WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
22 November 2018  
(18-7347) Page: 1/46 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English/Spanish  
 
 
TREATY ON THE EURASI AN ECONOMIC UNION  (GOODS AND SERVICES ) 
QUESTIONS AND REPLIE S 
Revision  
 The following communication, dated 18 November 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 establi shed 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 Commission 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.  
 
 
 
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  b. Will/Can the EAEU Commission intervene when a member State 's temporary 
SPS measure is not  scientifically 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 wit hin the EAEU and the WTO.  
 
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 order 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 Phytos anitary 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 r egulations 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 confor mity 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 Phytosani tary 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, guidelines an d 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 scientific basis i s 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 de termines 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, det ermines 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 recommendations is provided. If the draft measure is s upposed to be more stringent 
or the relevant international standard does not exist, it is up the developing Member to provide all 
relevant scientific data.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  c. If a third country finds EAEU standards more stringent 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 Agreement.  
 
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 relevant economic factors limited to those a ssociated 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 Phy tosanitary 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 country.  
a. Can you confirm that amendments to e xisting 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 existing 
bilateral export certificates m ay 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 long as the 
second EAEU member 's competen t 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 country (Decision No 726 "On Veterinary M easures" 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 b ilateral 
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.  
 
 
 
 
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 4 - 
 
  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 completing 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 dep ending on the format of an international agreement that is proposed 
to be negotiated on (concluded). At the same time all international negotiations involving the EAEU 
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 P TA or FTA. A special group of experts of 
the EEC, EAEU member States and potential negotiating partner prepares JFS report that must be 
presented 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 is 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 th e 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, o f the other part of 17 May 2018 (pending for entry into force);  
 
 - 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, of the 
 other part of 17 May 20 18 (pending for entry into force).  
 
 That said, with the above -mentioned countries 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 welcome 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 concludi ng 
agreements with 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 r ecently 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.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 5 - 
 
   Interim Ag reement 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 agreement lea ding 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 force – 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, 
of the other part that has been concluded on the 17 May 2018, it provides 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 stated that: "an 
EAEU  member State that is not a WTO Member can deviate from the pro visions 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 and  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 exemptions, are the competence of the Commission. The WTO accession 
commitments o f 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 memb er 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 the Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union within the Framework of 
the Mul tilateral 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 through international 
agreements with third parties concluded by the EAEU unilaterall y 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 (Artic le 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 exte rnal 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 Un ion 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 foreign trade policy, according to which the issues of changing the trade regime and WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 6 - 
 
  granting preferenc es 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, together with its partners in the EurAsEC, is 
working to negotiate new preferential and non -prefere ntial 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 Trade Agreement between the Eurasian Economic Union and its member 
States, on the one hand, and the Socialist Republic of Viet  Nam, on the other hand. This agreement 
came into force in October 2016.  
 
 On 17 May 2018, within the framework of Astan a 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 C ooperation 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 agreem ents were concluded 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 proced ures", 
under 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 these estimates 
are available in English on the official website of the Eurasian Ec onomic 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 windows in order to ensure the 
interoperability between them and possibility of informati onal 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 European 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 forms an integral part of the legal system of the EAEU, 
states that "[…] EAEU membe r 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; pending these being made compatible, the WTO 
disciplines shall prevail over respecti ve provisions of the EAEU legal framework. […] 
                                                
1 Questions were submitted to the Parties on 19 October 2018 (four weeks, three days before 
the meeting).  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 7 - 
 
  temporary exceptions from the EAEU disciplines/CET are granted to the Party that would 
have otherwise breached WTO disciplines. Pending the end of this transition period,[…]".  
 Please provide a list of the cur rent (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?  
 
 The Decision of the Council of the EAEU No 73 of 14 September 2018 establishes customs 
duties on products covered by the industrial assembly regime for their import to the territory of the 
Russian Federation in compliance with Russia WTO commitments.  
 
 The current full list of temporary exceptions with regard to which Kazakhstan applies import 
duties rates lower than those indicated in the Common External Tariff of the Eurasian Economic 
Union is available on the EEC website  . 
(http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/trade/catr/ttr/Documents/%D0%9F%D0%95%D0%A
0%D0%95%D0%A7%D0%95%D0 %9D%D0%AC%20%D0%A0%D0%9A%20%D0%BD%D0%B0
%2001.09.2018.pdf ) 
 
 In accordance with Kazakhstan 's WTO commitments, the transition period of implementation 
of the final bound tariff rates ends in 2020 . After three years and six months from the date of full 
implementation of all the final bound tariff rates contained in Accession Schedule of Kazakhstan, 
negotiations on tariff adjustment can be started (are expected in 2024). The duration and outcomes 
of the negotiations will be subject to an agreement between  WTO Members affected and the relevant 
EAEU member States.  
 
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 available information indicates that Russia's customs authorities regularly 
approach foreign trucks en tering 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 circulation, as indicated by para. 3.6 of the factual presentation) and check their 
cargo, customs d eclarations, etc. and often ban their further transit on the EAEU territory. 
How does this practice correspond to the provisions of the EAEU Treaty?  
 
