. 
 
1.111.   Paragraph 3.76: This paragraph notes that "[i]n practice, technical regulations 
adopted at the EAEU level have direct effect in its territory (Articl e 52.1 of the Treaty)" .  
a. Why does the report use the term "in practice"?  
 The technical regulations of the EAEU have an automatic legal  effect in the territory of the 
member States . 
 
b. Do EAEU technical regulations have automatic legal effect in the territo ry of the 
member States?  
Yes, they do.  
 
c. If so, what is the legal basis for this automatic application?  
 According to  the Article 52 of the EAEU Treaty technical regulations o f the EAEU have a direct 
effect in the territory of the member States . 
 
d. If not, are member States required to draft implementing measures to give 
EAEU  technical regulations effect in their respective territories?  
- 
 
1.112.   Paragraph 3.77: What factors were considered in determining which product 
groups would be prioritized "for the development and adoption of EAEU technical 
regulations"? Regarding transition periods, please provide more information on the length 
of the trans ition periods. Are these time -frames laid done in a CU Decision? If so, please 
provide a reference.  
 The Unified List of Products was developed based on the proposals of the member States  of 
the EAEU.  
 
1.113.   Paragraph 3.78: Please explain the process by which t he Unified List of products 
subject to mandatory conformity assessment (CU Commission Decision 620 of 2011) was 
developed. What factors were considered in including products on the list?  
 The Unified List of Products was developed based on the proposals of  the EAEU member  
States.  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 36 - 
 
  1.114.   Paragraph 3.79.f: Please clarify whether all products, including imported goods, 
have to undergo "conformity assessment procedures in the territory of one of the member 
States" . Will the EAEU accept a certificate of conformity or a declaration of conformity 
issued by a conformity assessment body outside the EAEU?  
 If the relevant technical regulation of the EAEU enter s into force, the conformity assessment 
procedures are mandatory for domestic and imported goods.  
 
 Only certificat es of conformity issued by a conformity assessment body of the EAEU are 
acceptable.  
 
1.115.   Paragraph 3.81: Please explain how bodies and laboratories are included in the 
Unified Register. What is the application process? What are the requirements for a body 
or laboratory to be included? How do foreign testing bodies get included in the 
Unified  Register?  
 The Unified Register consists of national registers.  
 
The order for inclusion into the national registers depends on the national legislation of 
member States of the EAEU.  
 
The certification bodies and laboratories are included in to the Unified Register by the 
authorized body of the member State in accordance with the criteria established by the CU Council 
Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010.  
 
Foreign testing bodies may be included into t he Unified Register if they are registered as a 
legal entity in accordance with the legislation of a member State . 
 
1.116.   Paragraph 3.85 : Pleas e provide more information on the "List of Standards". What 
is the process by which the list is adopted by the Commission? What is the process by 
which standards, whether international, regional or national, are included in the list? Is 
there an opportunit y for stakeholders to provide input on which standards should be 
included?  
 The process of elaboration of "Lists of Standards" is described in the Decision of the Council 
of the EEC No. 161 of 18 October 2016.  
 
 The procedure of elaboration provides for pu blic discussion.  
 
Industrial subsidies  
 
1.117.   Paragraph 3.125.b. & c.: Have the industrial subsidies listed in subparagraph b 
(for Kazakhstan) and c (for Russia) for which the temporary exemptions have expired 
been eliminated?  
Paragraph 3.125.b. for Kazakhstan : 
 
"i. customs duty and tax exemptions, as well as local content, export performance 
and trade balancing requirements (all of which are WTO prohibited trade -related 
investment measures, or "TRIMs") applied in SEZs and free warehouses, for which the 
transiti on period ended before 1  January 2017;"  
 In accordance with paragraph 934 of the Report of the Working Group on Accession of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO privileges  for the FEZ residents and owners  of the free warehouses 
registered  prior to 1 January 2012 , that were inconsistent with the WTO rules were repealed  from 
1 January 2017 (exemption from customs duties and VAT).  
 
