RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/68  
 
10 October 2018  
(18-6283) Page: 1/13 
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG OF  17 MAY 2018  
CHAIRPERSON: MS ZSÓF IA TVARUSKÓ (HUNGARY ) 
INTRODUCTION  
The Committee adopted the proposed agenda for the meeting circulated in document  WTO/AIR/IT/ 7, 
dated 7 May 2018, and document  WTO/AIR/IT/7/Rev.1, dated 9  May 2018. An annotated agenda 
for the meeting was circula ted in document  JOB/IT/2 1, dated 8 May 2018, and 
document  JOB/IT/21/Rev.1, dated 9  May 2018. The Chairperson stated that she would take u p 
two issues under "Other Business" : (i) the announcement on replacing faxes by e -mails ; and (ii)  the 
date of the Committee's next meeting.  
 
INTRODUCTION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  1 
1   REVIEW OF THE ST ATUS OF IMPLEMENTATI ON OF THE MINISTERIA L DECLARATION 
ON TRADE IN INFORMAT ION TECHNOLOGY PRODU CTS ................................ ...................  2 
1.1   Request by Canada, China, the European Union, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Norway, 
Chinese Taipei, and the United States Regarding an Implementation Is sue Concerning India  ........  2 
1.2   Requests by the European Union, Japan, Chinese Taipei, and the United States Regarding an 
Implementa tion Issue Concerning China  ................................ ................................ ................  5 
2   REVIEW OF PRODUC T COVERAGE  ................................ ................................ ................  8 
3   NON-TARIFF MEASU RES WORK PROGRAMME  ................................ ..............................  8 
4   EMC/EMI PILOT PR OJECT – DRAFT LIST O F TYPES OF CONFORMIT Y ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/E MI USED BY ITA  PARTI CIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/R EV.22)  ...........  9 
5   DIVERGENCES IN C LASSIFYING INFORMATI ON TECHNOLOGY PRODUC TS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1 ; G/IT/W/6/REV.3; G/ IT/W/33; G/IT/W/34; G/IT/27; 
JOB/IT/12; G/I T/29; AND G/IT/W/40/ ADD.1 -15, AND G/IT/W /40/SUPPL.3)  ............  10 
5.1   Implementation of the Dec ision for the Classification of  
18 Attachment  B Products (G/IT/27)  ................................ ................................ .................... 10 
5.2   Implementation of the 2016 Decisi on for the Classification of an  
Additional 15  items ( G/IT/29)  ................................ ................................ .............................. 11 
5.3   The remaining 22  Attachment  B items as contained in document  G/IT/W/40 and its 
supplements and addenda ................................ ................................ ................................ ...11 
6   ELECTION OF CHAI RPERSON  ................................ ................................ .....................  12 
7   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 13 
7.1   Announcement concerning the replacement of faxes by e -mails  ................................ .......13 
7.2   Date of the next meeting  ................................ ................................ ............................. 13 
 G/IT/M/68  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1  REVIEW OF THE STATUS  OF IMPLEMENTATION O F THE MINISTERIAL DE CLARATION ON 
TRADE IN INFORMATION  TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS  
1.1.  The Chairperson  informed Participants that an overview of the status of implementation of the 
Ministerial Declaration on Information Technology Products could be f ound in 
document  G/IT/1/Rev.57.  
1.2.  She indicated that , under this agenda item, and in addition to an overview of the st atus of 
implementation, two  sub-agenda items had been added.  The first sub -agenda item had been added 
at the r equest of Canada, China, the European Union, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Norway, Chinese 
Taipei, and the United States regarding an implementation issue concerning India.  The 
second  sub-agenda item had been added at the request of the European Union, Jap an, Chinese 
Taipei, and the United States,  regarding an implementation issue concerning China.  
1.3.  She recall ed that, with regard  to the review of the st atus of implementation, the following 
two issues were still pending: (1)  El Salvador to complet e its domestic legal procedural 
requirements ; and (2)  Morocco to submit its final ITA  schedule of commitments.  
1.4.  She informed the Committee that , despite outreach to Morocco on several occasions by her 
predecessors, and by herself, including a letter that she had sent to the Minister of Economy and 
Finance of Morocco in the autumn  of 2017 , still no formal response had been received  from Morocco . 
1.5.  The representative of Morocco  stated that he had  not yet received any information from Capital , 
but that he would follow up on the issue with Capital with a view  to providing additional information 
to the Committee at its next meeting.  
1.6.  The Chairperson  invited the delegation of El Salvador to update the Committee on their process 
for completing the domestic legal procedures o n their ITA  Accession.  
1.7.  The representative of El Salvador  reported that , as she had mentioned at previous meetings , 
her delegation was working on this matter with Capital , and once they had received updated 
information from Capital it would  be communicate d to the Committee.  
1.8.  The Chairperson  thank ed both Morocco and El Salvador for their updates. She urged El Salvador 
to complete its domestic legal procedures and Morocco to submit , as soon as possible, its 
ITA schedule of commitments for formal rectification and modif ication , as required by the 
1980 Decision . 
1.9.  She proposed  that the Committee take note of the statements made.  
1.10.   It was so agreed . 
1.1  Request by Canada, China, the European Union, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Norway, 
Chinese Taipei , and the United States Regarding an Implementation Issue Concerning 
India  
1.11.   The Chairperson  turned to the first  sub-agenda item, the request by Canada, China, the 
European Union, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Norway, Chinese Taipei, and the Unites States , 
regarding an implementation issue concerning India. In this context, she referred to 
document  G/IT/W/42, which had been circulated at the request of the delegations of the European 
Union, Japan, and the United States; and to document  G/IT/W/45, circulated at  the request of the 
delegation of India. She invite d first the delegations of the European Union , Japan, and the US to 
take the floor.  
1.12.   The representative of Japan  continue d to express Japan's concern s over the issues relating to 
customs duties on ICT  produ cts. He regrett ed that the Government of India had again increased the 
customs duty on mobile phone parts on 2 April 2018. He underst ood that , under the subheadings of 
India' s WTO  bound Schedule, mobile phones (HS8517.12) and their parts (HS8517.70) were 
classified as zero  duty goods. However, because of  a series of duty increases announced in India' s 
customs not ifications , and the Finance Bill  2018, mobile phones ha d been subjected to 20%  customs 
duties and mobile phone parts ha d been subjected to 15%  customs duties. These tariff rates , at G/IT/M/68  
 
