RESTRICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/6  
 
4 May 2016  
(16-2500)  Page: 1/4  
Committee on Trade and Development 
Sixth Dedicated Session on Regional Trade Agreements    
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 16 MARCH 2016 
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Juan Esteban Aguirre Martínez (Paraguay) 
 
A. ADOPTION OF TH E AGENDA .................................................................................... 1  
B. CONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS ............................................. 1  
(i)  Status of the work of the Dedicated Session - report by  the Chairman ......................... 1  
(ii)  Preferential Trade Agreement betw een MERCOSUR and India (Goods) 
(WT/COMTD/N/31, WT/COMTD/RTA /6/1, WT/COMTD /RTA/6/2) ............................................... 2  
C. OTHER BUSINESS .................................................................................................... 4  
 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/RTA/1 of 4 March 2016 was 
adopted. 
B. CONSIDERATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS 
(i) Status of the work of the Dedica ted Session - report by the Chairman 
2. The Chairman said that he wished to provide Members with a brief update on the regional 
trade agreements (RTAs) notified under the Enabling Clause that were to be considered in the 
Dedicated Sessions on RTAs of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD).  
3. He firstly informed the Committee that there had been one new notification of an RTA 
under the Enabling Clause since his last report to the CTD in November 2015. In particular, the 
Arab Mediterranean Free Trade Agreement (Agadir Agreement) between Egypt, Jordan, Morocco 
and Tunisia was notified on 22 February 2016 in document WT/COMTD/N/48. The Parties had been requested to provide the necessary data to the Secretariat for the preparation of the factual 
presentation by 15 July 2016. Turning to th e Agreement between Singapore and the Gulf 
Cooperation Council (GCC), which was notified in 2015, he said that data had been submitted by Singapore. However, the Secretariat was still waiting to receive data from the GCC Parties, which had been requested by 23 November 2015. In the case of the Mauritius-Pakistan Agreement - also 
notified in 2015 - data had been received from the Parties, but the Secretariat was seeking some 
additional clarification before processing the data. 
4. He next turned to other factual presentations which had yet to be completed. With regard 
to the Agreement between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and India, he said 
that comments had been received from India on the draft factual presentation that was sent to the Parties, but the Secretariat was still waiting for comments from ASEAN, which had been requested 
by 10 January 2014. The Secretariat was also still waiting to receive comments from the Parties on 
the draft factual presentation relating to the acce ssion of Rwanda and Burundi to the East African 
Community, which had been requested by 16 June 2014. For a number of other RTAs – namely, RTAs between India and Nepal, India and Af ghanistan, India and Bhutan, and Cuba and 
El Salvador - the full set of data needed to complete the factual presentations had not been WT/COMTD/RTA/M/6 
 
