RESTRICTED  
  
WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
13 May 2013  
(13-2463)  Page: 1/388  
Working Party on the 
Accession of Kazakhstan   
  
  DRAFT REPORT OF THE WORKING PARTY ON THE  
ACCESSION OF KAZAKHSTAN  
Revision 
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 2 - 
 
  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 6  
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED ........................................................................................... 6  
INTRODUCTORY ST ATEMENTS ......................................................................................... 6  
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES .............................................................................................. 7  
-  Monetary and Fi scal Policy ...................................................................................... 7  
-  Foreign Exchange and Payments ........................................................................... 11  
-  Investment Regime ............................................................................................... 19  
-  State Ownership, State-Trading Entities and Privatization .................................... 26  
(a) Privatization .......................................................................................................... 26  
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Enterprises, Enterprises with Special 
and Exclusive Privileges ........................................................................................ 30  
-  Pricing Poli cies ...................................................................................................... 40  
-  Competition Policy ................................................................................................ 47  
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING PO LICIES ........................................ 55  
-  Powers of Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government ................ 55  
-  Framework of the Customs Union amon g the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus .................................................... 59  
(a) Legal Framework Establishi ng the Custom s Union ................................................ 59  
(b) Customs Union Structure and Competency in the Area of Trade ............................ 60  
(c) The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council .............................................................. 60  
(d) The Eurasian Economic Commission ...................................................................... 61  
(e) The Council of the Commission .............................................................................. 62  
(f) The Collegium of the Commissi on ......................................................................... 62  
(g) Decision-making within the Customs Union Bodies ............................................... 65  
(h) The EurAsEC Court ................................................................................................ 66  
(i) Transparen cy ........................................................................................................ 69  
(j) Implementation of WTO Commitmen ts under the CU  Regime ............................... 70  
-  Government Entities Responsible for Making and Implementing Policies 
Affecting Foreign Trade; Right of Appeal ............................................................... 71  
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS ............................................................... 73  
-  Registration Requirements for Im port and Export Operations .............................. 73  
-  (a) Ethyl Spirit and Alcohol Prod ucts .................................................................... 79  
-  (b) Pharmace uticals .............................................................................................. 80  
-  (c) Products containing cryptographi c capabilities, including goods with 
encryption technology and sp ecial technical devices............................................. 81  
-  (d) Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 83  
A. IMPORT REGU LATIONS ......................................................................................... 83  
-  Ordinary Customs Duties ....................................................................................... 83  
-  Other Duties an d Charges ..................................................................................... 87  
-  Tariff Exemptions .................................................................................................. 88  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 3 - 
 
  -  Tariff Rate Quotas ................................................................................................. 92  
-  Fees and Charges for Services Rendered ............................................................... 97  
-  Application of Internal Taxes to Imports ............................................................... 99  
-  Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and 
Licensing Sy stems ............................................................................................... 106  
-  (a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas ............ 107  
-  (b) Import Li censing ........................................................................................... 110  
-  Customs Valu ation .............................................................................................. 123  
-  Rules of Or igin .................................................................................................... 132  
-  Other Customs Fo rmalities .................................................................................. 137  
-  Preshipment In spection ...................................................................................... 139  
-  Anti-dumping, Countervailing Du ty and Safeguar d Regimes ............................... 140  
-  (a) Transitional  regime ....................................................................................... 141  
-  (b) Regime established under the Agreement of 25 January 2008 ...................... 142  
B. EXPORT REGU LATIONS ....................................................................................... 150  
-  Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Services Rendered, Application of 
Internal Taxes to Exports .................................................................................... 150  
-  Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas ................... 153  
-  Export Licensing Procedur es ............................................................................... 156  
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS ............................. 158  
-  Industrial Policy, including Subsidies .................................................................. 158  
-  Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification ..................................... 166  
(a) Legal Frame work................................................................................................. 166  
(b) Institutio ns ......................................................................................................... 173  
(c) Technical Regulations, International and National Standards, and 
Conformity Assessmen t Procedur es .................................................................... 176  
-  (i) Technical Re gulations .................................................................................... 176  
-  (ii) Technical Requirements Not Su bject to Law No. 603 On Technical 
Regulation ........................................................................................................... 180  
-  (iii) Voluntary National and International Standard s .......................................... 181  
-  (iv) Disposition of Mandatory Nati onal Standards of  Kazakhstan ........................ 182  
-  (v) Conformity Assessment Procedures  including the Accreditation of 
Conformity Assessm ent Bodi es ........................................................................... 184  
-  (d) Transpar ency ................................................................................................ 195  
-  Sanitary and Phytosani tary Measures ................................................................. 198  
-  Trade-Related Investment Measures ................................................................... 198  
-  Free Zones, Special Economic Areas .................................................................... 203  
-  (a) Customs Union Regu lation of SEZs ................................................................ 204  
-  (b) Basic Law on SEZs ......................................................................................... 207  
-  (c) Customs and Tax Legislation of  the Republic of Kazakhstan .......................... 209  
-  (d) Free Warehouse Customs Regime ................................................................. 211  
-  Government Pr ocurement ................................................................................... 214  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 4 - 
 