 In spite of common customs territory the state borders between members States keep 
functioning. A track entering the Russian territory may be checked by authorities to fulfill legitimate 
objectives, e.g. implementation of unilateral NTMs of the member Stat e.  
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.  
 The interim agreement leading to formation of a fre e 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, was signed on May 17, 2018  (has not entered into force yet) . The main objectives of the 
Agreement are to liberali ze and facilitate trade in goods between the Parties through, inter alia , 
reduction or elimination of tariff and non -tariff barriers in respect of the originating goods included 
in Annex 1 to the interim agreement and to create a base for formation of a fre e trade area in which 
in accordance with international rules, standards and practices duties and other restrictive 
regulations on commerce shall be eliminated in respect of substantially all the trade between the 
Parties. For the Parties to this Agreement that are Members of the World Trade Organization 
"international rules, standards and practices " shall mean the respective provisions of the WTO 
Agreement, in particular Article XXIV of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994. The 
agreement provides  that the Parties shall no later than within a year from the date of entry into WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 8 - 
 
  force of the interim agreement start negotiations on an agreement on a free trade area with a view 
to conclude it no later than three years from the date of entry into force of  the interim agreement.  
 
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 t he 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 territ ory. As a consequence, circulation 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 h ave been imported to Kazakhstan 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?  
 
 In accordance with the commitments before the members of the EAEU, Kazakhstan has 
created a system that provides control over movement of goods included in the list of exemptions. 
In accordance with this system, when importing goods included in the list of  exemptions, "WTO" is 
indicated in the customs declaration if the import duty rate was paid in accordance with the 
commitments of Kazakhstan to the WTO. If the CET rate has been paid, the declaration specifies 
"EAEU ". The turnover of exempted goods is acco mpanied by an electronic invoice. Only exempted 
goods for which import customs duties have been paid at the rate of CET can be moved to the 
territory of other EAEU countries.  
 
 This system is uniformed and applicable throughout the territory of Kazakhstan since 2016.  
 
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.  
 In case if one EAEU member State imposes any unilateral non -tariff measures, there are no 
restrictions on the transit of the concerned goods in the EAEU legislation. However, a ccording to paragraph 
56 of Annex No.7 to the EAEU Treaty the other member States must control the observance of 
temporary measures implemented unilaterally by another member State.  
 
1.20.   Paragraph 3.16, page 24 and 3.21, page 27: According to the Factual Presentation, 
Kazakhstan's WTO accession commitments provide that n o 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 Sche dule with the final bound tariff rate of 
the Russian Federation as set out in its Protocol of Accession; commence negotiations 
with affected WTO Members; and notify WTO Members of its intention to commence these 
negotiations six months before they start an d provide Members that had concluded 
bilateral goods market access protocols with Kazakhstan all data relevant for the 
negotiations.  
 When Kazakhstan plans to commence negotiations on tariffs alignment/ 
compensation?  
 
 Negotiations on tariff adjustment are  expected to start in 2024.  
 
1.21.   Part 3.4.1 Standards, page 33: According to numerous representations from 
economic operators, the Customs authorities of the Russian Federation reject conformity 
certificates issued in other members of the EAEU. What is the leg al basis for that?  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 9 - 
 
   The Russian Federation has no information about the refusal by the customs authorities of the 
Russian Federation to accept conformity certificates issued in other members of the EAEU.  
 
1.22.   Interested industries report that adoption of, and amendments to, technical 
regulations of the 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?  
 New rules of drafting, adopting, amendment and cancellation of the EAEU technical regulations 
(adopted by Eurasian Economic Commission Council Decision No. 48 of 20.06.2012, as last amended 
on 18.10.2016) were adopted to align with the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic U nion. New rules 
clarified the lists of documents submitted at various stages of drafting and adopting of the EAEU 
technical regulations in order to speed up the process.  
 
1.23.   Following the entry into force of the Treaty on the EAEU the competent national 
autho rities 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, recognize the existence of the problem of fake or fict itious 
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 based on fake certificates and laboratory tests or do cuments certifying 
de facto  fictitious tests. Are there any legislative changes foreseen in this regard?  
 In order to combat fake certificates and laboratory tests the EEC decided to implement in 
2018-2019 a pilot project to establish an information system  for informing about goods that do not 
comply with the technical regulations of the EAEU.  
 
 Moreover, competent authorities of the member States conduct state control over compliance 
with technical regulations.  
 
 In addition, the legislation of the member  States provides for the responsibility for issuing 
products that do not meet the requirements of technical regulations, as well as for any violation of 
conformity assessment procedures with regard to the technical regulations.  
 
1.24.   Paragraph 3.43, page 31: According to the Factual Presentation, export duties 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.  
 
 In accordance with  Article 28.3 of the Agreement on the EAEU, any tariff and non -tariff 
measures are not applied by the Members of the EAEU (the Members) in the frames of mutual trade 
in goods, except for protection of human, animal or plant life or health; of the environme nt, public 
morality and order, cultural values; commitments made under the international organizations; or 
for the national security.  
 
 In regard with Russian exports of mineral products into the Members (oil and oil products), 
we inform that the partners hip of the Russian Federation with the Members is stipulated within 
bilateral trade agreements on terms of non -duty distributions of approved volumes of oil and oil 
products.  
 
 Particularly, there are bilateral agreements between the Governments of the Ru ssian 
Federation and Belarus on the measures for trade cooperation in sphere of oil exports (Adopted in 
Moscow, 12.01.2007) and on procedures for payment of and crediting export duties (other duties, 
taxes and charges, having equivalent contribution) when exporting oil and oil products into the 
non-Members from the territory of Belarus (Adopted in Moscow, 09.12.2010), including Protocols 
attached.   
 