- 2 - 
 
  submitted by the Parties. He urged the Parties to these agreements to provide the data as soon as 
possible. He went on to say that there remained one RTA notified under the Enabling Clause that had not been ratified by all the Parties. This was the Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA). Following the procedures of the Commi ttee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA), a 
factual presentation of an RTA falling in this ca tegory would only be dr afted after the Agreement 
had been ratified by all the Parties. The Parties to PICTA were urged to inform the Secretariat as 
soon as all ratifications were complete. 
5. The representative of the European Union sugg ested that the updates on RTAs provided by 
the Chairperson at CTD meetings could henceforth also be shared with the Committee in the form 
of a room document, as was done in the CRTA. 
6. It was so agreed. 
7. The Committee took note of the interventions. 
(ii) Preferential Trade Agreement between MERCOSUR and India (Goods) (WT/COMTD/N/31, 
WT/COMTD/RTA/6/1, WT/COMTD/RTA/6/2) 
8. The Chairman said that the Preferential Trade Agreement between MERCOSUR and India 
entered into force on 1 June 2009 and was notified on 23 February 2010 under paragraph 4(a) of 
the Enabling Clause. The notification was containe d in document WT/COMTD/N/31. The text of the 
Agreement, together with its annexes, could be found on the Parties' official websites. The factual 
presentation on the Agreement – circulated as document WT/COMTD/RTA/6/1 on 14 September 2015 – had been prepared by the Secr etariat on its own responsibility in full 
consultation with the Parties, in accordance with paragraph 7(b) of the Transparency Mechanism 
for RTAs. Written questions on the Agreement had been submitted by Ecuador and, more recently, 
by the United States (US). In the questions and replies document, circulated on 8 March 2016 in document WT/COMTD/RTA/6/2, replies had been provided to the questions from Ecuador. 
However, the Parties had not been able to provide written responses to the questions from the US 
within the timeframes leading up to the present m eeting. It was his understanding that the Parties 
would provide written responses to these questions after the meeting, although the Parties also 
had the possibility to address the questions duri ng the meeting. He proposed to organize the 
consideration of the Agreement by giving the Pa rties, and then Members, the opportunity to 
provide general comments. Members could then turn to the specifics of the Agreement. 
9. The representative of India said that the aim of the Agreement was to strengthen existing 
relations between India and MERCOSUR, and to promote the expansion of trade by granting 
reciprocal fixed tariff preferences. It was a first step towards the creation of a free trade area. Under the Agreement, India had extended prefer ences to the MERCOSUR members on 450 tariff 
lines. A margin of preference of 10% was gran ted on 93 of these lines, while 336 lines benefited 
from a margin of preference of 20%. The ma rgin of preference was 100% on the remaining 
21 lines. The major sectors covered in India's offer list included meat and meat products, organic 
and inorganic chemicals, dyes and pigments, raw hides and skins, leather articles, wool, cotton 
yarn, glass and glassware, articles of iron and steel, machinery items, electrical machinery and 
equipment, and optical, photographic and cinematographic apparatus. As for MERCOSUR, it had granted preferences to India on 452 tariff lines. A margin of preference of 10% was offered on 393 
of these lines, while an additional 45 lines benefitte d from a margin of preference of 20%. A total 
of 14 tariff lines benefited from a margin of preference of 100%.  
10. He said that the governing body of th e Agreement was the Joint Administrative 
Committee, composed of the Common Market Group of MERCOSUR and India's Secretary of 
Commerce. The Joint Advisory Committee was responsible for ensuring the proper functioning and implementation of the Agreement, proposin g modifications and amendments, recommending 
further steps towards the objective of establishing a free trade area between the Parties, and 
establishing mechanisms to encourage the active participation of the private sector in areas covered by the Agreement. Both sides recognized th e need to significantly increase the number of 
tariff lines so that the Agreement could cover a sizeab le proportion of bilateral trade. At the second 
meeting on the expansion of the Agreement in June 2010, MERCOSUR and India had exchanged 
their respective request lists. Subsequently, in July 2013, both sides had agreed to move ahead with the expansion process by exchanging revised request lists, which were still under review by WT/COMTD/RTA/M/6 
 
- 3 - 
 
  the Parties. Turning to trade figures, he said th at India’s trade with the Latin American region 
stood at US$38.48 billion in the 2014-2015 period, while trade with MERCOSUR countries stood at US$14.24 billion. He noted that India’s trade wi th MERCOSUR had grown more than six times 
since the 2004-2005 period, and in this context prov ided figures highlighting the increase in both 
exports and imports. In concluding, he said that substantial scope existed for MERCOSUR and 
India to explore complementarities and to harness the full potential of trade and investment ties. He also indicated that written responses to the questions from the US would be provided after the 
present meeting.  
11. The representative of Uruguay, on behalf of  MERCOSUR, said that negotiations between 
MERCOSUR and India to increase bilateral trade fl ows through the granting of mutual concessions 
were completed with the signing of the Agreem ent between the Parties on 25 January 2004. The 
annexes to the Agreement were incorporated into the Agreement on 19 March 2005. She noted 
that the Agreement, which was MERCOSUR's first collective trade agreement notified to the WTO, 
consisted of a preamble and 18 chapters - including chapters on state trading enterprises, rules of 
origin, national treatment, customs valuation, anti-dumping and countervailing measures, 
technical barriers to trade, and sanitary and phyt osanitary (SPS) measures. There were also five 
annexes, which contained the lists of both Parties' offers, as well as a description of the rules of 
origin, safeguard measures and dispute settlement procedures. The Agreement was a first step 
towards the creation of a free trade area. 
12. She went on to say that, since the entry into force of the Agreement, India's and 
MERCOSUR's global imports had both grown by  around 70%, while MERCOSUR's imports from 
India had almost tripled. Minerals were the most important component of MERCOSUR's imports 
from India, followed by chemicals and textiles. In  the case of India's imports from MERCOSUR, the 
fats and oils product category was the most important, followed by minerals and base metals. 
Other products of major interest to MERCOSUR in  terms of global exports - including prepared 
food and vegetables - had a smaller penetration in the Indian market. Turning to MERCOSUR's 
offer list, she said that the main product groups covered were food preparations, organic 
chemicals, pharmaceuticals, essential oils, plastics and articles, rubber and rubber products, tools 
and implements, machinery items, electrical machin ery and equipment. The vast majority of these 
products were bound at 35%, although the applied rates were generally much lower. With regard to the deepening of economic and trade integratio n between the Parties, she noted that the Parties 
recognized the need for a significant increase in the number of tariff lines under the Agreement, 
with the aim of covering a greater proportion of  bilateral trade. The Parties had discussed this 
matter at their meeting in June 2010, and in Ju ly 2013 they had reaffirmed their intention to 
further deepen the Agreement through the exch ange of lists. In conclusion, she expressed 
MERCOSUR's interest to continue to work towards the deepening of trade ties between the Parties. 
13. The representative of the European Union observed that bilateral trade had increased 
significantly between MERCOSUR and India, and in this regard asked the Parties for their 
assessment as to extent to which the Agreement had contributed to this increase, given the limited coverage. She additionally registered her delegation's interest in the responses that the 
Parties would be providing to the questions from the US, and also asked the Parties for information 
on their plans to enlarge the scope of the Agreement. 
14. The representative of the United States noted that the Parties would be circulating written 
responses after the meeting to the questions raised by his delegation. Nevertheless, he asked 
whether some preliminary responses could be provided at the meeting, in particular to the 
question relating to the other RTAs being implemente d by the Parties that had yet to be notified to 
the WTO. He expressed his delegation's interest to learn more about the various RTAs that India 
and the MERCOSUR members were participating in. 
15. The representative of India said that the request lists relating to the expansion of the 
Agreement were still under review by the Parties. He also observed that the factual presentation 
listed three RTAs to which India was a party which had yet to be notified. In this regard, he 
informed the Committee that India and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) had 
notified their RTA in services on 20 August 2015 in document S/C/N/822. The process for the 
notification of the other two RTAs was under way. 
16. The representative of Uruguay confirmed that  the Parties would provide written responses 
to the US' questions after the meeting. She indica ted that Brazil wished to make some preliminary WT/COMTD/RTA/M/6 
 