  -  Transit ................................................................................................................. 219  
-  Government-mandated Counter -trade and Barter ............................................... 222  
-  Agricultural Policies ............................................................................................ 223  
-  Trade in Civil Aircraft .......................................................................................... 223  
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME ........................................... 224  
-  GENERAL ............................................................................................................. 224  
-  Industrial Property  Protection ............................................................................ 224  
-  Responsible Agencies for Policy Fo rmulation and Implementation ..................... 225  
-  Participation in International In tellectual Property Agreements ......................... 227  
-  Application of National and MFN Treatment to Foreign Nationals ........................ 228  
-  Fees and Taxes .................................................................................................... 228  
-  SUBSTANTIVE STANDARDS OF PROTECTION, INCLUDING PROCEDURES 
FOR THE ACQUISITION AND MAINTENA NCE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
RIGHTS ............................................................................................................... 229  
-  Copyright and Rela ted Rights .............................................................................. 229  
-  Trademarks, includin g Service Marks .................................................................. 232  
-  Geographical Indications, includ ing Appellations of Origin ................................. 234  
-  Industrial Designs ............................................................................................... 238  
-  Patents ................................................................................................................ 238  
-  Plant Variety Pr otection ...................................................................................... 242  
-  Layout Designs of Inte grated Circ uits ................................................................. 243  
-  Requirements on Undisclosed Inform ation, including Trade Secrets and 
Test Data ............................................................................................................. 243  
-  ENFORCEM ENT .................................................................................................... 246  
-  Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies ............................................................... 246  
-  Provisional Me asures  .......................................................................................... 248  
-  Administrative Procedur es and Reme dies ........................................................... 249  
-  Special Border Measures ..................................................................................... 250  
-  Criminal Proc edures  ............................................................................................ 252  
VI. POLICIES AFFECTING TR ADE IN SERV ICES ......................................................... 255  
VII. TRANSPARENCY .................................................................................................. 262  
-  Publication of Information on Trade .................................................................... 262  
-  Notifications ........................................................................................................ 265  
VIII. TRADE AGREEMENTS ........................................................................................... 266  
CONCLUSI ONS ............................................................................................................. 277  
ANNEX 1  ..................................................................................................................... 278 
ANNEX 2  ..................................................................................................................... 288 
ANNEX 3(a) .................................................................................................................. 294  
ANNEX 3(b) .................................................................................................................. 295  
ANNEX 3( c) .................................................................................................................. 2 95 
ANNEX 3(d) .................................................................................................................. 295  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 5 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(e) .................................................................................................................. 296  
ANNEX 3( f) .................................................................................................................. 2 96 
ANNEX 3(g) .................................................................................................................. 296  
ANNEX 4  ..................................................................................................................... 297 
ANNEX 5(a) .................................................................................................................. 299  
ANNEX 5(b) .................................................................................................................. 300  
ANNEX 6  ..................................................................................................................... 302 
ANNEX 7  ..................................................................................................................... 315 
ANNEX 8  ..................................................................................................................... 316 
ANNEX 9  ..................................................................................................................... 317 
ANNEX 10..................................................................................................................... 3 19 
ANNEX 11..................................................................................................................... 3 24 
ANNEX 12..................................................................................................................... 3 25 
ANNEX 13(a) ................................................................................................................ 326  
ANNEX 13(b) ................................................................................................................ 328  
ANNEX 14..................................................................................................................... 3 30 
ANNEX 15 (a) ............................................................................................................... 350  
ANNEX 15 (b) ............................................................................................................... 351  
ANNEX 15 (c) ............................................................................................................... 35 3 
ANNEX 15 (d) ............................................................................................................... 355  
ANNEX 16..................................................................................................................... 3 56 
ANNEX 17..................................................................................................................... 3 57 
ANNEX 18..................................................................................................................... 3 58 
ANNEX 19(a) ................................................................................................................ 359  
ANNEX 19(b) ................................................................................................................ 361  
ANNEX 19( c) ................................................................................................................ 36 2 
ANNEX 20..................................................................................................................... 3 63 
ANNEX 21..................................................................................................................... 3 76 
ANNEX 22..................................................................................................................... 3 81 
ANNEX 23(a) ................................................................................................................ 383  
ANNEX 23(b) ................................................................................................................ 384  
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................... 3 85 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 6 - 
 
  I. INTRODUCTION 
1. The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan applied for accession to the World Trade 
Organization (WTO) on 29 January 1996.  At its meeting on 6 February 1996, the General Council established a Working Party to examine the application of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to accede to the WTO under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the 
World Trade Organization (document WT/GC/M/9).  The terms of reference and the membership of 
the Working Party are reproduced in document WT/ACC/KAZ/2/[Rev.36]. 
2. The Working Party met on 19-20 March and on 9 October 1997 under the Chairmanship of 
H.E. Mr. B. Ekblom (Finland); on 9 October 1998, 12-13 July 2001, and on 13 December 2002 
under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. P. Huhtanie mi (Finland); on 4 March 2004, 3 November 2004, 
7 June 2005, 1 November 2006, and on 17 July 2008 under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. V. Himanen (Finland); on 18 April 2012 under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. H. Himanen 
(Finland); and on 24 July 2012, 5 October 2012, 10 December 2012, 20 March 2013 and […] 
under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. V. Himanen (Finland).   
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED 
3. The Working Party had before it, to serve as a basis for its discussions, a Memorandum on 
the Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Ka zakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/3,  WT/ACC/KAZ/3/Add.1), 
a Survey of the Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/40 of 
30 April 2003), the questions submitted by Member s of the Working Party on the foreign trade 
regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan, togeth er with the replies thereto (WT/ACC/KAZ/6, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/10, WT/ACC/KAZ/11, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/14, WT/ACC/KAZ/22, WT/A CC/KAZ/37,  WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.3, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.3/Corr.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/50,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Corr.1, WT/ACC/ KAZ/57, WT/ACC/KAZ/63, WT/ACC/KAZ/66, WT/ACC/KAZ/67, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/70, WT/ACC/KAZ/71, WT/ACC/KAZ/75 an d ....), and other information provided by 
the authorities of the Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/8, WT/ACC/KAZ/12, WT/ACC/KAZ/19, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/24, WT/ACC/KAZ/25,  WT/ACC/KAZ/26, WT/ACC/KAZ/ 27, WT/ACC/KAZ/27/Rev.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/28, WT/ACC/KAZ/29, WT/ACC/KA Z/30, WT/ACC/KAZ/31, WT/ACC/KAZ/32, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/32/Rev.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/32/Rev.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/34, WT/ACC/KAZ/34/Rev.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/34/Rev.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/35, WT/ACC/KAZ/41, WT/ACC/KAZ/43, WT/ACC/KAZ/44, WT/ACC/KAZ/45, WT/ACC/KAZ/46, WT/ACC/KA Z/47, WT/ACC/KAZ/48, WT/ACC/KAZ/51, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/52, WT/ACC/KAZ/53, WT/ACC/KA Z/54, WT/ACC/KAZ/55, WT/ACC/KAZ/58, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/59, WT/ACC/KAZ/60, WT/ACC/KA Z/61, WT/ACC/KAZ/64, WT/ACC/KAZ/65 ...), 
including the legislative texts and other documentation listed in Annex 1. 
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS 
[to be completed] WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 7 - 
 
  II. ECONOMIC POLICIES 
- Monetary and Fiscal Policy 4. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the National Bank of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (NBRK) was the sole authority determining and implementing the State monetary and 
credit policy.  Kazakhstan had a two-tier banking system, in which the NBRK represented the 
upper (first) tier, while all other banks represented th e lower (second) tier.  Within the limits of its 
authority, the NBRK represented the interests of th e Republic of Kazakhstan in relations with other 
countries' central banks and other banks; international banks; and other financial and credit 
institutions.  The NBRK was not guided by the aim of gaining profit in performing its tasks.  
The NBRK was independent, within the limits of its authority granted by law.  Representative and 
executive bodies had no authority to interfer e in the activity of the NBRK, its branches, 
representative offices and organizations. 
5. According to Law No. 2155 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995 (as 
amended on 5 July 2012), the primary goal of th e monetary policy of the NBRK was to ensure 
price stability.  To accomplish this primary goal, the NBRK was assigned with the following tasks:  
(i) development and implementation of the State' s monetary policy; (ii) support of the payment 
system; (iii) foreign exchange regulation and foreign exchange control; and (iv) facilitation of the 
financial system's stability; (v) regulation, control and supervision of the financial market and 
financial organizations; (vi) protection of rights and interests of financial services consumers; and (vii) statistics activity in the monetary sphere and in external sector, as well as other tasks in 
accordance with the laws of Kazakhstan and the acts of the President.  The NBRK also performed 
the function of a lender of last resort and was entitled to carry out other transactions, authorised under Kazakhstan's law, in accordance with the decisions of its Board.  Since 1998, the NBRK had 
not financed the budget deficit of the State.   
6. In order to conduct its monetary policy, the NBRK provided loans to commercial banks; 
took deposits in national and foreign currencies;  undertook interventions on the foreign exchange 
market; issued short-term notes; conducted open market transactions with securities; and provided commercial bill refinancing.  The instruments used by the NBRK for the conduct of 
monetary policy included setting of the official  refinancing rate and interest rates on main 
transactions, as well as establishing of minimum reserve requirements.   
7. In 2011, inflation in Kazakhstan had been measured at 7.4%.  In 2012, one of the goals of 
the NBRK had been to implement monetary policy directed at the provision of price stability and 
maintenance of annual inflation at a low level, which would be adequate with existing 
macroeconomic conditions.   
8. In order to control the amount and remunerati on rates on bank deposits and loans, the 
NBRK used the normative standards for minimum reserve requirements.  In exceptional cases, if it 
was not possible to slow down inflation by means of indirect monetary control, the NBRK had the 
authority to establish direct quantitative restrictions on particular types of transactions.  Since the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 8 - 
 