 In accordance with paragraph 12 of Annex No. 23 to the EAEU Treaty , bilateral agreements 
can be applied until the common market of the oil and oil products is created.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 10 - 
 
  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 introduc ing 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 violatio n of the SPS Agreement and, if yes, 
please provide examples where this role has been exercised.  
 
The EAEU does  not have such a competence . However, provisions of of the EAEU Treaty 
(article 56) as well as EAEU regulatory acts mean that SPS measures applied  by the EAEU Member 
States base on international standards, guidelines and recommendations.  
 
The Customs Union Commission Decision No. 625 of 7 April 2011 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 in SPS WTO Agreement . 
1.26.   Paragraphs 3.64 and 3.68, pages 35/36: The Factual Pr esentation 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 States 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 
previously certified products (by individual EAEU member States) pending the EAEU -level 
agreed certificates with affected third countries?  
 
 The registers of the forms on the Common veterinary certificates are available on the web -
site of the EAEU in the Decision No. 607 as of April 7, 2011; forms of the bilateral veterinary 
certificates a re available on the web -sites of the competent authorities. The EAEU has no competence 
to procure the agreement of the veterinar y certificates by its Members.  
 
 Currently there are 21 EAEU level veterinary certificates agreed with third countries. The 
veterinary certificates on certain products agreed with Israel, Iran, Czech Republic, Brazil, US, Spain 
and European Union.  
 
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 im plementation 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?  
 The EAEU monitors the correct implementation of the Common requirements. The Eurasian 
Economic Commission may call on a Member State to comply with the EAEU requirements.  
 The Russian Federation applies the exporting establishments registry in accordance with its 
international obligations and following the appropriate scientific justification.   
In addition, in accordance with the CU Commission Decision № 625 upon submission of written 
requests of interested parties, including governments of foreign states on non -compliance of the 
documents of the Customs Union regulating the application of sani tary, veterinary and phytosanitary 
measures with standards, decisions and recommendations of international organizations including 
the World Health Organization, the Commission "Codex Alimentarius ", Office International des WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 11 - 
 
  Epizooties and relevant internat ional and regional organizations operating under the International 
Convention for plant Protection (hereinafter: international standards), as well as on the initiative of 
the competent authorities of the Parties, such documents shall be subject to examinat ion 
(hereinafter – examination) in accordance with the provisions of the Regulation on common order 
on the examination of regulations of the Customs Union in the application of sanitary, veterinary 
and phytosanitary measures.  
1.28.   Paragraph 3.66, page 36: Accor ding 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 national territory of a single EA EU 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?  
 
 According to the EAEU Treaty, in order to ensure the sanitary and epidemiological welfare of 
the population, as well as veterinary -sanitary and phytosanitary quarantine safety within the Union, 
agreed policy shall be conducted in the sphere of application of sanitary, vete rinary -sanitary and 
phytosanitary quarantine measures. Agreed policy shall be implemented through the Member States ' 
joint development, adoption and implementation of common requirements.  
 
 Common SPS requirements are applied to all the products subject to  sanitary, phytosanitary 
and veterinary control, not depending on them being imported or produced domestically (or in other 
words "[SPS measures are applied]  equally to external and internal trade in the EAEU ").  
 
 The national SPS requirements of EAEU Mem ber States do not contradict EAEU requirements.  
Moreover , some SPS requirements/ measures  applied to goods produced domestically and traded 
within the EAEU territory or within the territory of a n EAEU Member State are more stringent th an 
those applied to imported  goods . 
 
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 functi oning single information enquiry point on SPS. 
Please provide a reference to it or explain why it is not in existence.  
 At the moment, information enquiry point on TBT and SPS is established in each EAEU Member 
State separately.  
 For the moment, the EAEU s ingle information enquiry point on SPS and TBT is under 
construction. It will start its activities in the nearest future.  
 
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 agr eements 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 been removed. 
Please indicate the legal acts of Kazakhstan, Russian Federation and/or the EAEU that 
formalise the change of the above -describe regime.  
 
 With regard to subparagraph c (i) of paragraph 3.125 we report the following : 
 
 The decision of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission (No. 73 of 14.09.2018) to 
raise import customs duties rates with respect to goods "for industrial assembly " in accordance with WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 12 - 
 
  the obligations of the Russian Federation in the WTO (paragraph 1090 of the Report of the Working 
Party of the Accession of the Russian Federation to the World Trade Organization) was published on 
30.10.2018. The decision will enter into force 10 days after its official publication.  
 
 With regard to subparagraph b of p aragraph 3.125 we report the following : 
 
 The above -mentioned measures, which were inconsistent with WTO -related rules and 
disciplines, have been removed by amendments made on 22 April 2016  to the Order of the Deputy 
Prime Minister – Minister of Industry a nd New Technologies  No. 113 of 11 June 2010.  
 
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 t hese two EAEU members are opposing termination of these measures 
at the EAEU level (provided the EAEU decision on this is still pending).  
 Kazakhstan has supported the decision of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission 
(No.73 of 14.09.2018).  
 
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 pos t, 
etc. (Article 104 of the Customs Code). Customs declarations can be submitted 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), there 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 wi ll 
the electronic system be made fully operational?  
 
 According to the EAEU Customs Code customs declaring is carried out in electronic form. Cases 
when customs declaring in writing shall be permitted are listed in the paragraph 4 of Article 104 of 
the EAE U Customs Code.  
 