- 3 - 
 
  20% and 15% , were clearly inconsistent not only with India' s ITA commitment but also with India' s 
binding commitment to zero  duty based on its schedule.  Japan ha d sent India' s government 
questions  that had include d the relevant legal issues, and was awaiting India's response.  Japan 
recognize d that the series of duty increases made by the Government of India had created a serious 
problem , since India's action raised a systemic issue for the WTO , and had an adverse impact on 
international trade and the global economy.  Japan asked India to justify the deviation from its 
schedule. Japan urged India to withdraw these customs duties as soon as possible.  
1.13.   The representative of the European Union  stated that his delegation remain ed very concerned 
over India's re -imposition of customs duties  on an increasing number of ICT  products. The affected 
products include d mobile phones, components and accessories  for mobile phones , base stations, 
certain printers, and static converters . The t ariff lines in question were subject to duty -free 
commitments in India's GATT  Schedules of Concessions , and fell under the scope of the ITA itself.  
He noted that , despite numerous exchanges in the WTO  committees and bilaterally, ranging from 
technical disc ussions and multiple letters from their A mbassador , which remain ed unanswered , no 
progress had yet been achieved . His delegation was  very disappointed by the lack of any progress  
and, furthermore, India had not change d its course, but instead several further duty increases ha d 
been introduced . He stated that t he EU's position on this issue was very clear –India's import duties 
for a number of products consti tuted violations of India's obligations under its GATT  Schedule. 
Furthermore, India was the only ITA member to have levied duties on covered products.  He called 
on India urgently to reconsider these duty increases , to ensure India's compliance with its 
WTO obligations , and to refrain from re -introducing duties for any other ITA  products.  
1.14.   The represent ative of the United States  regrett ed having again to raise th e issue of India's 
tariff increases on telecommunications and ICT  products.  Rather than responding to the chorus of 
concerns from the US and other Members, India had continue d to increase its tariff rates on 
ICT products , for which India ha d a WTO  binding commitment to provide duty -free access. Most 
recently, in early -April 2018, there had been additional increases introduced on essential 
ICT products.  She stated that the US  assessment was that , collectively, India's increases ha d 
resulted in an impact of upwards of US$15-20 billion in global exports, not to mention the impact 
on countless traders worldwide , and importers in India.  She remind ed the Committee that the United 
States had circulated  a Room Document at the November  2017 meeting. Th at document had 
detailed one  example , tariff line  8517.62 , and had demonstrated the discrepancies there between 
India's bound and applied tariff rates, and highlight ed the apparent non -compliance with India' s 
tariff commitments.  She said that t his ha d nothing to do with technology ; it had everything to do 
with India's binding commitments. Yet again, India ha d not provided a sufficient response to their 
questions and concerns , neither  on the product , for example , nor on the numerous other examples 
cited at the Committee.  The US would continue to call upon India,  at all the relevant Committees , 
as well as in bilateral fora, to abide by its WTO  commitments and reinstate duty -free access where 
India had commi tted to provide duty -free access  in its WTO  schedule.  
1.15.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  share d the concerns previously expressed by other 
Members . She also reiterate d her delegation's own concern s as raised previously in 2014, 2017, and 
again this year,  over India's increase s of import duties on a range of ICT  products, including telecom 
products, mobile phones (from 10% to 20%) and mobile phone parts, and digital cameras.  India 
had referred to the products at issue as being "new technologies" or "new pr oducts", and thus not 
covered by its ITA  commitments, nor by India's tariff-binding commitments. However, based on the 
Secretariat Note on "HS2007  Amendments in Relation to ITA  Products and a Model List in HS2007"  
(document  JOB(07)/96) , the goods in question were covered in the ITA -1 commitments, and India 
had already incorporated those commitments as such into its 1996  Schedule of Concession s 
(document  WT/Let/181), as well as its current Schedule of Concessions ( document  WT/Let/1072).  
In her view, even if the products at issue did not exist in 1996, it c ould hardly mean that they were 
"new technologies" or "new products" beyond the textual meaning of the 8517  heading in the 
ITA-1 commitments. Besides, an increase in customs duties by In dia on the goods in question was 
totally inconsistent with Article  II of the GATT.  She urged India to reconsider eliminating  these tariff s 
on the products at issue.  
1.16.   The representative of Norway  emphasized the importan ce of this issue, both systemically and  
economically . He felt that a Member's applied tariff  could not exceed that listed in its schedules. 
Technological advancement within a product segment clearly d id not change that simple fact. 
Indeed, this was a basic and self -evident starting point for how their agreement must be read , and 
for how their obligations must be understood.  An interpretation implying that a product segment G/IT/M/68  
 