  introduction of the national currency in 1993, th e tenge, the NBRK had not established maximum 
rates and had not established credit restrictions since 1995.   
9. The main instruments of rate control on the financial market and sterilization of banks' 
surplus liquidity were short-term banknotes and the deposits of second tier banks in the NBRK.  
The short-term banknotes were State securities, issued by the NBRK.  The supply of short-term banknotes was determined on the basis of constructing a financial instruments yield curve for a 
period of up to one year.  In 2011, the liquidity situation on the monetary market had remained 
almost the same.  The conversion period for short-term banknotes was kept at existing levels - three, six and nine months. 
10. In response to questions on the currency regi me, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that the earlier regulatory procedure for currency transactions had been completely revoked as of 
1 January 2007.  The existing currency regulation (registration and notification) did not limit 
currency transactions and was aimed at providing statistical monitoring of currency transactions.  The simplification of requirements for currency transactions conducted by residents, including 
transactions with foreign assets, was a major goal for further advancement of the currency regime 
and currency control.  In order to control risks relating to currency transactions, Kazakhstan would be taking measures to improve the effectiveness of  prudential regulation and risk management by 
banks, pension funds and insurance companies.   
11. Asked to clarify the term "resident" for the purposes of the registration and notification 
regime, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to Article 1 of Law No. 57, 
"residents" were defined as:  (i) citizens of Kazakhstan, including those located temporarily abroad or those on State service abroad, but excluding those having permanent residence abroad in 
accordance with the legislation of the foreign State; (ii) foreigners and stateless persons holding a 
document entitling them to permanent residence in Kazakhstan; (iii) all juridical persons, established under Kazakhstan's legislation and located in Kazakhstan, as well as their branches 
and representative offices located in either Kazakhstan or abroad; and (iv) diplomatic, trade and 
other official representative offices of Kazakhst an abroad.  Accordingly, "non-residents" were 
defined as all natural persons and juridical persons, their branches and representative offices, 
which were not defined as "residents".  She noted that licensing and registration requirements applied only to residents engaged in currency transactions (and not to non-residents).   
12. Asked to provide information on the main sources of State revenue, as well as the main 
expenditures, the representative of Kazakhstan said that State budget receipts for 2011 had represented 19.9% of GDP.  Tax revenue had accounted for 74.1% of total budget revenue - with 
corporate income tax (19.5%), value-added tax (16%), individual income tax (7%), and social tax 
(5.5%) representing the main tax revenue sources.  Taxes levied on international trade and 
external transactions had accounted for 20.4% of overall tax revenue.  
13. The representative of Kazakhstan furthe r noted that the new Budget Code of 
4 December 2008 had laid down the legislative basis for the transition to a result-oriented State WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 9 - 
 
  budgetary planning.  The Budget Code was aimed at redirecting the activity of government bodies 
from formal disbursement of the budget funds to reaching results in accordance with State policy priorities.  The following budgets were approved and implemented in Kazakhstan:  the republican 
budget, oblast budget, capital city budget, republic an significance city budget, and regional budget 
(oblast significance city budget).  The budget inflows were from the following:  revenues, 
repayments of budget loans, inflows from the sale  of State financial assets, and loans.  Budget 
revenues consisted of tax inflows, non-tax inflows, inflows from sales of main capital, and transfers 
inflows.  Tax inflows comprised taxes and other ob ligatory payments to the budget stipulated by 
the Tax and Customs Codes of Kazakhstan.  According to the Budget Code, obligatory payments 
included corporate income tax, excluding inflow s from the oil industry sector; value-added tax 
(VAT) on locally produced goods, works and services, and imported goods; excise tax on imported 
goods; excise tax on crude oil, gas condensate; excise tax on locally produced goods; and other 
payments to the budget.  Non-tax inflows were obligatory irrevocable payments to the budget, 
which were not related to inflows from basic capital sales, fixed grants and money transferred to 
the budget on a voluntary basis, except transfers of (i) revenue from republican property - inflow 
from the net profit of republican State enterpri ses; inflow from the net profit of the NBRK; 
dividends from State-owned stakes; income from shares in State-owned entities; income from the 
lease of State-owned property; remuneration for ex ternal loan placements by the State on second 
tier accounts, as well as for government deposits in the NBRK; fees on credits issued from the 
republican budget; revenues from the sale of military equipment; and other revenues from 
republican property; (ii) inflows from sales of goods, services and works by State institutions, financed by the republican budget; (iii) inflows from government purchases, financed from the 
republican budget; (iv) penalties, fines and sanctions imposed by institutions, financed from the 
republican budget, except for inflows from the oi l industry sector; and (v) other non-tax inflows, 
except inflows from the oil industry sector. 
14. Asked to provide information on Kazakhstan's tax system, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that the tax system was based on the principles of justice, transparency of the tax 
legislation, and unity of the tax system.  She added that the new Tax Code, which had become 
effective on 1 January 2009, was aimed at (i) reducing the tax burden on economic sectors other than those related to the extraction of natural resources; (ii) reducing administrative barriers; and 
(iii) increasing the effectiveness of tax administration.  
15. The tax administration was made up of the Tax Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the tax service authorities.  The tax service authorities included the 
interregional tax committees, the tax committees of oblasts and the cities of Astana and Almaty, 
interregional tax committees, and tax committees of regions, cities and districts within cities.  
Tax committees could also be established on the territories of special economic zones.  The tax 
service authorities were subject to a vertical authority, i.e., each tax service authority was directly subordinate to an authorised higher-level tax service authority and was not classified as a local 
executive government authority.  The Tax Committ ee of the Ministry of Finance administered the 
tax service authorities.  The customs authorities collected taxes paid for the transportation of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 10 - 
 