 In the EAEU Customs Code it is allowed to use transport (shipping), commercial and/or other 
documents, including those under international treaties of the Member States with a third party 
containing data required for the release of goods as a declaration for goods and a transit declaration.  
 
 When transport (shipping), commercial and/or other documents, including those under the 
international treaties of the Member States with a third party are used as a declaration for goods 
and a transit  declaration customs declaring shall be effected in writing but in a simplified form.  
 
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/TFA/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 Kazakhstan 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 Sin gle Window system be actually available to economic 
operators?  
 
 The Single Window system is currently being tested in Kazakhstan. It is expected that the 
system will be available in 2019.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 13 - 
 
  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 E AEU planning to effectively implement this provision 
of its Customs Code?  
 
 Currently, Kazakhstan uses the electronic declaration system ASTANA -1. The use of this 
electronic system allows the electronic declaration in accordance with the EAEU Customs Code.  
 
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 throughout 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 i s 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 level 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?  
 
 Kazakhstan 's practices on this matter are in conformity with the requirements of the Customs 
Code of the EAEU.  
 
1.36.   Paragraph 3.137, page 51: According to the Factual Presentation, "[t]he 
development of legal i nstruments 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"".  
 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.  
 
 The Unified List of Products for  which EAEU technical regulations are to be developed (CU 
Commission Decision No 526/11, as amended by EAEU Commission Decision No 102/12) includes 
«Building Materials and Products». In 2011 the technical regulation of the CU «On safety of buildings 
and st ructures, building materials and products» was drafted but has not yet been adopted. 
Mandatory national technical regulations now are applied. After adoption, entry into force of the 
technical regulations of the EAEU and expiration of transition periods an y mandatory national 
technical regulations applied in the EAEU member States would be abolished.  
 
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, as w ell 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 instruments  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 co ntinue 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 under national rules will be terminated from 
31 December 2025, while for medical products the EAEU r egistration is required as of 
1 January 2022."  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 14 - 
 
   A draft decision of the Board of the EEC on Good Manufacturing Practice certificate 
requirements for pharmaceutical 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 unifo rm application of the common system can be ensured across all five EAEU 
members.  
 
 The rules of the GMP of the EAEU was adopted by the Decision of the Council of the EAEU 
№ 77/2016 and entered into force 06.05.2017. The uniform application of the common sy stem is 
ensured by uniform mandatory requirements and procedures.  
 
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 tha t 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 tr eatment (in single market sectors) also 
extends to employees that are not service suppliers. Please confirm our understanding 
that the lack of MRAs for service suppliers concerns only sectors not subject to single 
market.  
 According to the EAEU Treaty memb er States recognize the professional qualifications of the 
service supplier 's personnel in all single market sectors (Paragraph 38 of the Services & Investment 
Protocol).  
 
 The treatment accorded within the single market sectors extends to employees of the service 
suppliers.  
 
 The single services markets that are currently functioning do not provide for the recognition 
of authorization and professional qualifications, howeve r, it should be noted that EAEU Member 
States had already concluded the agreement on mutual recognition of higher (professional) 
education within CIS in 2013.  
 
1.39.   Paragraph 4.5, page 52: Please clarify whether the definition of "establishment" 
refers to the process of 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".  
 In accordance with paragraph 66 of the Protocol of trade in services, esta blishment and 
activities one of the types of investment is establishment which refers to:  
 
• the establishing and/or acquisition of a juridical person (participation in the capital of a 
created or established juridical person) of any organizational and legal  form and form of 
ownership provided for by the legislation of the Member State in the territory of which such 
a juridical person is created or established;  
 
• the acquisition of control over a juridical person of a Member State through the obtaining of 
a possibility, either directly or via third persons, to determine decisions to be adopted by 
such a juridical person including through the management of votes granted by voting shares 
(stakes), by participation in the board of directors (supervisory board) and  in other 
management authorities of such juridical person;  
 
• creation of a branch;  
 
• creation of a representative office;  
 
• registration as an individual entrepreneur.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 15 - 
 
  1.40.   Paragraph 4.7, page 52: Please clarify whether Section VII on Investment concerns 
only po st-establishment, or otherwise.  
 Section "Investments " applies to both pre - and post -establishment.  
 
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, nor 
subject to specific disciplines. How are they covered by the schedules of the parties?  
 The conditions and the order of access to a subsidy in respect of trade in services, 
establishment and activities of organizations are stipulated by the  individual horizontal exemptions 
of Member States of the Union . 
 
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.  
 Paragraphs 4.16 -4.20 and paragraph 4.22 reflect the lega l treatment of trade in services, 
establishment and investments and the possibility to fix individual exemptions from the national 
treatment and most -favored -nation treatment by the Member States of the Union.  
 
1.43.   Paragraph 4.24, page 55: According to the Fac tual 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 thos e disciplines 
in each EAEU member State.  
 
 According to Section XXVI, Article 97 paragraphs 1 -3, employers may employ workers of the 
member States without any restrictions aimed at the protection of their national labour market.  
Workers of the member States shall not be required to obtain employment permits for the state of 
employment.  
 
 Besides, member States recognize the education certificates issued by educational 
organizations, except for employment in educational, legal, medical or pharmaceutical  spheres.  
 