- 4 - 
 
  could automatically be released from binding commitments after technological advancement would 
seriously undermine the system . His delegation continue d to expect further clarification from India 
on this issue.  
1.17.   The representative of Canada  stated that his delegation's concerns over India' s customs 
duties on certain ICT  products above its bound commit ments were well documented given Canada's  
repeated interventions on this issue in this Committee, as well as in the Market Access Committee 
and at the Council for Trade in Goods.  Canada was disappointed that , despite the concerns raised 
by Canada and a gro wing number of other WTO  Members, India ha d continued to further increase 
its tariffs on ICT  products above its bound commitments , in successive announcements , over the 
past year or two.  Since th e Committee 's previous meeting, India's 2018 -2019 Budget had been 
announced and included additional customs duty increases on certain ICT  products on which India 
had a bound commitment of zero.  The potential negative impact on Canada's trade with India 
continue d to grow with every announcement of customs duty increases on products covered by the 
ITA. Canada d id not accept India's justification for applying customs duties above its WTO  bound 
commitments. And he once again call ed upon India immediately to rescind these customs duty 
increases and to refrain from p ursuing any further increases above its WTO bound c ommitments.  
1.18.   The representative of China  noticed that India had increased the applied rates on mobile 
phones and related parts in February  2018, exceeding its WTO bound  rates. This was inconsistent 
with the  ITA and GATT  Article  ІІ Schedules of Concessions, especially for tariff lines  8517.12, which 
covered telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks , and 8517 .70, which covered 
parts. China had also noticed that, on 2  April 2018, India had further increased the duty rates on 
camera or camera modules of cellular mobile phones, connectors, and printed circuit board 
assemblies (PCBA ). China was of the view that these products fell within the scope of the ITA, and 
that India's measures were inconsistent with its ITA commitment and WTO  Schedule. China believe d 
that India's measures were not consistent with WTO  rules and urge d India promptly to adjust its 
duty rates on the products  in question , making sure to return to and abide by its WTO  bound rates.  
1.19.   The representative of Singapore  asked to put on record his delegation's continued interest in 
this issue, which ha d been on the agendas of this Committee, the Committee on Market Access, and 
the Council for Trade in Goods, for quite some time.  Singapore remain ed concerned that India had 
continue d to impose tariffs on ICT  products covered under its  ITA commitments , and was equally 
concerned that no headway ha d so far been made on th e issue.  Singapore would continue to engage 
bilaterally with officials in New Delhi on this issue and hope d that it could be resolved as soon as 
possible.  
1.20.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  echoed the concerns raised by Japan and other 
delegations over India's tariff hike in r elation to products covered under its ITA  commitment s. Hong 
Kong, China ha d both trade and systemic concerns over this  matter.  She noted that India had 
increased its tariffs on certain ICT  products that had already been  bound , including cell phone 
componen ts, classifiable under Indian tariff line s 8517. 70.10, 8517. 70.90, 8525.80. 20, 8525.80. 90, 
and 8529.90. 90, and its notifications (No. 36/2018 to No.  40/2018) by the Department of Revenue, 
dated to 2  April 2018.  She stated that , based on her understanding, products falling under these 
five tariff lines u nder India's Schedule of Concessions  were bound at zero  per cent.  She urged India 
to restore the tariff rate of these products to zero as it was committed to do under the ITA.  She 
emphasize d that all Members should abide by their WTO  obligations , and that a rise in tariff rate not 
consistent with a Member's bound tariff commitments ran contrary to the objectives of multilateral 
tariff liberalization.  She urged India to honour its tariff elimi nation commitment under the ITA , and 
looked forward to hearing India's substantive responses to the questions posed by delegations.  
1.21.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  stated that , as a co-sponsor of this agenda item, 
Korea also ha d serious systemic concerns over the current situation , and the fact that India ha d 
continued to impose tariff s on additional products subject to the ITA. He believe d that what 
ITA participants had committed to were not individual specific products at the t ime of agreement 
but, rather,  specific HS  lines. In this regard, Korea call ed upon India to provide duty-free acce ss to 
any goods belonging to any HS line on which India had committed to provide duty -free access.  
1.22.   The representative of Thailand  reiterate d that Thailand had a commercial interest in the 
products in question and systemic concerns over the issue.  She urged India to comply with its 
WTO binding commitments.  Thailand indicated that it would continue to monitor this issue closely . G/IT/M/68  
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.23.   The representati ve of Switzerland  share d the concerns of other delegations regarding India's 
duty treatment on certain telecommunication s equipment . He concur red that the issue was about 
India's binding commitments. He said that Switzerland continue d to consider that IT  products listed 
in India's schedule for which the bound rate was zero should not be subject to any import duty when 
imported into India. Accordingly, he observed that the MFN  published tariff on mobile phones, for 
example , was inconsis tent with India's commitment s in its 2015  certified schedule.  He joined other 
speakers in  request ing India to abide by its WTO  commitments.  
1.24.   The representative of Australia  also raise d Australia's concerns over India's compliance with 
its WTO  obligations.  
1.25.   The representative of India thank ed those delegations that had again raised , and ha d been 
raising for some time, these particular concerns.  He responded that he had been informing Members, 
in the various committee meetings, including in this Committee, the Committee on Market Access, 
and the Council for Trade in Goods, where Members had raised some of the ir initial questions and 
concerns, that India's responses had been provided in document  G/IT/W/45. In addition, his 
delegation h ad been from time to tim e sharing their viewpoint in the various committee meetings.  
He stated that , if one looked again at India's replies, India had been referring to the technological 
progression as well as the HS  transposition of telecom and IT  products.  He felt that India was fully 
committed to its ITA  commitment and ha d been abiding by it over the years.  Since India had signed 
the ITA, in 1997, it had presented its Schedule of Commitments, which had subsequently been 
certified in document  WT/Let/181 . India consider ed that it did not intend to commit to anything 
beyond the scope of India's ITA  commitment as inscribed in that document.  Extensive  discussions 
had been held at stakeholder consultations among India's relevant agencies on the coverage of these 
products and India's ITA commitments.  And India consider ed that the items on which duties had 
been raised did not form part of the 1996 ITA as signed by India.  
1.26.   He said that, i n this regard, at the ITA  Committee meeting of November  2017, as well as in 
the C ommittee on Market Access, and at the C ouncil for Trade in Goods, one or two  Members ha d 
raised certain concerns in relation to specific products . They ha d raised certain technical issues 
concerning which India was  currently in consultation . India would revert  to the Members  concerned , 
first bilaterally , and then multilaterally.  
1.27.   In addition, he stated that his delegation was of the view that Members ha d the right to revisit 
the Schedule , the HS2007  Schedule , which ha d been referred to by certain Members, and place the 
necessary  rectification request before the Committee.  He said that India was working on it and w ould 
revert back to the Committee soon.  He stated that India was open to discuss any technical issue 
concerning this classification and India's imposition of duties on so-called , and alleged , ITA products.  
1.28.   The Chairperson  proposed that the Committee take note of the statements made.  
1.29.   It was so agreed . 
1.2  Requests  by the European Union, Japan, Chinese Taipei , and the United States 
Regarding an Implementation Issue Concerning China 
1.30.   The Chairperson  moved to the second  sub-agenda item , which was the request by the 
European Union, Japan, Chinese Taipei, and the United States regarding an impleme ntation issue 
concerning China.  
1.31.   The representative of the European Union  referred  to their previous statements , in which  the 
EU had expressed its concern over the way in which China ha d implemented its MCO concessions in 
the context of the ITA  Expansion.  He stated that their concern was over China's transposition of a 
number of tariff lines , which were previously at zero but which had now become dutiable.  He had 
questioned the need for using a simple averages calculation method for some products while 
excluding others.  Nevertheless, he  thanked China for sharing its calculations with them. He also 
thanked China for providing additional explanation during  the EU's bilateral  meeting with China. He 
stated that his delegation needed to study the explanations further and to consult with their 
stakeholders.  In addition,  since this was an important is sue, he noted that for future cases of this 
kind the EU would appreciate guidance from the Secretariat on how to transpose  these types of 
concessions when in implementation . The EU felt that such guidance would  be beneficial to all G/IT/M/68  
 