  goods across the Customs Union's border, in accordance with Kazakhstan's Tax Code, as well as 
the customs legislation of the Customs Union and Kazakhstan. 
16. The new Tax Code provided for a number of tax reductions.  The corporate income tax rate 
had been reduced from 30% to 20%.  Since 1 January 2009, VAT had been decreased from 13% 
to 12%.  As a result, Kazakhstan had one of the lowest VAT rates in the world.  The following persons were required to register for VAT payment in Kazakhstan:  (i) individual entrepreneurs; 
(ii) juridical persons of Kazakhstan except for government institutions; and (iii) non-residents 
conducting business in Kazakhstan through branches or representative offices.  In accordance with the Tax Code, the mandatory registration for VAT payment did not apply to:  (i) state institutions; 
(ii) structural divisions (branches, representati ve offices) of juridical persons of Kazakhstan; 
(iii) entities subject to gambling tax, fixed ta x and single land tax; and (iv) individual 
entrepreneurs, juridical persons of Kazakhstan  and non-residents conducting business through 
branches or representative offices in Kazakhstan, with an annual turnover of less than 30,000 MCI (i.e. small businesses).  In 2013, 30,000 MCI (monthly calculation index) was equivalent to 
US$345,000 (1 MCI equaled KZT 1,731 or US$11.5). 
17. Within the framework of social tax reforms, the new Tax Code provided for the 
replacement of the existing regressive social ta x scale - based on rates ranging from 13 to 5% - 
by a horizontal tax set at 11%.  The social tax was a contribution by employers, levied on the 
basis of the income of employees, and was aimed at covering for the social needs of the 
population.   
18. The Tax Code provided for companies operating in special economic zones the following 
preferences:  a 100% reduction of corporate income tax; a 100% reduction for advance payments 
o n  c o r p o r a t e  i n c o m e  t a x ;  0 %  r a t e  f o r  t h e  l a n d  t a x ,  a s  w e l l  a s  a  z e r o  c o e f f i c i e n t  a p p l i c a b l e  t o  
related rates in the calculation of the land tax;  and 0% rate on the average value of property 
subject to taxation in the calculation of property tax.   
19. Prior to 1 January 2009, Kazakhstan had used two tax regime models for subsurface 
users:  (i) subsurface use contract; and (ii) a production sharing agreement (PSA).  
Since 1 January 2009, under the new Tax Code, the practice of concluding PSAs with subsurface 
users had been discontinued.  This was due to the difficulties of controlling the correct calculation of reimbursable costs under the PSA.  At the same  time, the tax regime defined in the PSAs - as 
approved by the President and signed before the enactment of the Tax Code (i.e., until 
1 January 2009) - had been preserved. 
20. In accordance with the new Tax Code, subsurface users paid all taxes and compulsory 
charges to the budget, in accordance with that Code, including (i) special charges for subsurface 
users, including a signature bonus, commercial discovery bonus, and payment for compensation of 
past costs; (ii) a mineral extraction tax (MET); and (iii) excess profit tax.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 11 - 
 
  21. In order to improve the taxation regime for subsurface users, royalty payments had been 
replaced by a MET.  The main goal was an even distribution of the tax burden, since the royalty 
was calculated under the terms of each subsurface use contract. 
22. In accordance with Article 331 of the Tax Code, the MET was imposed on subsurface users 
carrying out the extraction of oil, minerals, gro und water and mud, including the extraction of 
minerals from man-made mineral formations within each individual subsurface use contract.   
23. A tax reduction approach was applied in the calculation of excess profit tax by increasing 
the volume of non-taxable net income from 20 to 25%.  In accordance with the provisions of the 
new Tax Code, the tax base for this tax was the part of the subsurface user's net income in excess 
of 25% of the sum of the user's costs in the rele vant tax period.  In addition, in calculating the 
excess profit tax, subsurface users had the right to deduct actual expenses for the acquisition of 
fixed assets and geological exploration.   
24. The rent tax on exported crude oil and gas condensate was applied at rates ranging from 
0 to 32%.  The value of factually exported crude oil and gas condensate was subject to taxation in 
accordance with world prices. 
- Foreign Exchange and Payments 
25. The representative of Kazakhstan said that currency transactions were regulated by the 
following normative legal acts:  Law No. 57 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 
13 June 2005 (as amended on 6 January 2012) , Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 154 
"On Approval of Rules for Conducting Currency Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
28 April 2012, Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 10 6 "On Approval of Rules for Conducting Foreign 
Exchange Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 27 October 2006 (as amended on 
30 November 2009), Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 63 "On Minimum Charter Capital of 
Juridical Persons Solely Involved in Foreign Ex change Transactions " of 16 July 2009 (as amended 
on 1 February 2010), Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 42 "On Approval of Rules on the 
Export-Import Currency Control in the Republic of Kazakhstan and receipt by residents of the 
record number on the export-import contracts" as of 24 February 2012, as well as other normative 
legal acts of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
26. The purpose of currency regulation in Kazakhstan was to advance the national policy of 
achieving sustainable economic growth and ma intaining economic security.  The currency 
regulation goals were to:  (i) establish procedures for the circulation of currency valuables in 
Kazakhstan; (ii) create conditions for Kazakhstan's further integration into the global economy; and (iii) provide a database on currency transactions and capital flows.  
- Role of the National Bank of Kazakhstan  
27. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the National Bank of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (NBRK) adopted normative legal acts to ensure the efficient and reliable transaction of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 12 - 
 
  the payment systems in Kazakhstan and was responsi ble for their oversight.  In accordance with 
Article 48 of Law No. 2155, the NBRK had to arrange, coordinate and regulate payments and money transmissions.  The NBRK had to establish (i) "rules and peculiarities of application" of 
payment methods and/or money transmissions; and (ii) rules and conditions for payments related 
to the use of money in cash.   
28. The NBRK activities in the sphere of currency regulation and currency control extended, 
inter alia , to:  (i) determination of the order of currency valuables circulation in Kazakhstan; 
(ii) establishment of rules for conducting currency transactions by residents and non-residents in Kazakhstan; (iii) establishment of unified rules and conditions for registration of foreign trade 
contracts for export and import, and of procedures for export-import currency control for fulfilling 
repatriation requirements by residents; (iv) esta blishment of the procedure for import, export and 
transmission of currency valuables in and out of Kazakhstan; (v) establishment of licensing 
procedures and the issuance of licenses for foreign exchange transactions; (vi) establishment of registration procedures and the issuance of registration certificates for foreign exchange offices; 
(vii) establishment of qualification requirements for conducting foreign exchange transactions; 
(viii) establishment of procedures for registration and notification of currency transactions and opening accounts in foreign banks by residents of Kazakhstan, as well as the issuance of 
registration and notification certificates; (ix) determination of the "rate deviation of foreign 
currency in purchase from the rate of foreign curre ncy in sale for tenge" in transactions conducted 
through exchange offices; (x) issuance of special permits for currency transactions within the 
special currency regime; (xi) establishment of procedures and forms of reporting on currency transactions obligatory for both residents and non-residents (after consultation with the competent 
State bodies); and (xii) application of sanctions stipulated in the banking and currency legislation 
of Kazakhstan in cases of violation by banks and other persons.  
29. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan had accepted the obligations of 
Article VIII of the IMF Articles of Agreement and had established full convertibility of tenge in 
current transactions in 1996.   
30. Since 4 February 2009, the exchange rate of the national currency had been pegged to the 
US dollar.  Taking into account the stability of the national currency, the favourable position of Kazakhstan's exports on world markets, and Kazakhstan's balance of payments, the NBRK had 
cancelled the exchange rate peg and, as of 28 February 2011, had moved to a managed float 
exchange rate regime.  A devaluation of the tenge in medium-term was not expected.  The NBRK continued to take all necessary measures to prevent considerable fluctuations of the national 
currency, which could have a negative impact on the competitiveness of Kazakhstan's industries.  
The NBRK's policy was, to the extent possible, to  further decrease its activity on the exchange 
market in order to increase the exchange rate flexibility of the national currency.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 13 - 
 