 In accordance with the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 28 December 2016 No. 34 -VI 
"On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts  of the Republic of Kazakhstan on State 
Monopoly" the FEZ residents and owners of the free warehouses were granted the right to conclude 
an investment contract with the Ministry of Investment and Development and to  enjoy the 
investments preferences.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 37 - 
 
  "ii. tax and customs privileges granted for industrial assembly agreements in the 
automotive sector were removed before 1 July 2018;"  
Since 1 January 2018 Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan has introduced an alternative 
mechanism of subsidization for ent erprises engaged in the industrial assembly of motor vehicles. 
The new mechanism provides investment preferences within the special investment contracts.  
 
In accordance with the Code of the Republic of Kazakhsta n No. 120 -VI ZRK of 
25 December  2017 "On Tax es and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)" investment 
preferenc es were provided in the form of:  
 
- VAT exemption on imports of raw materials and (or) materials in assembly with vehicles 
and (or) agricultural machinery, placed under the cust oms procedure of a free 
warehouse within the framework of a special investment contract concluded wi th a legal 
entity on investment;  
 
- exemption from customs duty on imports of spare parts for technological equipment.  
 
"iii. local content requirements applied in the oil, gas and mining sectors are to be 
removed before 1 January 2021; and"  
Pursuant to paragraphs 896 and 897 of the Report of the Working Party on the Accession of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, Kazakhstan undertook a commitment to ensure that all laws, regulations 
and other measures would be consistent with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, 
including the WTO Agreement on TRIMs, except for measures applied under investment contracts 
concluded prior to 1 January 2015. Thus, Kazakhstan  has following two types of investment 
contracts:  
 
(1) investment contracts concluded prior to 1 January 2015  on subsurface use. Under 
these  investment contracts, local content requirements would cease to be enforced as 
of the date of expiration of the initial duration of the contracts or by 1 January 2021, 
whichever takes place sooner. Therefore, the temporary exemptions on local content 
requirements are reducing gradually;  
 
(2) investment contracts concluded after 1 January 2015  on subsurface use. Thes e 
 contracts do not contain any inconsistent measures with the WTO Agreement on TRIMs.  
 
 As of 10 September 2018, Kazakhstan has following statistics on investment contracts on 
subsurface use:  
 
Number of investment contracts concluded 
prior to 1 January 2 015 Number of investment contracts concluded after 
1 January 2015  
477 202 
 
 As it is seen almost a half of total investment contracts on subsurface use is comprising of 
new contracts, which were formed after 1 January 2015 and do not contain local content 
requirements. Meanwhile , by 1 January 2021 Kazakhstan will eliminate all the WTO-inconsistent 
measures from the rest of investment contracts concluded prior to 1 January 2015. Thus, Kazakhstan 
is moving towards compliance with its WTO commitments.  
 
"iv. the subsidization of interest rates on loans for export oriented production an d 
local content requirements for procurement of goods and services were removed upon 
its accession to the WTO. " 
The Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan in order to comply with the 
commitments taken within the framework of the WTO has  started to make amendments in the State 
Program on Busin ess Supporting and Development " Road Map Business 2020 " in terms of eliminating 
the third component on subsidizing of export -oriented enterprises.  
 
With regards to local content in procurement, it sh ould be noted that at the end of 2015, the 
Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 4 December 2015 "On Government Procurement" was adopted 
and this Law does not contain local content requirements in government procurement.  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 38 - 
 
  Furthermore, in order to comply with  its commitments within the WTO, in 2015 Kazakhstan 
eliminated the local content requirements from the procurement rules of state -owned enterprises. 
Thus, Kazakhstani state -owned enterprises make purchases and sales of goods and services in 
accordance with  commercial considerations, such as price, quality, marketability, and availability, 
and afford enterprises of other WTO Members the opportunity to compete through participation in 
such purchases and sales.  
 
With regard to subparagraph c(i) of paragraph 3.125 the Russian Federation reports 
the following : 
 
 At the meeting of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission the decision to raise 
import customs duties rates with respect to goods "for industrial assembly" in accordance with the 
obligations of the Russian Federation  in the WTO (paragraph 1090 of t he Report of the Working 
Party of the Accession of the Russian Federation to the World Trade Organization) was taken. At the 
present time signing of this decision by the members of the EEU is expected. This Decision will enter 
into force ten days after its  official publication.  
 