- 6 - 
 
  participants . He also requested China to provide a written statement to explain  its methodology and 
reasoning  in this case , and that , not all of them being experts in semi -conductors , they would consult 
again with their stakeholders . 
1.32.   The representative of the United States  reiterate d US concerns over the change in China's 
applied rate for semiconductor products , which they had also raised at the previous meeting of this 
Committee , at the Committee on Market Access, and at  the Council for Trade in Goods.  She indicated 
that China continue d to assert that they were using a WTO -approved methodology. However, a 
simple average was not the only WTO -approved methodology. There were other 
Secretariat -approved methodologies that could also have been applied ; for example, using ex -outs. 
China ha d not offered an explanation as to why these other methodologies had not been used 
instead . She also said that the transposition process was not just about choosing a WTO -approved 
methodology. It also require d Member s' approval and certification by the Committee of the 
transposition methodology and subsequent outcome of each Member's file on a line -by-line basis.  
She noted and appreciated China's recent information -sharing on its transposition ; but  this 
information d id not alleviate her delegation 's concerns and d id not offer a comprehensive explanation 
of China's rationale behind its choice of methodologies.  She argued that , setting aside the specific 
calculations , the WTO  General Council Decision on HS  Transposition , which China had often refer red 
to, made clear that the bound rates in the new HS  nomenclature should fully reflect the same level 
of concessions as were in place under the old nomenclature ; in other words, the scope of concessions 
must remain unchanged, and the transposition should be tariff-rate neutral.  This was not the case 
for 10 of the 17  tariff lines at issue.  She therefore urged China to reinstate zero  duties on all products 
previously classified under the 10  tariff lines in HS2012  nomenclature, and for which China ha d an 
obligation to provide duty -free treatment pursuant to its ITA  commitments, and to do so without 
delay.  
1.33.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  share d the views of other co -sponsors . He stated that 
their concerns remain ed the same , and  that it was still their view that the results of the 
HS2017  transposition should follow the principal of tariff -rate neutral ity, meaning that the level of 
the tariff concession for the ten  MCO products, which were effectively duty-free, should not be 
impaired because of  a change in HS  nomenclature.  He referred to their enquiry made at the meeting 
of the Committee on Market Access of 26 April 2018. He further expressed their concern over why 
China had not applied the principal of tariff-rate neutral ity to the oth er MCO  products that were duty-
free on the HS2012 as ex -outs under the subheading  8542.31 in HS2017 . He stated that , according 
to the agreement on ITA  Expansion, Members were required to implement their commitments not 
only on the level of tariff reduction , but also on the staging of implementation. China had agreed to 
implement the duty -free tariff on the above -mentioned ten  MCO products after its commitment had 
entered into force , in July  2016, and had integrated its ITA  commitment into China's Consolidat ed 
Tariff Sched ule, in accordance with Article  II of the GATT.  However, his delegation had noticed that 
China had responded several times , in previous meetin gs, that according to China's  
HS2017  transposition, all duties on MCO  products w ould be eliminated in July  2021. It therefore 
appear ed that, since last year, China was also deviating from t imely implementation of the 
ITA commitments. Further,  China  had imposed tariffs on the MCO  products at a rate that was higher 
than its current WTO  bound rate.  He said  that China was unquestionably in violation of its obligation s 
under Article  II of the GATT, and that these tariffs also con stitute d a violation of its ITA  obligations.  
He request ed China immediately to delete the tariff rates applied to imports of th e MCO  products at 
issue, and to abide by its obligation s under Article  II of the GATT and the ITA. He echoed the proposal 
put forward by the European Union for the Secretariat to provide an explanation of this issue.  
1.34.   The representative of Japan  joined other s in expressing its concern s over the issue of customs 
duties on certain products of multi-component semiconductors (MCOs).  He thank ed China for 
providing the materials indicating  China's commitment to fulfilling  its phase -out schedule under the 
ITA Expansi on, including the elimination of duties on all MCO s in 2021.  He share d the concern s that 
had been  raised by other Members at the last meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods. He said 
that Japan underst ood that an Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor  (IGBT ) was also an MCO  product. 
And he request ed China to explain the reason why a customs duty of 5%, as opposed to 2.7%, ha d 
been applied to IGBT.  
1.35.   The representative of Singapore  continue d to register their interest in this implementation 
issue, which they would be monitoring  closely . G/IT/M/68  
 