  - Requirements Related to Foreign Exchange 
31. In response to a question concerning obligations and restrictions relating to the purchase 
of foreign currency, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to Article 17 of Law 
No. 57 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005, the purchase and sale 
(exchange) of foreign currency had to be carried out only through authorised banks, authorised 
organizations, or their exchange offices.  Accord ing to the Article 15 of the Currency Rules in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 154, residents and non-residents had a right to purchase foreign 
currency in the domestic currency market without providing a currency contract and/or other payment documents related to the foreign currency purchase and sale transactions.  In filling the 
application for the purchase of foreign currency through an authorised bank, juridical persons 
(resident and non-resident) were required to indicate the purpose of purchasing the foreign 
currency.  However, in accordance with Articl e 18 of Currency Rules No. 154, the foreign currency 
purchased by juridical persons could be used for purposes other than indicated in the application.   
32. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with Article 26 of Law No. 57, 
non-residents had a right to open bank accounts in a foreign and/or national currency in 
authorised banks on an unrestricted basis.  Non-residents also had the right to transfer foreign and national currency, on an unrestricted basis, (i) from their accounts outside of Kazakhstan to 
their bank accounts in an authorised bank; and (ii)  from their bank accounts in an authorised bank 
to their bank accounts outside of Kazakhstan.   
33. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with Currency Rules No. 154, 
natural persons had a right to withdraw (credit an account) foreign currency in cash from their bank accounts in an authorised bank without limita tions.  Juridical persons could withdraw foreign 
currency in cash from bank accounts in authorised banks for payments to natural persons in the 
following cases:  (i) payments for the sale of goods in duty free shops, as well as realisation of goods and rendering of services to passengers on route during international transportation; 
(ii) payments between natural persons and author ised banks or authorised organizations through 
their exchange offices; (iii) payment of salary by resident juridical persons to non-resident 
employees, as well as by non-resident juridical persons to resident and non-resident employees in 
foreign currency; (iv) payment in foreign currency by juridical persons of expenses related to business trips of its employees abroad; and (v) payments between natural persons and 
non-resident juridical persons conducting activity under customs control in airports, ports and 
border terminals open for international traffic.  In her view, the requirement to indicate the purpose for the purchase and sale of foreign currency was only imposed for statistical purposes 
and did not restrict the juridical persons' use of the purchased currency for other legal purposes.  
In her opinion, the current legal framework did not restrict legitimate trade transactions.   
34. The representative of Kazakhstan noted th at payments and money transmissions under 
current transactions between residents and non-residents could be carried out without restrictions, provided that they were conducted through accounts in authorised banks.  In addition, 
paragraph 1 of Article 16 of Law No. 57 stipulated cases where payments and transmissions on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 14 - 
 
  currency transactions could be carried out, by non-cash payment, without opening bank accounts 
in authorised banks in Kazakhstan:  (i) payments and transmission of natural persons' money, as well as payments and transmission of money in their favour, in national currency, within the 
territory of Kazakhstan; (ii) transfer of natural persons' money without opening a bank account in 
an authorised bank in cases of non-repayable transmission of money (including tax and licence payments, fines, transfer of inheritance, alimony, grants, etc.) and other money transmissions 
from Kazakhstan, which were not related to conducting business activity by natural persons, and 
in relation to which there was no requirement to assign a record number to the foreign trade contract, registration and notification; (iii) payments for the sale of goods in duty free shops as 
well as the sale of goods and rendering services to passengers on route during international 
transportations; (iv) payments between natura l persons and authorised banks or authorised 
organizations through their exchange offices; (v) payment of salary by resident juridical persons to 
non-resident employees, as well as by non-resident juridical persons to resident and non-resident employees in foreign currency; (vi) payment in fo reign currency by juridical persons of expenses 
related to sending employees on business trips outside of Kazakhstan; (vii) payments between 
natural persons and non-resident juridical persons conducting activity under customs control in airports, ports and border terminals open for international traffic; and (viii) payments between 
resident juridical persons and non-resident juridi cal persons conducting business activity on the 
territory of Kazakhstan, in the national currency within the amounts specified by the legislation of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The following paymen ts and transmissions of money could be carried 
out without opening bank accounts in authorised banks of Kazakhstan:  payments by checks; payments and transmission of money for transactions with non-residents through foreign bank 
accounts opened by residents, as well as payments and transmission of money through the 
authorised bank's correspondent accounts in foreign banks; and transfer of money from the foreign banks accounts of non-residents against fulfillment of the resident's obligations.  
- Restrictions on Foreign Exchange 
35. Restrictions on currency transactions as a mechanism of reaction to external shocks could 
be imposed in Kazakhstan only as provided by Article 32 of Law No. 57 "On Currency Regulation 
and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005, according to which restrictions on currency transactions could be imposed only in case of threat to the country's economic security and the stability of its 
financial system, and only if the situation could not be resolved through other economic policy 
tools.  Restrictions on currency transactions could be imposed within the framework of a special currency regime applied by an Act of the Presid ent.  However, the special currency regime had 
never been imposed. 
36. Asked to explain the procedures and criteria applied when the President decided to restrict 
currency transactions, the representative of Kazakhstan said that these were stipulated in 
Article 32 of Law No. 57 of 13 June 2005 and included a requirement to:  (i) open a banking deposit without remuneration, in an amount determined as percentage of the amount of the 
currency transaction, in an authorised bank or the NBRK, for a fixed period of time; (ii) obtain a WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 15 - 
 