 According to Kazakhstan 's legislation, EAEU citizens are exempted from the quota for foreign 
labour and are not required to obtain work permits.  
 
1.44.   Paragraph 4.26 page 55: Please indicate where the sectors of strategic economic 
importance are lis ted. 
 The sectors of strategic economic importance are listed in the national legislation of Member 
States of the Union.  
 
1.45.   Paragraph 4.29, page 55: According to the Factual Presentation, "A member State 
may nevertheless apply any of the mentioned measures p rovided they are listed in its 
Schedules of Horizontal Limitations or of Additional Limitations."  
 Please provide a general assessment of the commitments of each EAEU MS with 
respect to performance requirements.  
 Each Member State of the Union provides the  possibility to reflect in its individual Schedules 
of limitations its measures concerning performance requirements in services.  
 
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.  
 The EAEU Treaty does not provide for the minimum threshold of equity holding in order to fall 
within scope of SOE provisions of Section V.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 16 - 
 
  1.47.   Paragraph 4.36, page 56: According to the Factual Presentation, "A standstill claus e 
is included in Article 66 of the Treaty, whereby member States agree not to adopt new 
discriminatory measures from the date 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 explain the functioning of the 
reservations listed against the standstill clause; please confirm whether those only 
concern cross border tra de. 
 
 In case of violation of any provision of the Treaty that regulates trade in services, 
establishment and activities as well as investments the in vestment protection provisions will be 
applied.  
 
 The Treaty stipulat es the cases when the applying the  measures that are not consistent with 
standstill clause is possible. Such measures include, inter alia , measures necessary for the protection 
of public morals or the maintenance of public order, life or health of people, animals or plants, for 
the protection  of security and peace, for the protection of essential interests of its security, regarding 
taxation issues, for the protection of privacy against certain people that process and spread personal 
information and for the protection of confidentiality of inf ormation on personal life and accounts etc.  
 
1.48.   Paragraph 4.37, page 56: "The EAEU provisions on services and investments 
provide  …" 
 Please clarify whether ratchet applies.  
 The EAEU provisions on services and investments do not provide for application of ratchet.  
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?  
 
 The functioning of the single  market for services is based on the following legal instruments:  
 
 (1) Supreme Council Decision No. 110/14 - creation of the single market for 43 services 
 sectors/sub -sectors.  
 
 (2) Supreme Council Decision No. 30/15 - formation of the single market for services for 
 21 services sectors/sub -sectors within a transition period.  
 
 The number of sectors/subsectors included in these decisions is based on the Central Product 
Classification (CPC) ST/ESA/STAT/SER.M/77/Ver.1.1.  
 
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.  
 
 The commitments that are stipulated in the Treaty are consistent with the provisions of 
Article  V of the GATS. The individual schedules of  limitations in trade in services and establishment 
are formed in the negative format in accordance with the Treaty provisions and applied to all sectors 
(services and non – services). Therefore, they cannot be GATS minus.  
 
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.  
 Licensing requirements are a part of domestic regulation provisions in accordance with WTO.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 17 - 
 
   Domestic regulation is not related to market access and/or national treatment, therefore, 
there are no commitments.  
 
Table 4.2 Russian Federation: Comparison between the GATS and EAEU liberalization 
commitments (excluding mode 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.  
 In respect of all sectors i ncluding these  that fall into the single market for services individual 
horizontal limitations of Member States of the Union are applied (in respect of all sectors (services 
and non - services).  
 
 Provisions 1-4 of the Protocol on trade in services, establishment, activities and investments 
including limitations, requirements and measures, the application of which is provided for by the 
provisions of the Treaty, apply to subsectors and sectors that are not  covered by the single market.  
 
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.  
 The commitments of the Russian Federation under WTO stipulate certain limitations with 
respect to foreign participation in a media organisation, editorial office, or enti ty engaged in 
broadcasting.  
 
 Individual commitments of the Russian Federation under the Treaty also provide for the certain 
limitations regarding the participation of service suppliers of Member States of the Union in the 
mentioned sectors.  
 
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 XXI. 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 protection 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. A ccordingly, 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 info rm 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 
decided for lo nger than six  months (including through extensions)? If so, please list those.  
 
 The information on the measures, mentioned in the question, is published on the websites of 
the competent authorities of the EAEU Parties that introduce such measures. The mea sures are also 
notified to the WTO in the cases foreseen by the WTO Agreements, ministerial decisions and specific 
commitments of the Parties.  
 
 The justification for the measures, in case they deviate from a relevant international standard 
and/or are more  restrictive than such a standard, is normally provided on request of the interested 
parties except some cases of the defense and security.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 18 - 
 
   There is no specific time -frame for the validity of all such measures . The timeframes may vary 
depending on the re sults of scientific research and risk assessment (for the SPS measures). The 
measure is terminated, if the basis, giving rise to introduction of such restriction, no longer exists.  
 
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 national treatment principle currently applied 
by the EAEU member State in public procurement between them.  
 
 The following exemptions from the national treatment principle is currently applied by the 
EAEU Member State in public procurement betwee n them:  
 
1. Armenia:  
- Procurement of tularemia vaccine.  
 
2. Republic of Belarus : 
- Procurement of ceremonial civilian uniform for sport delegates of the Republic of Belarus;  
- Procurement of restoration works of sculptural composition of VDNKH pavilion;  
- Procurement of limestone (dolomite) flour;  
- Procurement of services (works) to development and operation of financial information 
system;  
- Procurement of medicines within the Agreement between the Government of the 
Republic of Belarus and the Government of the Cube Repu blic on mutual supplies.  
 