- 7 - 
 
  1.36.   The representative of Switzerland  express ed their continued interest in this issue, especially 
regarding the methodology used by China and its systemic implications.  He welcome d any additional 
explanation from the Chinese delega tion in this regard.  
1.37.   The representative of Thailand  shared the concerns raised by other delegations on this issue  
and looked forward to receiving a detailed explanation from China.  
1.38.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  also share d the concern s raised  by other 
delegations on this issue. Korea believe d that transposition was inevitable when a new 
HS nomenclature was introduced . However, when carrying out a transposition , a Member had fully 
to respect the spirit and principle of the ITA by maintaining the balance in Members' commitments. 
Korea hope d that the concerns raised by Members would soon be clarified by China.  
1.39.   In response to the question raised by the EU and Chinese Taipei, the Secretari at recalled that 
a similar question had been posed at the Committee meeting of 6  November  2017, and that some 
explanation could be found in the minutes of that Committee meeting (document  G/IT/M/67). In 
order to avoid repetition, Members were asked to note  that the procedures to which reference had 
been made were procedures that had been adopted by the General Council for the transposition of 
WTO Schedules of Concessions to newer versions of the HS. In the current case, this would be the 
2017 version of the  Harmonized System (Annex  2 of document  WT/L/995, on page  6.). Under the 
methodological issues, the Decision provided that each new HS2017  subheading or tariff line would 
be derived from one or more HS2012  tariff lines or parts of those lines. If the conce ssions of the 
original HS2012  tariff lines were different, the concession elements of the new HS2017  subheading 
or tariff line should reflect this, which meant that the HS2017  subheading or tariff line should 
normally be broken down to a more detailed leve l in order that the draft HS2017  file reflected fully 
the same level of concessions as the CTS in HS2012. In addition, paragraph  5 of Annex  2 recognized 
that, "in case s where it is unavoidable to combine tariff lines or parts of tariff lines with different  
concessions" there were "four  possible methodologies that could be used to arrive at the new rate". 
The last section of this paragraph was also relevant because it indicated that the "implication of a 
combination of tariff lines on other elements of the c oncessions, such as INRs, ODCs and SSGs, shall 
also be taken into account by Members to assess whether the value of the concession has been 
impaired and GATT  Article  XXVIII negotiations need to be followed." Again, as mentioned at the 
November  Committee me eting, when a transposition file was submitted to the Market Access 
Committee at multilateral level, all WTO  Members had the possibility to look at the draft transposition 
file and to provide their comments, if any, and only when no objection remained woul d a 
transposition file be approved at the multilateral level.  
1.40.   The Secretariat  hoped that its intervention had helped to clarify the procedures on 
transposition.  
1.41.   The representative of China  took note of Members' comments and thanked the delegations of 
the EU, the US, Chinese Taipei, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, Thailand,  and the Republic of  Korea  
for raising their concerns . He also thanked the Secretar iat for its int ervention. He stated that , 
regarding the MCO  issue, in addition to China's comments made at previous meetings of the 
ITA Committee, the Committee on Market Access, and the Council for Trade in Goods, China had 
also conducted several rounds of bilateral consultations with certain Members to clarif y related 
technical questions.  During those consultations, China had reiterate d its position and ma de certain 
clarifications regarding this issue.  As one of the major trading partner s in IT products , China  had 
participated fully in the ITA  Expansion negotiation s and was seriously implementing its 
ITA commitments.  In accordance with the results of the ITA  Expansion negotiation s, MCO  products 
cover ed 17 ex-out tariff lines in China's 2007 tariff nomenclature . Those ex -out tar iff lines ha d been 
changed to five  national tariff lines in the HS2017  transpos ition, in accordance with the WCO's 
HS amendments. As a result, specific parts of several subheadings ha d been regrouped in new 
subheadings.  Pursuant to the WTO document , "Procedure for the Introduction of Harmonized System 
2017 Changes to Schedul es of Concessions Using the CTS  Database " (document  WT/L/995),  cited 
earlier by the Secretariat , and given that it was impractical to establish reasonably accurate trade 
allocations  in this case , China had used the fou rth method set out in document  WT/L/995 ; namely,  
applying the simple average of the previous rates of duty. This was fully consistent with WTO  rules 
on HS2017  transposition.  
1.42.   He argued that , technically , it was unavoidable to increase the duty rates on certain products 
with the simple average me thod, while the duty rates on certain other products were reduced. In G/IT/M/68  
 
- 8 - 
 
  this case, even the duty rates on 10  MCO products were relatively higher compared to those in 
HS2012, and the duty rates on seven  MCO products were reduced substantially.  He stated that China 
had undertaken its commitments seriously , and w ould continue to fulfil its tari ff reduction 
commitments under the ITA Expansion , as scheduled. The linear reduction of the duties on 
MCO products w ould be implemented over a five-year period. Of the five MCO products in HS2017, 
and since 1  July of this year, the duty rates on three  products w ould be further reduced to 2.1% ; 
and the duty rates on the other two products w ould be reduced to 5% and 1.9% , respectively.  
According to China' s tariff reduction co mmitments in its ITA Expansion  schedule , all duties on 
MCO products w ould be eliminated in July  2021.  Regarding the additional technical questions raised 
by certain Members, he indicated that these would be forward ed to Capital for review , and China 
would offer further clarification in the context of future b ilateral consultations.  
1.43.   The Chairperson  proposed  that the Committee take note of the statements made.  
1.44.   It was so agreed . 
2  REVIEW OF PRODUCT CO VERAGE  
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, s ince the Committee meeting of 15  May 2012, and as requested 
by some delegations, the "review of product coverage" ha d been included as a regular item on the 
Committee 's agenda . It provide d an opportunity for the Committee to receive reports and updates 
from those p articipants that were engaged in bilateral and plurilateral consultations relative to the 
review of product coverage pursuant to paragraph  3 of the Annex to the ITA.  
2.2.  The representative of Canada , speaking as Chair of the ITA  Expansion Group, updated the  
Committee on efforts to implement the Ministerial Declaration on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products ( document  WT/L/956) , which currently had 26 participants , 
representing 55  WTO Members.  
2.3.  He reported that t he vast majority of these p articipants ha d implemented their tariff 
commitments in their domestic national tariffs on an MFN  basis.  In addition, 24 of 26  participants 
had submitted their modifications and rectifications to their respective Sche dule of Concessions to 
the GATT  1994 in  accordanc e with the Decision of 26  March  1980 on Procedures for Modification and 
Rectification of Schedu les of Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25).  
2.4.  He indicated that there was still more work to do. He encourage d participants that ha d not yet 
completed their  respective domestic procedures to implement the declaration to do so as soon as 
possible to fully realize the benefits of this important initiative.  He stated that , as noted in the past 
in this Committee, the ITA  Expansion declaration was open to all WTO  Members, and all 
WTO Members were strongly encouraged to consider participation in this important initiative.  His 
Group stood ready to provide more information to any WTO Member that might be interested in 
joining.  
2.5.  The Chairperson  proposed that the Committ ee take note of the statement made and agree to 
revert to this matter, as appropriate, at its next meeting . 
2.6.  It was so agreed . 
3  NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK  PROGRAMME  
3.1.  The Chairperson  turned to the Work Programme on Non-Tariff Measures . She reminded the 
Committee  that paragraph  3 of the Annex to th e 1996  Ministerial Declaration required that 
"Participants […] meet periodically … to consult on non -tariff barriers to trade in information 
technology products."  She also recalled  that t he Committee ha d attached great i mportance to NTBs 
and that, since 2000, NTBs ha d become an essential part of the regular work of the Committee.  
3.2.  She further recall ed that, on 7 May 2015, an industry -driven workshop dedicated  to NTBs 
affecting trade in ICT  products had been organized. The main issues raised at that workshop by 
industry represe ntatives were: (i)  transparency; (ii)  standards for recog nition of test results; 
(iii) e-labelling; and (iv)  energy efficiency. A factual report by the Chairperson had been circulated G/IT/M/68  
 