  special currency transaction permit from the NBRK;  (iii) fulfil obligatory sale of foreign currency 
obtained by residents of Kazakhstan; or (iv) restrict the use of foreign banks accounts and establish terms for the repatriation of currency proceeds and limits on the scope, amount and 
transaction currency during currency transactions.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that 
not all measures would be applied at once, but that the measures would be applied selectively, depending on the situation and the nature of the risks of destabilization in the currency market.  
The President could also impose other temporary currency restrictions.  The special currency 
regime measures were aimed at fulfilling Kazakhstan's international obligations and creating conditions for the improvement of Kazakhstan's balance of payments and the situation on the 
domestic market. 
37. The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the special currency regime was 
applied by the President based on consulta tions with the Government and the NBRK.  
The President's Act on a Special Currency Regime had to contain:  (i) the list of measures and temporary restrictions of currency transactions; (ii) procedure to carry out the requirements of the 
special currency regime, including terms for issuing the special permit; and (iii) date of 
introduction and validity period of the special currency regime.  A special currency regime could not be established for more than one year.  Within the year the special currency regime was in 
effect, the President was entitled to extend the te rm of the special currency regime (in case it was 
imposed for a term of less than one year) or to fully or partially abrogate it.  During the application 
of the special currency regime, residents and non-residents had to observe the requirements 
established by the Special Currency Regime Act of the President. 
38. Specific criteria and procedures for application of this regime were not established as it 
was difficult to forecast what could cause a threat to the economic security and financial stability of 
the State.  In her opinion, this system complied with the provisions of the WTO Agreements and did not conflict with Kazakhstan's obligations in resp ect of the IMF.  In response to a question from 
a Member, she noted that the regime of obligator y sale of foreign currency had been temporarily 
imposed from April to December 1999 during the transition to the new exchange rate regime.  
Since then, there had been no reasons to apply such restrictions.   
39. At present, within the framework of the Customs Union between the Russian Federation, 
Belarus and Kazakhstan (hereinafter:  the CU parties), the CU parties had signed an Agreement on 
the Rules of Transfer of Cash and (or) Cash Instruments through the Customs Border of the 
Customs Union by Natural Persons of 5 July 2010.   Kazakhstan had ratified this Agreement 
through Law No. 389-IV "On Ratification of the Agreement on the Procedure for the Movement of 
Cash Monetary Funds and (or) Monetary Instruments by Natural Persons across the Customs 
Border of the Customs Union" of 17 January 2011.   Under this Agreement, imports from third 
States to Kazakhstan and exports from Kazakhstan to third States of (i) cash and traveler's checks 
in a total amount exceeding the equivalent of US$10,000; and (ii) cash instruments payable on demand irrespective of the amount - were subject to customs declaration in written form.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 16 - 
 
  - Licensing, Registration and Notification of Foreign Exchange Transactions 
40. Some Members expressed concerns regarding th e large quantity of licensing requirements 
for foreign exchange transactions under the current legislation, some of which could complicate 
normal trade transactions, and asked for specific information on Kazakhstan's plans to liberalise its 
foreign exchange regime.   
41. The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Law No. 57, since 
11 August 2009 the licensing regime (authorisation procedure) of currency transactions and retail 
trade had been fully cancelled.  At present, lice nsing requirements were applied only to exchange 
transactions with foreign currency in cash by exchange offices and authorised banks.  Kazakhstan 
provided annual reports on its currency regime to the IMF.  The IMF had never deemed 
Kazakhstan's regime inconsistent with the IMF Agreement and, in particular, with Article VIII of 
the Agreement.  The registration and notification  requirements, as described in the following two 
paragraphs, were maintained for statistical monitoring of external liabilities/revenues of Kazakhstan and for further submission of the relevant data to the International Monetary Fund and 
the World Bank.   
42. Asked to clarify what changes had been introduced into Law No. 57 with respect to the 
licensing regime of currency transactions and retail trade, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that during the period of gradual liberalisation of the currency transactions and retail trade 
licensing regime from 2005 to 2009, the licensing requirement had been eliminated towards the 
following currency operations and activities: 
- retail trade and provision of services for which payment was performed in cash of foreign 
currency.  Under the previous regime, the licence had been issued to persons who carried out their activities under the customs regime of duty free shops, as well as on the sea, 
inland water, air, rail and road transpor t engaged in international transportation; 
- payments based on exports (imports) exceeding the 180 days term; - purchase by residents of non-resident's secu rities, equity interests in investment funds - 
nonresidents, contributions by residents into the share capital of non-residents, as well as 
transactions with financial derivatives between residents and non-residents; and 
- opening accounts in foreign banks by physical persons-residents and juridical 
persons-residents.  Under the previous regime, the account balance and the conditions of use of a foreign bank account had been determined in accordance with a licence of the 
National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
43. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that only residents were required to register major 
transactions of capital flows and provide timely no tice to the NBRK.  Residents were required to 
register transactions related to capital flow, which provided for the receipt of assets (funds) in an 
amount exceeding US$500,000 or for the transfer of  capital (tangible assets) from Kazakhstan in 
an amount exceeding US$100,000.  She added that, in accordance with Law No. 57, the following 
transactions of residents with non-residents were subject to registration with the NBRK:  
(i) commercial credits exceeding 180 days, except for foreign trade contracts, which were subject 
to export-import currency control as described in paragraph [441] of this Report; (ii) direct 
investments; (iii) financial loans for more than 180 days, including financial leasing; (iv) acquisition of an exclusive right to intellectu al property objects; and (v) transfer of money or WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 17 - 
 
  another property in fulfilment of obligations as a participant of a joint partnership.  The NBRK 
registration or notification requirements extended only to residents.  Non-residents investing directly in Kazakhstan could further export their investments and incomes without any restrictions. 
Registration of contract on currency transaction could only be refused in cases when (i) the 
submission contained unreliable information or did not include all information required in accordance with Law No. 57; and (ii) the transaction did not comply with the legislation of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  The provisions of Arti cle 8 of Law No. 57 outlined the only conditions 
under which the registration of transactions could be refused.  If a resident submitted the complete set of required documents in compliance with the legislation of Kazakhstan, the 
authorised bank would not have grounds for refusing the registration.  Registered transactions 
could not be abrogated or nullified by the NBRK.  
44. The representative of Kazakhstan added that the registration regime required the resident 
to submit to the NBRK a copy of the contract based on which the currency transaction would be 
carried out, as well as application form, identification documents and documents confirming 
incurrence, performance and discharge of liabilities  under the currency contract.  The notification 
regime required the submission of information on already conducted currency transactions.  As part of the liberalisation reform of the currency transaction regime, the registration requirement 
for certain currency transactions had been replaced by the notification requirement.  Residents 
were required to notify currency transactions related to:  (i) capital movements involving the 
inflow of property (funds) in an amount exceed ing the equivalent of US$500,000; (ii) transfer of 
funds (tangible assets) from Kazakhstan in an amount exceeding the equivalent of US$100,000; and (iii) payments/transfers by residents to non-residents and/or by non-residents to residents 
under financial derivatives transactions, as well as for payments related to export/import of works 
and services in amounts exceeding the equiva lent of US$100,000.  The notification regime 
covered:  (i) the bank's own transactions, including financial loans and direct investments; 
(ii) securities transactions carried out on the basis of a brokerage services agreement concluded 
with a resident broker (notification by a broker); (iii) transactions with derivative financial 
instruments; (iv) acquisition of real estate; (v) op ening of foreign bank accounts by residents; and 
(vi) transfer of property in trust (monetary funds and tangible assets).   
45. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with paragraph 30 of Rules 
No. 154, the currency control regime did not extend to:  (i) contracts on State external loans 
and/or contracts on non-State external loans guaranteed by the Government, as well as transactions carried out under these contracts; (ii) commercial credits related to export or import 
requiring the assignment of a record number to the foreign trade contract; (iii) acquisition by 
non-residents of the securities of resident issuer s, which were issued under the legislation and on 
the territory of other States (including depositary receipts issued for resident issuers' securities) in 
the secondary market; (iv) acquisition by residents of  the securities of non-resident issuers, issued 
under Kazakhstani legislation (including Kazakhstani depositary receipts) in the secondary market; 
(v) acquisition by non-residents of government securities issued in Kazakhstan; (vi) banking 
transactions with derivative financial instruments; (vii) currency transactions carried out by WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 18 - 
 