3. Russian Federation : 
- Procurement of goods, works and services for the needs of defense and security of the 
state;  
- Procurement of worsted cloths;  
- Procurement of ambulance cars.  
 
1.56.   Paragraph 5.63, page 90: According to the Factual Presentation, "[t]he principle of 
the regional exhaustion of exclusive rights 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 Intellectual 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 mar ket. Allowing the international exhaustion 
principle only for certain goods, 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 ple ase provide explanation on the matter?  
 
 In April 2016 The Council of the EAEU took the decision № 6 that prescribes to The Eurasian 
economic Commission together with the governments of the member States of the EAEU to develop 
a draft Protocol on amendment s to The Treaty on the Eurasian economic Union, providing for 
provisions on granting the Eurasian intergovernmental Council the authority to establish exceptions 
in respect of certain types of goods to the application of the principle of exhaustion of the exclusive 
right to the trademark. The Protocol is still being drafted . In this work Members of the EAEU are 
guided by their international obligations, including by TRIPS Agreement.  
 
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.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 19 - 
 
  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 Commission appraised the status of 
developmen t 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 autho rized 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 accordan ce 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 
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 and 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 m ust 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:  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 20 - 
 
  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 pai d. 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 t he 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 ha ve 
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 with 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 compe tent 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: P aragraph 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 no t 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 Counci l 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 do 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.  
 
 At the same time, by 1 January 2020, the Council of the Commission should 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 availability 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 pe nalty 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 b y the Commission" of the Protocol on General 
Principles and Rules of Competition (Appendix No. 19 to the EAEU Agreement of 29 May 2014 
(hereinafter the "Agreement")). Under the Calculation Methodology and the Procedure for Imposing 
Fines (approved by the C ommission) and Article 76 of the Agreement the Commission imposes fines 
for violations of general competition rules in cross -border markets, as well as for failure to submit WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 21 - 
 
  or late submission to the Commission at its request of information (Info) or for s ubmission of 
deliberately false information (data) to the Commission in the following amounts:  
 
(1) unfair competition 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 offic ials 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 therei n, shall 
be subject to a penalty in the amount of RUB 20,000 to 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 mar ket 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 a ll 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 good s (works, 
services) the penalty in the amou nt of three thousandth to three  hundredths of the 
amount of the proceeds gained 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 
officia ls 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 three 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 
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 income of the offender from sell ing all goods (works, services) and no less than 
RUB 100,000;  
 
(5)  non-submission or late submission to the Commission of information (data) provided 
for by Section XVIII of the Treaty and in this Protocol, including failure to provide 
statements (inform ation) at the request of the Commission, as well as deliberate 
submission to the Commission of knowingly false statements (information), shall 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 o fficials 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 other provisions, what provisions are 
established to ensure the application of a coordinated policy in regard to consu mer rights 
protection?  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 22 - 
 
   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 crea ting equal conditions for the nationals of the 
Member States in order to protect their interests against dishonest activities of economic entities.  
 
 According to paragraph 2 of this article, agreed policy in the sphere of consumer protection 
shall be ensu red 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 Commission 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 t he advisory body of the Commission, which prepares proposals, recommendations 
and conducting consultations on the implementation 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 permanent 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 EA EU 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. establishment 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.  
 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 accords 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 ". 
 
Questions from the delegation of Ukraine  
 
Characteristic elements of the agreement  
 
1.67.   The GATT/WTO permits its members to esta blish 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 removing 
all the barriers between the member s to the agreement, and that the trade creation effect WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 23 - 
 
  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 into 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 such studies have been conducted.  
1.68.   Paragrap h 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 scope of this clause as far as their 
obliga tions 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 -making 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 decision whether to apply the measure or w hen 
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 EAE U 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 the injury determination should be "based on positive 
evidence" that includes evaluation of the most recent information?  
 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 w ith 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 t he EEC No. 1 of 7 March 2012 the 
investigating authority responsible for conducting trade remedy investigations is the Department for 
Internal Market Defence of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – DIMD).  
 The standards for investigations condu cted by the DIMD and the rules governing the 
imposition of anti -dumping, countervailing measures and safeguards in the EAEU are in conformity 
with the relevant WTO Agreements.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 24 - 
 
   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 . Specifically, 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 affirmative, objective and verifiable character, and that it must be credible".2 
Therefore, an investiga ting authority cannot base its injury determination on information that is not 
credible, affirmative, objective and verifiable.  
 In addition, in order to evaluate the most recent information the DIMD establishes the period 
of investigation in accordance w ith 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 Department for Internal Ma rket 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 Dep artment 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 consultations 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.  
Other export -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 detailed 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, including 
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 experi ences and general coordination 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 Octo ber 2018 and planned in 2019 to be held Bishkek and in 2020 in Minsk.  
                                                
2 Appellate Body Report, US – Hot-Rolled Steel , para. 192.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 25 - 
 
  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 align ing 
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 provided 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 webs ite of the Commission. 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 right s, including publishing of 
the list of participants of the foreign trade activity, is determined according to national legislations 
of the member States of the EAEU.  
 
Sanitary and phytosanitary measures  
 
1.74.   Paragraph 3.65: Concerning the CU Commission Decisio n 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 Members 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 of goods subject to 
veterinary control must be accompanied by a veterinary certificate . 
 