- 9 - 
 
  in document  G/IT/28. At subsequent meetings of the Committee , the Chairperson had been tasked 
to continue consultations on follow -up to the ITA  NTB workshop.  
3.3.  She also recall ed that NTBs were ex tensively discussed at the ITA 20th Anniversary Symposium , 
which had been held in June  2017. 
3.4.  She said that , since the Committee 's previous  meeting , held o n 6 November  2017, she had 
held informal discussions with several delegations, including the delegation of Switzerland,  which 
was coordinating informal consultations on NTBs among a small informal group of participants. 
During those informal discussions, she had again requested interested delegations to give more 
thought to how the Committee should proceed in its follow -up discussio n on NTBs. She invited the  
delegation of Switzerland to provide an update of their work.  
3.5.  The representative of Switzerland  reported that the  small informal group  now had 15 Members 
that were interested in the advancement of NTM -related issues within the co ntext of the 
ITA Agreement. The group had been working more specifically on such issues as conformity 
assessment procedures ; test results ; e-labelling ; and transparency.  Since the Committee 's previous 
meeting , their discussions ha d continued mostly in bilateral and informal formats on various 
elements between interested parties on each specific issue. His delegation would continue  to keep 
the Committee informed of any developments.  
3.6.  He reiterated that the informal group was open to any delegation that was interested in 
NTM issues. In this regard , if any delegation had question s concerning the work of this group , or 
was interested in participating, they should not hesitate to contact the Swiss delegation or one of 
the other mem bers of the group at any time.  
3.7.  Switzerland  wished also to reiterate the importance of NTMs  affecting trade in ICT products, 
which were nowadays  one of  the main obstacle s to trade given that tariffs were now at zero or close 
to zero for most ICT products.  He encourage d WTO Members to wor k together on the advancement 
of NTM -related issues, which fell within the mandate of the Committee . 
3.8.  The representative of the European Union  stated that his delegation was persuaded that 
non-tariff barriers increasingly represent ed the main barriers to tr ade in IT  products. Owing to the 
specificities of the sector –global product ion with relatively low risks , the EU saw room for the ITA to 
work t owards further removing barriers  in this regard . The EU continue d to seek opportunities to 
make progress  in the sector.  
3.9.  The Chairperson  proposed  that the Committee take note of the statements made , agree that 
the incoming Chair person continue the consultations , and revert to this matter as a ppropriate at its 
next meeting . 
3.10.   It was so agreed . 
4  EMC/EMI PILOT PROJEC T – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF  CONFORMITY ASSESSME NT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/E MI USED BY ITA  PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W /17/REV. 22) 
4.1.  The Chairperson  turned to the EMC/EMI  Pilot Project.  She recall ed that one of the outcomes of 
the NTM  Work Programme was the completion of the pilot project that had led to the adoption of 
the "Guidelines for Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) and Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) 
Conformity Assessment Procedures". Upon adoption of those "Guidelines", the Secretariat had 
prepared a note on the  "Draft List of Types of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used 
by ITA  Participants", as contained in document  G/IT/W/17 and its  subsequent  revisions. The note 
contain ed the responses to the survey and other notifications received from Participa nts on the type 
of assessment procedures for EMC/EMI that they use d. ITA Participants had indicated on several 
occasions that they had found the information contained in this document to be very useful and that 
they wished to have it completed.  
4.2.  She stated that, since the Committee 's meeting in November  2017, of the 53  ITA Participants, 
39 had provided information on their conformity assessment procedures for EMC/EMI. The latest 
submission had been received from Panama on 9  May 2018, and a revision had been issued, 
contained in document  G/IT/W/17/Rev.22. However, there were still 14  Participants that ha d not G/IT/M/68  
 