  overseas organizations of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and (viii) commercial credits and financial 
loans granted by banks to non-residents for more than 180 days.  She emphasized that registration and notification was required for statistical monitoring purposes.    
- Exchange Offices 
46. Some Members asked the representative of Kazakhstan how enterprises obtained rights to 
conduct currency transactions, whether foreign organizations were able to become licensed banks 
or exchange offices, and whether the licenses could be issued to any other organizations except 
for banks.  She explained that foreign currency transactions, including those on behalf of clients, were carried out by second-tier banks and other financial organizations established in Kazakhstan 
on the basis of a licence issued by the NBRK.  In  accordance with Law No. 57, "authorised banks" 
were second-tier banks and organizations engaged in certain types of banking operations and 
conducting foreign currency transactions, including transactions on behalf of clients.  The definition 
of "authorised banks" excluded "authorised organizations" which were allowed to conduct only currency exchange transactions.  She further co ntinued that the Agency for Regulation and 
Supervision of Financial Markets and Institutions of  the Republic of Kazakhstan had been abolished 
pursuant to Decree of the President No. 25 "On Further Improvement of the System of State 
Regulation of the Financial Market of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan" of 12 April 2011.  The functions 
and authority of the Agency had been transf erred to the NBRK, and its new Committee for 
Regulation and Supervision of Financial Markets and Institutions of NBRK. 
47. The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the NBRK issued licenses for 
conducting exchange transactions with foreign currency in cash only to juridical persons of the Republic of Kazakhstan, who were solely engaged in the organization of exchange transactions 
(exchange offices).  In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 6 of Law No. 57, to obtain a licence, 
the applicant had to meet only one qualification requirement – to have start-up capital as specified by the Decree of the NBRK Board No. 63 "On Mini mum Charter Capital of Juridical Persons Solely 
Involved in Foreign Exchange Transactions".   
48. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that such juridical persons could be established 
only as limited liability partnerships without the right to establish representative offices in 
Kazakhstan or abroad, or to participate in the charter capital of other juridical persons, but with the right to establish branches in Kazakhstan.  According to Article 7, Chapter 2 of Regulations 
No. 106, resident and non-resident natural and juridical persons could be the founders of an 
authorised organization, except for juridical pers ons, which previously had been founders (one of 
the founders) of an authorised organization whose licence had been revoked less than three years 
before the date of application for a State registration permit or for a licence for organizing 
exchange transactions with foreign currency.  A general licence for conducting exchange 
transactions did not restrict the number of exchange offices of the applicant.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 19 - 
 
  49. Branches and representative offices of foreign banks could not carry out foreign currency 
exchange transactions until they registered as juridical persons of Kazakhstan and obtained the 
relevant permit.   
50. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that if Kazakhstan introduced restrictions on 
foreign exchange or payments such restrictions would be applied in conformity with WTO requirements.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Investment Regime 
51. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the general legislation comprising the 
investment regime of Kazakhstan included the Co nstitution of Kazakhstan of 30 August 1995; the 
Civil Code of Kazakhstan - General Part of 27 December 1994 (as last amended on 
25 March 2011) and Special Part No. 409 of 1 Ju ly 1999 (as last amended on 2 April 2010); the 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the 
Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 and a number of other legislative acts, including:  
Law No. 373 "On Investments" of 8 January 2003 (as last amended on 20 February 2012), 
Law No. 112-IV 2008 "On Competition" of 25 December 2008, Law No. 233 "On National Security 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 26 June 1998, Law  No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface 
Use" of 24 June 2010, Law No. 167 "On Concessions" of 7 July 2006, and Law No. 124 "On Private 
Entrepreneurship" of 31 January 2006.  Provisions relevant to the investment regime contained in 
CU Agreements and Treaties, to which Kazakhstan was a party, also applied (see "Tariff Exemptions"). 
52. The representative of Kazakhstan added that Law No. 373 "On Investments" of 
8 January 2003 provided the specific elements of  the legal basis for Kazakhstan's investment 
policy.  This Law regulated relations with regard to investments in Kazakhstan, determined the 
legal and economic basis for the attraction of inve stments, guaranteed the protection of investors' 
rights when investing into Kazakhstan, and established measures of State support for investments 
and procedures for dispute resolution.  The Law "On Investments" did not establish local content 
or export performance requirements as measures of State support for investments. 
53. Asked to clarify the definition of investments, and whether or not it included all goods, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the Law "On Investments" defined investment as all kinds 
of property (except for goods for personal use), including property under financial leasing as of the 
date of the contract; property rights invested by an investor into the charter capital of a juridical 
person; and the increase of fixed assets used in en trepreneurial activities, as well as fixed assets 
produced and received within a concession agreement by the concessionaire (including its legal 
successor).   
54. She further informed Members that, in accordance with the Law "On Investments", legal 
protection of investments included full and unconditional protection of the rights of investors; 
guarantee of indemnity for damages suffered by investors as a result of non-compliant norms 
being issued, and unlawful acts (commission or omission) of public officials; and guarantee of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 20 - 
 
  stability of the terms and conditions of agreements concluded between investors and State 
agencies, except for agreements that were amended by mutual consent of the parties.  These guarantees for investors did not extend to (i ) amendments to the legal acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and/or their entry into force, nor to amendments made to international agreements 
that changed the terms and conditions of impo rt, production, and sale of excisable goods; 
(ii) amendments and addenda to Kazakhstan's legislation introduced for national security, 
environmental safety, public health and morality purposes.  The Law "On Investments" also 
guaranteed the transparency of th e activities of State agencies; the access to information related 
to investment activities (company registration, charter documents, licensing, etc.); a guarantee for 
investors to use income at their full discretion; guaranteed protection of investors' rights in case of 
nationalization and requisition; and investment dispute settlement regulations, including the 
possibility of international arbitration provided by this Law.  Agreements on promotion and mutual 
protection of investments were concluded with certain countries in order to guarantee investment protection.  These Agreements provided guarantees of investors' rights, including the recovery of 
investments when faced with political (regulatory) risks, nationalization and expropriation; the 
prevention of discrimination; and the regulation of disputes including appeal to international 
arbitration courts. 
55. In response to a request by a Member for more information on nationalization, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that nationalization procedures were stipulated in the Civil Code 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 269-XII of  27 December 1994 and Law No. 413-IV "On State 
Property" of 1 March 2011.  In accordance with Article 54 of the Law "On State Property", nationalization was carried out in the public interest, for national security purposes, in compliance 
with the established legal procedures and performed without discrimination.  Nationalization was 
subject to preliminary and equivalent compensation  by the Republic of Kazakhstan of the market 
value of the nationalized property and other losse s.  Reimbursement of the value of the property 
subject to nationalization and other relevant losses was carried out in full prior to transfer of 
ownership rights to the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
56. Asked to clarify if legislation on evaluation activities was developed and what effect it had 
on reimbursements, the representative of Kazakhst an said that evaluation of property, purchased 
or alienated by the State in case of nationalization or requisition, was performed by a valuator in 
accordance with Law No. 109-II "On Evaluation Ac tivity in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
30 November 2000.  The market value of the property  subject to nationalization or requisition was 
established without regard to the change of valu e as a result of announcement of the forthcoming 
nationalization or requisition.  Upon the requ est of the owner of the property subject to 
nationalization, a re-valuation of the value of the property could be conducted on the date of 
reimbursement.    
- Investment preferences 
57. The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the Law "On Investments" 
provided that the State's investment support was directed towards the creation of favourable WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 21 - 
 