- 4 - 
 
  comments with respect to question 7 from the US, which concerned paragraph 28 of the Nairobi 
Ministerial Declaration. 
17.  The representative of Brazil said that RTAs signed by MERCOSUR were legal instruments 
applying the disciplines of the Treaty of Montev ideo establishing the Latin American Integration 
Association (LAIA). He recalled that the LAIA wa s notified under the Enabling Clause. He added 
that his delegation attached great importance to the exercise of analyzing cross-cutting issues in 
RTAs, and in particular the wider and deeper RTAs, given their impact on world trade. While 
expressing his delegation's commitment to paragraph 28 of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration, he 
indicated that a discussion on the systemic implic ations of RTAs went beyond the context of the 
present meeting. 
18. The representative of Canada noted from section 3.4.1.1 of the factual presentation that 
MERCOSUR and India had agreed to cooperate in th e area of mutual recognition of SPS measures. 
She expressed her delegation's interest to learn about any cooperation that had taken place in this area since the entry into force of the Agreement, including in the context of recent discussions to 
expand the Agreement. 
19. The representative of India said that the Parties would respond to the question from 
Canada after consulting with their capitals.  
20. The representative of the United States referre d Members to the information in table 4.1 of 
the factual presentation concerning the list of non-notified RTAs that MERCOSUR members were 
parties to. In this regard, he informed the Committee that his delegation did not agree with the statement by MERCOSUR which was found in footnote 13. 
21. The representative of the European Union indicated that her delegation also had a different 
view than that expressed by MERCOSUR in  footnote 13 of the factual presentation. 
22. The representative of the United States wished to know when the Parties would be able to 
provide written responses to the questions raised by  his delegation, given in particular that five 
weeks had passed since the questions were submitted. 
23. The representative of Uruguay indicated that the Parties were working on the responses to 
the US' questions and would circulate them as soon as possible.  
24. The Chairman said that any follow-up ques tions on the Agreement would need to be 
submitted to the Secretariat by 23 March 2016. The Parties would then be given two weeks to 
submit written replies, by no later 6 April 2016. While proposing this date as the final deadline for 
the submission of responses to all outstanding questions, he asked the Parties if they could 
provide their responses to the US' questions earlier.  
25. The representative of India took note of the deadline proposed by the Chairman. He 
indicated that the Parties would try to provide wr itten responses to the US' questions earlier.  
26. The Chairman said that oral discussion of  the Preferential Trade Agreement between 
MERCOSUR and India could be concluded in accord ance with paragraph 11 of the Transparency 
Mechanism for RTAs. In accordance with paragraph 13 of the Transparency Mechanism, all written 
submissions as well as the minutes of the meeting would be circulated promptly in all WTO official 
languages, and would be made available on the WTO website. 
27. The Committee took note of all interventions. 
C. OTHER BUSINESS 
28. No matter was raised under "Other Business". 
29. The meeting was adjourned. 
 
__________