With regard to subparagraph c(ii) of paragraph 3.125 the Russian Federation reports 
the following : 
 
Measures stipulated in the Federal Law of 10 January 2006 No. 16 -FZ for which the transition 
period expired before 1 April 2016 hav e been eliminated.  
 
The EAEU Customs Code  
 
1.118.   Paragraph 3.129: How does the EAEU Customs Code ensure that member States 
meet the WTO Article XXIV:8(a)(ii) requirement that "subject to the provisions of 
paragraph 9, substantially the same duties and other reg ulations of commerce are applied 
by each of the members of the union to the trade of territories not included in the union"?  
 According to Article 1 of the Customs Code of the EAEU, single customs regulation is 
implemented within the Customs Union, includ ing the establishment of the procedures and 
conditions for movement of  goods across the customs border of the Customs Union, their presence 
and use in or outside the customs territory of the Union, the procedure for conducting customs 
operations related to  the arrival of goods into the customs territory of the Customs Union, their 
departure from the customs territory of the Customs Union, the temporary storage of goods, their 
customs declaration and release, other customs operations, the procedure for makin g customs 
charges, special, anti -dumping and countervailing duties and the implementation of customs control, 
as well as the regulation of the authoritative relationships between customs authorities and 
individuals exercising their right of possession, use  and (or) disposal of goods in or outside the 
customs territory of the Union . 
 
1.119.   Paragraph 3.129.b.: Is the single window referred to in this paragraph a single 
system that will be used across the EAEU by all members? When will it be functional?  
 Each EAEU member State develops its national single window on its own in accordance with 
approved plans and concepts. In 2017 the Eurasian Economic Commission appraised the status of 
development of national single windows of the EAEU member States. The results of the se estimates 
are available in English on the official website of the Eurasian Economic Commission by following 
reference:  
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/tam_sotr/edinoe_okno/Documents/9281012 -en.pdf . 
 
 In accordance with the main directions in de velopment of the single window mechanism in the 
system of regulation of foreign trade activities (adopted by the decision of the Supreme Eurasian 
Economic Council No. 68 of 29 May 2014) and the plan of their realization (adopted by the decision 
of the Supr eme Eurasian Economic Council No. 19 of 8 May 2015) the EAEU member States 
endeavour to coordinate their efforts in developing national single windows in order to ensure the 
interoperability between them and possibility of informational exchange. There are  no plans for 
creation of one integrated regional mechanism "single window" for all EAEU member States.  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 39 - 
 
  Provisions on trade in services and investment  
 
General provisions on trade in services and investment  
 
1.120.   Paragraphs 4.11 and 4.12: These paragraphs sugg est that a substantial portion of 
the member States' services sector are not yet integrated. GATS Article V provides that 
an agreement liberalizing trade in services must have "substantial sectoral coverage" and, 
with certain exceptions, must provide for t he absence or elimination of substantially all 
national treatment discrimination in the covered sectors. Please explain how the EAEU 
meets the "substantial sectoral coverage" requirement of Article V of the GATS.  
 The "substantial sectoral coverage" requi rement of Article V of the GATS is fulfilled in the EAEU 
Treaty in the following way:  
 
- the liberalization of trade in services is ensured in the EAEU Treaty;  
- new discriminatory measures with regard to  trade in services, establishment and 
activities are not allowed;  
- the single services market should comprise the maximum number of services sectors;  
- the EAEU Treaty regulates both the issues related to trade in services, establishment, 
activities and movement, labo ur conditions of natural persons.  
 
 For the moment the single services markets contains 55% of services sectors. During the 
period 2019 -2021 the rules of the single services market will spread on more sectors (5%). 
Moreover, such strategic s ectors as financial, transport services and services related to energy which 
constitute 30 % of all sectors will also join single services market by 2025.  
 
 Moreover, in respect of trade in services and the establishment of companies the Treaty 
stipulates providing for the national treatment with particular national exemptions. The provisions 
on establishment and activities of companies (Mode 3 of supply) apply to all economic sectors 
(services and non -services sectors).  
 