 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: Articl e 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 interna tional agreements 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 ag reements or otherwise to eliminate technical barriers in the near 
future. If so, please identify when.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 26 - 
 
   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, agreements 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 
technical 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 a nd without any additional 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 a ssessment 
procedures.  
 
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 Foodmarkets for 
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.  
 
Provisio ns 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, availability and environmental compatibility.  
 How do the Russian Federation's actions regarding a ban on international transit 
cargo from the terr itory 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?  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 27 - 
 
   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, a ccording to which it is the matter of the DSB to inform of "any 
developments in disputes related 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 procedures established under 
the WTO?  
The EAEU DS mechanism is established by article 112 of the Treaty on the Euras ian Economic 
Union  and the Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union (Annex 2 to the Treaty on the 
Eurasian Economic Union). The EAEU DS mechanism and the WTO DS mechanism are two different 
ones.  
 
1.80.   When a conflict concerns a matter that may be dea lt 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 dispute?  
 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 speci fy this matter.  
 
1.82.   If a party to the EAEU opts to seek dispute settlement under the Treaty 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 its obligations on 
MFN treatment?  
 The EAEU Treaty does not regulate the matter.  
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 that 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.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 28 - 
 
  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 STES/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 P rivatisation" 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 201 8, within the 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 role of the 
state in the economy and ensuring the level playi ng 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 ser vices 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.  
 
 As to the Russian Feder ation  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 Decree are:  
 
-  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 process 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 reports of the 
Depart ment 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 
woul d 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 October  2017 has no t 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".  
 
                                                
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/Rev.1  
 
- 29 - 
 
   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 of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.  
 Kazakhstan, Belarus : This question r efers 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 integral part of its legal system and are 
applied to the whole territory of the R ussian 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 pr ices 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 th e 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 including 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 accorda nce 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 payable 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 
of conditions (listed in the paragraph 1 of Article 39 of the Customs Code of the EAEU) are fulfilled. 
One of these conditions is that the b uyer 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 cir cumstances 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 d ocuments and 
information  confirming that the transaction value of imported goods closely approximates to one of 
the following test values occurring in the same or comparable period of time, in which goods were 
imported into the customs territory of the EAE U: 
 
- 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 the Union;  
 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 30 - 
 
   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 Customs Code of the EAEU  there is no other cases of using test val ues. 
 
 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 service s 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 fo llowing 
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 Supreme 
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 EAEU 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.  
 
Questions from the delegation of the United States  
 
Characteristic elements 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 members bound by the Protocol and/or 
the 2011  Treaty?  
 Yes, the "Protocol on Function ing 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 goods  
 
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 customs 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 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 31 - 
 
  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 additiona l payment of import customs duties . As of January 2018 this is of relevance 
for Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic.  
 
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)." What 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 t he 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 and 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 
measures. However, in exceptional cases, which require i mmediate 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 Economic 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, th e 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 with 
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. 
 
 
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 32 - 
 
  Licensing  
 
1.94.   Paragraph 3.40: The first sentence of this paragraph suggests 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 sentence suggests that automatic licences 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 3.4 1: 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, pa ragraph 443 of Russia's WTO Working Party Report states that "an import 
licen ce or permit authorised the licensee or permit holder to 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 im porter can rely on an import licen ce issued by one 
EAEU member State to import goods into another EAEU member State.  
 An import licenc e or permit authorized the licensee or permit holder to import the relevant 
good into only the EAEU member State that iss ued 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 licence is valid to entry to the customs 
territo ry 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."   
 According to the Treaty on the EAEU, licen ces issued by the authorized body of one member 
State of the EAEU are recognized 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 territor y of the EAEU has to be done in the 
member State where a participant of foreign trade activities is registered.  
 
 This provision does not contradict to the rules of the GATT article XXIV.8(ii), since the EAEU 
applies the common non -tariff regulation in tra de 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 among 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.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 33 - 
 
  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 the 
lead the disc ussion 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 development ( Developer) and authorities i nvolved 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 Working Group appointed? Please provi de 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 abo ut the formation of the Working group to co -developers and national authorities. 
Co-developers and national authorities have 30 days from receiving this information to send to the 
"Developer " names of participants of the Working group . 
 
d. Do discussions with in 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 during the public consultations.  
 
1.98.   Parag raph 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 Consultative Committee's meeting.  
  
The Cons ultative 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 c ircumstances is it not required?  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 34 - 
 
   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 nation al 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 their 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 sph ere 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 Consultative Committee 's meeting.  
 
 The Consult ative 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 . 
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 Consultative 
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 develops 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.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 35 - 
 
  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 de cision 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.  
 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 decisi on 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 responsible for notification to the WTO.  
 
g. How are comments received as a result of no tifying 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 Committee of 
comments it receives regarding draft measures that it notified in acco rdance with 
the WTO TBT and SPS transparency obligations?  
 All stakeholders are allowed  to send to the EEC comments and suggestions during public 
discussion.  
 