- 10 - 
 
  yet provided any information on their conformity assessment procedures.  She remind ed the 
14 delegations concerned to submit their information as soon as possible and to contact the 
Secretariat if they need ed any further information or clarification.  
4.3.  The representative of the European Union  stated that t he progress that had been made in the 
EMC/EMI  Pilot Project was very encouraging. He thank ed both the Chair person and the countries 
that ha d made contributions. The project was important and had led to increased transparency on 
the regulatory environment for ICT products. He encourage d also the incoming Chair to continue to 
focus on th e project a nd actively to encourage those 14 Members that ha d not yet already done so 
to provide information on their conformity assessment procedures . This work was important because 
it could provide the basis for the NTM  programme that had just been discussed  in the Committee , 
which could lead to an increasingly trade -friendly environment for conformity assessment.  
4.4.  The representative of Switzerland  informed the Committee that Switzerland would shortly 
submit a revision of the questionnaire . Switzerland also thank ed the countries that ha d submitted 
their questionnaire recently . He remind ed the Committee that it  was an important topic and might 
constitute the basis for work in this area.  
4.5.  The Chairperson  emphasized the importance of the EMC/EMI  Pilot Project. Since this 
information on EMC and EMI had increased transparency on the types of conformity assessment 
procedures  used by ITA  participants, and facilitated international trade in this important sector, she 
encourage d the remaining 14  delegations that ha d not yet  done so to provide this information to the 
Secretariat as soon as possible in order to enable the Committee to complete this work.  
4.6.  As the Committee came  closer to finalization of th e Pilot Project, she asked Participants to 
reflect upon what steps, if any , they would be prepared to consider with a view to maximizing the 
usefulness of the information on EMC/EMI  conformity assessment procedures that ha d been 
provided. Participants were invited to share their insights in this regard with the incoming Chair and 
the Secretariat.  
4.7.  She proposed  that the Committee take note of the discussion under this agenda item.  
4.8.  It was so agreed . 
5  DIVERGENCES IN CLASS IFYING INFORMATION T ECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1 ; G/IT/W/6/REV.3; G/ IT/W/33; G/IT/W/34; G/IT/27; 
JOB/IT/12; G/IT/29 ; AND G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -15, AND G/IT/W/40/SU PPL.3) 
5.1.  The Chairperson  then turned to the agenda i tem on divergences in classifying information 
technology products.  Under this agenda item, there were three  sub-items: (i)  first, the 
implementation of the 2013  Decision for the classification of the 18 Attachment  B products ( as 
contained in document  G/IT/27); (ii)  second, the  implementation of the 2016  Decision for the 
classification of an additional 15  items ( as contained in document  G/IT/29); and (iii)  third, the 
remaining 22  Attachment  B items as contained in the document , "Note by the Secretariat on the 
Divergences of C lassification "–G/IT/W/40 and its supplements and addenda.  
5.1  Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of 1 8 Attachment  B Products 
(G/IT/27)  
5.2.  The Chairperson  recalled that , on 20  July 2013, the Committee had adopted a Decision for the 
HS1996  classification of 18  Attachment  B items, which were included in the List  I-A of 
document  G/IT/W/6/Rev.3. The Committee Decision had been circulated in document  G/IT/27. As 
required by th e Decision, each participant shall reflect the ag reed classifications in its WTO  Schedule 
of concessions, as appropriate, following the 1980  Procedures for the  Modification and Rectification 
of Schedules  of Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25) . 
5.3.  She stated that, a s mentioned at previous meetings of the Committee, the Sec retariat had 
been approached by five  ITA participants, namely: Guatemala; the Philippines; Japan; El Salvador; 
and Macao, China (four of which were developing country ITA  participants) to assist them in the 
modification of their Schedules. In this regard, the Secretariat ha d completed work on the requests 
of the delegations of Macao, China and the Phil ippines. It was to be noted that the technical work G/IT/M/68  
 
- 11 - 
 
  involved in this exercise was very time-consuming and thus c ould only be undertaken on a gradual 
basis.  In anticipation of additional requests, the Secretariat ha d undertaken a preliminary analysis 
of the  remaining developing country participants. She urged these developing country participants 
to contact the Secretariat if they require d technical assistance with the modification of their 
schedules.  
5.4.  She proposed  that the Committee take n ote of her statement.  
5.5.  It was so agreed . 
5.2  Implementation of the 2016 Decision for the Classification of an Additional 15 items 
(G/IT/29)  
5.6.  The Chairperson  move d to the second  sub-item, which was the implementation of the 
2016 Decision for the classification of the 15 additional items.  
5.7.  She recall ed that, on 18 April 2016, the Committee had adopted the "Decision for 
HS2007  Classification of 15  Additional 'Attachment  B' Products", w hich had been circulated in 
document  G/IT/29. Most of the items covered by th e Decision had related to HS2007  heading  8486 
(machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semicond uctor boules or wafers) and one  item 
related to heading  8471 (automatic data processing machines and units thereof).  
5.8.  She reported that , regard ing the implementation of the 2016 Decision  (G/IT/29) , the 
Secretariat ha d been approached by Macao, China  to conduct a review of its ITA  schedule. Further 
to this  review, no modification to the schedule of Macao, China had been necessary  as all the 
subheadings  affected by the 2016  Decision were already bound at zero in Macao, China's schedule.  
5.9.  She drew to the Committee's attention that, because of  this exercise, Macao, China had decided 
to increase its bound coverage on four  tariff lines, namely tariff lines: 8477.90.00; 8479.50.00 ; 
8528.72.00; and 8528.73.00 . Following transposition to HS2007, these tariff lines were no longer 
covered ITA  items. However, instead of reverting back to the original status of these four  tariff lines, 
which were "unbound" prior to the ITA, Macao, China had decided to keep these tariff lines bound 
at zero in its schedule. She congratulate d Macao, China on its decision , which contribute d to 
increased transparency and predictability in tariff concessions.  
5.3  The remaining 22  Attachment  B items as contained in docu ment  G/IT/W/40 and its 
supplements and addenda  
5.10.   The Chairperson  turned to the last sub -item, concerning the remaining 22  Attachment  B items 
as contained in the Note by the Secretariat on "Divergences of C lassification : Possible 
HS2007  Classification for the Remaining  37 'Attachment  B' Items" (G/IT/W/40 and its supplements 
and addenda) . She explained that this Note by the Secretariat on "Divergence s of Classification " had 
been originally circulated as document  G/IT/W/40 , based on the Swiss proposal for a three -step 
procedure ( as contained in  JOB/IT/12).  
5.11.   She recalled that , at the Committee meeting of 31  October  2014, it had been agreed that: 
"Participants are expected to submit a communication to the Secretariat no later than 30  June 2015, 
indicating: (a)  the items that, in the participant's opinion, should be classified differently from the 
HS2007  codes listed in column  8 of the Annex to this document; and (b)  the HS2007  subheading(s) 
that, in the participant's opinion, a re relevant for the classification of the item in question." It was 
also agreed that " [T]he Secretariat will compile communications received in a separate document. 
On that basis, participants would then be expected to assess the next steps that could be t aken to 
reduce any remaining divergence s in classification."  
5.12.   She reported that , so far, the Secretariat ha d received comments from 20  participants . These 
had been circulated as addenda to document  G/IT/W/40  as follows: Norway (G/IT/W/40/Add.1); 
Chinese Tai pei (G/IT/W/40/Add.2); Switzerland (G/IT/W/40/Add.3); the European Union 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.4); Hong Kong, China (G/IT/W/40/Add.5); China (G/IT/W/40/Add.6); Japan 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.7); Canada (G/IT/W/40/Add.8); the United States (G/IT/W/40/Add.9); India 
(G/IT/W/4 0/Add.10); Macao, China (G/IT/W/40/Add.11); El Salvador (G/IT/W/40/Add.12); the 
Republic of Korea (G/IT/W/40/Add.13); Panama (G/IT/W/40/Add.14); Thailand G/IT/M/68  
 