Sector -specific provisions on trade  in services  
 
Energy  
 
Natural gas transportation services  
 
1.121.   Paragraph 4.114: Have the member States submitted their outlines (due 
1 January  2016) and programmes of measure (due 1 January 2018) necessary for the 
establishment of a common gas market? How is the creation of a common gas market 
progressing?  
 In accordance with the EAEU Treaty the common gas market should be created no later than 
1 January 2025.  
 
 The gradual establishment of such common gas market should be based on related Concept 
and Program (Action plan).  
 
 The Concept  has already been developed and approved by the Supreme Council of the EAEU. 
The Program has also been develope d and should be approved by the end of 2018. The deadline for 
the implementation of the Program is 1 January 2024.  
 
Services related to petroleum and petroleum products  
 
1.122.   Paragraph 4.118: Have the member States submitted their outlines (due 
1 January  2016) and programmes of measure (due 1 January 2018) necessary for the 
establishment of a common petroleum and petroleum products market? How is the 
creation of a common petroleum and petroleum products market progressing?  
 In accordance with the EAEU Tre aty the common oil and petroleum products market should 
be created no later than 1 January 2025.  
 WT/REG358/3  
 
- 40 - 
 
   The gradual establishment of such common oil and petroleum products market should be 
based on related Concept  and Program (Action plan) . 
 
 The Concept has al ready been developed and approved by the Supreme Council of the EAEU. 
The Program has also been developed and should be approved by the end of 2018. The deadline for 
the implementation of the Program is 1 January 2024.  
 
 Furthermore no later than 1 Januar y 2025 the Member States will conclude an international 
agreement on the establishment of a common oil and petroleum products market, which will 
stipulate common rules of access to oil transmission systems within the territories of the member 
States.  
 
Gene ral Provisions of the Agreement  
 
Transparency  
 
1.123.   Paragraph 5.2: The transparency requirements of Article 69 of the EAEU Treaty 
applies only to services in the context of the Single Economic Space. Is there a similar 
transparency requirement for legal acts of  the member States affecting trade in goods?  
 The transparency requirements for legal acts affecting trade in goods are stipulated by 
Article  111 of the EAEU Treaty and paragraph 16 of the Annex 1 to the EAEU Treaty and paragraph 
105 of the Internal Docum ent Management Rules of the Commission . 
 
 Regulatory legal acts adopted by the Republic of Kazakhstan are published in accordance with 
Chapter 8 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 6 April 2016 No. 480 -V "On Legal Acts" . 
 
The transparency requir ements for legal acts affecting trade in goods are stipulated by the 
Article 111 of the EAEU Treaty and paragraph 16 of the Annex 1 to the EAEU Treaty and 
paragraph  105 of the Internal Document Management Rules of the Commission . 
 
Dispute settlement  
 
1.124.   Paragraph 5.43: Can expert review groups be established only in cases involving 
industrial subsidies, agricultural supports or trade defence  measures?  
 In accordance with paragraph 82 of the Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union 
(Annex 2 to the EAEU Treaty) expert groups can be established when examining particular disputes 
concerning the provision of industrial subsidies, agricultural state support measures, the application 
of safeguard, anti -dumping and countervailing measures.  
 
 According  to paragraph 84 of the Statute of the Court of the Union, the composition of the 
expert group is approved by the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union, their rules of the functioning 
are determined by the Regulations of the Court of the Eurasian Economic U nion, approved by the 
Decision of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council of 23 December  2014 No. 101 (paragraph 93 
of the Statute of the Court of the Union) . 
 