 National enquiry points provide  to the EEC comments and suggestions received.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 36 - 
 
   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 webs ite 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 their 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 together with the Working Group.  
 A "Developer" must provide justificat ion 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 comments.  
 A "Developer" modifies draft documents taking into account th e 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 published on:  
www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/texnreg/deptexreg/tr/Pages/projectsPublic.aspx .  
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 documents to members of the 
Consultative Committee. Draft measure is c onsidered 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 recommend revisions of the measure at 
this stage?  
Yes, they are.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 37 - 
 
  ii. Are all member States' national author ities 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 of 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 b e 
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 ef fect 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"?  
 It means that within the territory of the EAEU common general principles are laid out and 
common safety (sanitary and epidemiological, veterinary and phytosanitary) 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 d evelopment, adoption and implementation of 
international treaties and acts of the Commission in the application of SPS measures.  
 
b. Are the member States harmonizing their SPS regimes?  
 Implementation of the agreed policy also presumes legal harmonization a t 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, Guide lines 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 states 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 t he EAEU are 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 recommen dations, or parts thereof, may be applied.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 38 - 
 
   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 proce ss 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 specific 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 standards, 
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 sanitary 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 t he 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 vol untary basis".  
 
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 m eets the requirements of the 
WTO  TBT Committee 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 processes – namely design … ". We are concerned about the focus on 
design.  
 
 The EAEU's de finition does not contradict the WTO rules.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 39 - 
 
  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 determi ne 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 standar ds? Please 
explain how the EAEU has implemented 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 international 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 
elabor ation 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 
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 standard 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 Decision 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 deve loped 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 le vel have direct effect in its territory (Article 52.1 of the Treaty)" .  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 40 - 
 
  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 regulat ions have automatic legal effect in the territory 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 transition periods. Are these time -frames laid done in a CU Decision? If so, p lease 
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 the Unified List of products 
subject to mandatory conformity assessment (C U 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.  
 
1.114.   Paragraph 3.79.f: Please clarify whether all pr oducts, 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 outsid e the EAEU?  
 If the relevant technical regulation of the EAEU enters into force, the conformity assessment 
procedures are mandatory for domestic and imported goods.  
 
 Only certificates 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 t he 
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.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 41 - 
 
  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 : Please 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 opportunity 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 public 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 whi ch 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 
transition 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 Kaza khstan 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 wit h the Ministry of Investment and Development and to  enjoy the 
investments preferences.  
"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 enterprises engaged in the industrial assembly of motor vehicles. 
The new mechanism provides investment preferences within the specia l investment contracts.  
 
In accordance with the Code of the Republic of Kazakhsta n No. 120 -VI ZRK of 
25 December  2017 "On Taxes 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 customs procedure of a free 
warehouse within the framework of a special investment contract concluded wi th a legal 
entity on investme nt; 
 
- 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, WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 42 - 
 
  including the WTO A greement 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. Un der 
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 con tent 
requirements are reducing gradually;  
 
(2) investment contracts concluded after 1 January 2015  on subsurface use. These 
 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 2015  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  and 
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  should 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.  
Furthermore, in order to comply w ith 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 w ith 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.  
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 43 - 
 
  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 th ese 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 
Econom ic Council No. 68 of 29 May 2014) and the plan of their realization (adopted by the decision 
of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council No. 19 of 8 May 2015) the EAEU member States 
endeavour to coordinate their efforts in developing national single windows i n 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.  
 
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 suggest that a substantial portion of 
the member States' services sector are not yet integrated. GATS Article V provides that 
an agreement liberalizing trad e in services must have "substantial sectoral coverage" and, 
with certain exceptions, must provide for the absence or elimination of substantially all 
national treatment discrimination in the covered sectors. Please explain how the EAEU 
meets the "substant ial sectoral coverage" requirement of Article V of the GATS.  
 The "substantial sectoral coverage" requirement 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, labour 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 sp read on more sectors (5%). 
Moreover, such strategic sectors as financial, transport services and services related to energy which 
constitute 30 % of all sectors will also join single services market by 2025.  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 44 - 
 
   Moreover, in respect of trade in services and t he 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 f or 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 m arket 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 developed 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.  
 
 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".  WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 45 - 
 
  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 Union , 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 arts, 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 Union (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 t o works of an author, the exclusive 
rights to works of joint authorship, and 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 Artisti c Works of 9 September  1886 (as amend ed in 1971) and the 
World  Trade  Organization 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 
periods  for the protection of these rights. But there are no obligatory requirements 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 memb er States on the issue of the copyright 
term.  
 
1.126.   Paragraph 5.65 states "Patent 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 design s under TRIPS is ten years. Why is the term not in compliance 
with the TRIPs 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 industrial design should be at least five years for industr ial 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 ext ension 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 secrets."  Please state which term is the more accurate translation.  If 
"production secrets" is more accura te, please explain the difference bet ween the 
terms.  Similarly, paragraph  5.67 refers to "data" and Annex 26 refers to 
"information."  Please clarify.  
 Conceptually 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 Union.  
 
 WT/REG358/3/Rev.1  
 
- 46 - 
 
  1.128.   Paragraph 5.67 does not refer to two important items in defining a trade secret: 
(1) value of t he 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 addition, 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 referred to in an unusual way: 
"commercial value due to being unknown to third persons and legally inacces sible 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 whic h 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 information 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. Fr om 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 (industria l, technical, economic, organizational, etc.), including the results of 
intellectual activity in the scientific -research sphere, as well as data on methods 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" include ways of conducting 
business, etc.?  
 "Data" means information of any kind, including information o n the results of intellectual 
activities in the scientific and technical sphere, as well as information on the method of conducting 
professional activities 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.  
 
__________