- 12 - 
 
  (G/IT/W/40/Add.15); Guatemala (G/IT/W/40/Add.16); Mauritius (G/IT/W/40/Add.17); Montenegro 
(G/IT/W/40/ Add.18); the Russian Federation (G/IT/W/40/Add.19); and Seychelles 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.20). She also informed the Committee that the Secretariat had received comments 
from New Zealand, which would be circulated in due course.  
5.13.   All these comments ha d been consolidated into and reflected in 
document  G/IT/W/40/Suppl.3, which also took account of the 2016  Decision on the classification of 
the additional 15  items. Therefore, as participants could see from that document, there remain ed 
22 Attachment  B items  for which Participants should provide their comments in order to arrive at a 
common HS  classification.  
5.14.   In this regard, she recall ed that, at the Committee meeting  of 6 November  2017, and 
following consultations with some Members, she had proposed that the  Committee reach an 
agreement on the HS2007  classification of three of the 22  ITA items where no objection had been 
raised by Members in their submissions. The three  items were: items 137; 142; and 168, which also 
relate d to heading  8486 ( namely,  semicondu ctor manufacture apparatus ). 
5.15.   She further recall ed that a draft decision on the HS2007  classification of these three  items 
was ad referendum approved at the 6 November Committee meeting , which had been circulated in 
draft document  G/IT/W/47. However, after that meeting , some delegations had contacted the 
Secretariat requesting more time to review the draft decision or to further clarify certain elements 
in the decision. Therefore, the final approval of the draft decision on the classification of the 
three  additional items (i.e.  items  137, 142 , and 168) was still pending.  
5.16.   She stated that t his mean t that the remaining 22 items contained in 
document  G/IT/W/40/Suppl.3 were all still open for review by Members and that no decision on the 
classification of the se three items ha d yet been taken.  
5.17.   Therefore, she  invite d delegations that ha d not yet provided their comments on the possi ble 
HS2007  classification of the  remaining 22 items to do so as soon as possible in order to arrive at a 
common classification for these p roducts within existing HS  nomenclature , and to fulfil the mandate 
of paragraph  5 of the Annex to the  Ministerial Declaration  on Trade in Information Technology 
Product s. 
5.18.   The representative of Switzerland  informed the Committee that his delegation would shortly 
submit a number of technical comments on the whole issue of divergence of classification and o n 
the respective lines of the remaining items . He hoped that Switzerland's forthcoming comments 
might help other Members' customs officials to advance the  work towards resolving these 
divergences.  
5.19.   The Chairperson  thanked Switzerland and proposed  that the Committee take n ote of the 
statement made.  
5.20.   It was so agreed . 
6  ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON 
6.1.  The Chairperson  stated that, p ursuant to consultations by the Chairperson of the Council for 
Trade in Go ods, a consensus had been informally re ached on the election of Mr Hadri S opri of 
Singapore as new Chairperson of th e Committee.  
6.2.  The Committee elected  Mr Hadri S opri by acclamation  as the new Chairperson of the Com mittee 
of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in I nformation Technology Products.  
6.3.  Mr Hadri S opri assumed  his role a s Chairperson of the Committee.  
6.4.  The Outgoing Chairperson , Ms Zsófia Tvaruskó, expressed her thanks to Members of the 
Committee, the Secret ariat, and to the new Chairperson.  
6.5.  The Incoming Chairperson , Mr Hadri Sopri , expressed his appreciation to the outgoing 
Chairperson  for her able leadership and very valuable contribution to the work of this Committee G/IT/M/68  
 
- 13 - 
 
  over the past two  years , and for her work on the ITA  Symposium . He wished her well in her future 
endeavours.  He thank ed all participants for accepting his nomination and for honour ing him with the 
role of Chairperson . He undertook to  do his best to facilitate the work of this Committee impart ially, 
and he remain ed available to Participants on any matter relative to the ITA.  He would also convene 
consultations on the different topics, as necessary.  
7  OTHER BUSINESS  
7.1.  The Chairperson  move d on to "Other Business" , under which t here were two items : 
(i) announcement concerning the replacement of  faxes by e -mails ; and (ii) the date of the next 
meeting.  
7.1  Announcement concerning the replacement of  faxes by e -mails  
7.2.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that faxes would be replac ed by e-mails . This was 
mainly because  the Secretariat was encouraged to avoid unnecessary paper use whenever possible. 
Following t he Director -General 's announcement about replacing faxes by e -mails at the informal 
meeting of the Heads of Delegations (HODs) on 23 Febru ary 2018, the notes convening future 
HODs  meetings  and TNC meetings w ould only be sent to delegations by e -mail. 
7.3.  Therefore, it was  propose d to use this practice in the ITA  Committee as well. As a result, all 
official notes convening the meetings of t his Co mmittee w ould be sent by e -mail, not fax. The 
Secretariat w ould use the general e -mail address es of Members' Permanent Missions. The Secretariat 
would further keep its specific e -mail mailing l ist that the Committee had established for ITA -related 
communic ations as an additional, informal channel. To make sure that the information contained 
therein was still accurate, the Secretariat invite d each delegation to complete the contact list form 
found on each delegate's desk. The Secretariat' s e-mail address was indicated on this form and the 
Secretariat could be contacted for any further additions and modifications to that list. Questions 
regarding the general mailing lists  should be addressed to  the Council and TNC  Division.  
7.2  Date of the next meeting  
7.4.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that its next meeting was scheduled to take place in 
the autumn of 2018.  
7.5.  It was so agreed . 
__________