Intellectual p roperty  
 
1.125.   Paragraph 5.62 states "with respect to works of science, literature and art s, they 
last for the life of a natural person plus 50 years in Belarus and plus 70 years in 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation." Are there any plans to harmonize the copyright 
term?  
 According to the Annex 26 to the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Unio n (the Protocol on the 
Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights) the member States shall ensure 
compliance with the periods of protection of the exclusive rights to works of an author, the exclusive 
rights to works of joint authorship, an d the exclusive rights to works published after the author's 
death, which shall not be less than the deadlines set by the Berne Convention for the Protection of 
Literary and Artistic Works of 9 September  1886 (as amend ed in 1971) and the 
World  Trade  Organi zation Agreement on Trade -Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights of 
15 April 1994. It also determines that the legislation of the member States may determine longer WT/REG358/3  
 
- 41 - 
 
  periods for the protection of these rights. But there are no obligatory requiremen ts to harmonize the 
copyright term. At the same time currently, Belarus is carrying out work on harmonization of its 
national legislation with the legislation of the other EAEU member States on the issue of the copyright 
term.  
 
1.126.   Paragraph 5.65 states "Paten t terms are the same as in the TRIPS Agreement, at 
20 years for inventions and five years for utility models and for industrial designs 
(Annex  26, Section IX)."  
 The term for designs under TRIPS is ten years. Why is the term not in compliance 
with the TRIP s agreement. Are there plans to correct the disparity?  
 
 Under the Annex 26 to the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union (the Protocol on the 
Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights) the period of validity of the exclusive 
right to an i ndustrial design should be at least five years for industrial designs. National legislation 
of the Member States provide s different terms: Armenia – 15 years; Belarus – 10 years; Kazakhstan 
– 15 years; Kyrgyzstan  – 10 years and Russia – 5 years (term may be extended for a period not 
exceeding five years). The extension of the term is under consideration.  
 
1.127.   In paragraph 5.67: the subject is listed as "trade secrets".  Annex 26 of the Treaty 
refers to "production secret s." Please state which term is the more accurate translation.  If 
"production secrets" is more accurate, please explain the difference bet ween the 
terms.  Similarly, paragraph  5.67 refers to "data" and Annex 26 refers to 
"information."  Please clarify.  
 Conce ptually they are same things. The reason of the discrepancy is only in lexical specificity. 
The term "production secrets " is more accurate translation of the terms using in national legislations 
of the member States and Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Unio n. 
 
1.128.   Paragraph 5.67 does not refer to two important items in defining a trade secret: 
(1) value of the trade secrets comes from its secrecy and (2) the requirement that the 
owner of the trade secret take reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy.  In additi on, the 
trade secret must remain in force so long as the three defining characteristics remain in 
existence.  In comparison, Annex 26 refers to the value being related to the secrecy of the 
trade secret.  The maintenance of the secret by the owner is referre d to in an unusual way: 
"commercial value due to being unknown to third persons and legally inaccessible to 
third  persons, with regard to which the holder of such information has defined the 
treatment of trade secret." Please clarify this language.  Please also address the 
potentially endless term of a trade secret, provided the key requirements are met.  
 The legal mechanism of production secrets in the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union and 
the national legislation of the member States allows to protect information without temporal limits. 
Moreover, it allows to protect any kind of information to which the general public does not have open 
access, and with respect to which the owner of such information has instituted the regime of trade 
secrecy. Such info rmation could relate to the results of intellectual activity in the areas of science 
and technology and the methods for carrying out any professional activity having real or potential 
commercial value. The exclusive right to a secret of production shall be  valid as long as the 
confidentiality of the information constituting its content is maintained. From the time of disclosure 
of the respective information, the exclusive right to the secret of production shall be terminated for 
all the right  holders.  
 
1.129.   Paragraph 5.67 states that "5.67. Trade secrets shall be understood as data of any 
character (industrial, technical, economic, organizational, etc.), including the results of 
intellectual activity in the scientific -research sphere, as well as data on metho ds of 
professional activity that have valid or potential commercial value (Annex 26, 
Section  XII)."  
 Please clarify that data does not have to be in any specific format to be protectable. 
Also, please clarify how broadly "data" is defined. Does "data" inc lude ways of conducting 
business, etc.?  WT/REG358/3  
 
- 42 - 
 
   "Data" means information of any kind, including information on the results of intellectual 
activities in the scientific and technical sphere, as well as information on the method of conducting 
professional activiti es having an actual or potential commercial valu e due to being unknown to 
third persons  and legally inaccessible to third persons , with regard to which the holder of such 
information has defined the treatment of trade secret.  
 
__________