  conditions for investors investing in new technologies, the expansion and renovation of existing 
production facilities, training and protection of the environment.  The State support of investments involved granting of investment preferences for a list of "priority" investment activities, which were 
available to all juridical persons of Kazakhstan provided they met the objective criteria.  As the 
Law "On Investments" did not set minimum capital requirements for foreign investment, its scope of application, including investment preferences, also covered small and medium-sized enterprises.  
Investment incentives were granted to the investment  activity listed in the list of priority activities 
(approved by Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 and amended by Government Resolution No. 809 of 6 August 2010)  or the list of strategic investment projects.  She further 
explained that the list of strategic investment  projects previously adopted by Government 
Resolution No. 1293 of 1 September 2009 had become void and that a new list of strategic 
investment projects would be developed by her Government.   
58. Previously, investment tax preferences had been  in the form of full exemptions from the 
payment of property tax, land tax and corporate income tax and had been enforced from the date 
the investor started to operate the facility.  However, as of 1 January 2009, these investment tax 
preferences had been eliminated from the Law.  Th erefore, they had no longer been granted since 
1 January 2009.  In the meantime, a transitional arrangement had been introduced for investment 
contracts concluded before 1 January 2009.  Thus, according to Article 23 of the Law "On 
Investments", tax preferences granted under an investment contract concluded with the 
authorised body on investments before 1 January 2009 would be effective until the expiration of 
the term specified in the contract.  There were approximately 100 investment contracts granting tax preferences concluded prior to 1 January 2009.  
59. The fundamental criterion for granting all ty pes of investment preferences was that an 
investment activity should be listed in the list of priority activities.  The following types of investment preferences could be granted within the investment contract: 
- customs duty exemptions;  
- in-kind state grants;  - preferences on land tax and property tax for juridical persons implementing strategic 
investment projects; and 
- industrial preferences for juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects in 
socially and economically disadvantaged regions. 
60. Customs duty exemptions and in-kind state grants were granted, provided that the 
investment activity was listed in the list of priority activities approved by Government Resolution 
No. 436 of May 2003.  Customs duty exemptions were granted for a period not exceeding five years from the date of conclusion of the investment contract.  In-kind state grants were 
granted for the implementation period of an invest ment project from the date of conclusion of the 
investment contract.  For land tax preferences, pr operty tax preferences and industrial preferences 
implementing strategic projects, an additional criterion was established, i.e., an investment project 
had to be included into the list of strategic investment projects.  If the project was not listed in the list of strategic investments projects, a juridical person could not apply for such preferences.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 22 - 
 
  61. On 20 February 2012, the concept of strategic investment projects, i.e., projects that had 
strategic impact upon the economic development of Kazakhstan, had been re-introduced into the Law "On Investments".  Juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects could benefit 
from the new preferences on land and property tax and industrial preferences.  The procedures for 
granting preferences on land tax and property tax were stipulated in the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV of 10 December 2008.  Preferences on land tax and property tax could  be 
granted for a period not exceeding seven years from the date of conclusion of the investment 
contract.  Industrial preferences were granted to juridical persons implementing investment strategic projects in socially and economically disadvantaged regions in the form of compensation 
or payments for such expenditures as gas, electricity, purchase of land, buildings and facilities.  
The list of the regions that were socially an d economically disadvantaged was approved by 
Government Resolution No. 601 of 10 May 2012.  The procedure for granting industrial 
preferences had to be approved by the Government .  The duration of industrial preferences was 
not determined yet as the list of strategic investment projects and the procedure of granting these 
preferences was still being developed by the Gove rnment and had not been published.  To date, 
there had been no  industrial preferences, land and property tax preferences granted. 
62. The lists of priority activities and strategic in vestment projects were intended to be revised 
regularly.  The list of priority activities approv ed by Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 
had been amended in 2009 by Government Re solution No. 925, and again in 2010 by the 
Government Resolution No. 809.  Changes had been made with regard to types of activities, but 
the number of activities (93) had not been changed.  The list of priority activities was attached to 
the Working Party Report (Annex 2).  No amendments had been made in 2011 and 2012. 
63. According to Article 19 of the Law "On Investments", an applicant for investment 
preferences was required to submit documents to the authorised body in charge of investments 
determined by the Government to prove the juridical person's financial, technical and 
organizational capability to implement the investme nt project or the strategic investment project. 
The authorised body was responsible for concluding contracts on granting investment preferences 
based on the submitted information  and for monitoring of their implementation.  It also took 
decisions on granting investment preferences and the possible extensions of their terms.  Currently, the Investments Committee under the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies was 
the authorised body in charge of investments.   
64. In order to bring into compliance with the Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 
"On Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the Cust oms Union between the Republic of Belarus, 
the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009, the Law 
"On Investments" had been amended on 20 February 2012.  In accordance with those 
amendments, customs duty exemptions would now be  granted for technological equipment, its 
components and spare parts, raw materials and inputs imported for implementation of an investment project or a strategic investment project within the investment contracts concluded 
with the authorised body.  In-kind grants could be  granted by the Government to investors in the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 23 - 
 
  form of land plots, buildings, machinery, equipment, computer machines, measuring and 
regulating units, transportation vehicles (except for automobiles), production and household equipment.  The authorised body, based on dome stic legislation and with the approval of the 
relevant State agencies, also could confer in-kin d State grants for either ownership or temporary 
use.   
65. She further explained that procedures and conditions for simpler and broader application 
of investment tax preferences were now established by the Tax Code.  The Tax Code provided tax 
preferences in the form of deductions on corp orate income tax.  Application of these tax 
preferences did not require the juridical person to conclude an investment contract with the 
competent authority on investments in order to benefit from them.  These tax preferences 
provided for the possibility of judicial persons to  deduct from the taxable income the value of 
buildings and facilities, machinery and equipment used in production, as well as related costs for 
reconstruction and modernization.  The duration of tax preferences depended on the method of deduction applied by the juridical person.  Deductions could be carried out according to one of 
two methods:  (i) deduction after putting a facility into operation; or (ii) deduction prior to putting 
a facility into operation.  According to the me thod of deduction after putting a facility into 
operation, the original costs (to be paid for the purchase, construction, assembling and installation 
of buildings, facilities, machinery and equipment)  could be deducted in equal amounts during the 
first three-year tax period, or on a lump-sum basis.  According to the second method - 
i.e. deduction prior to putting a facility into operation - the costs (to be paid for the purchase, 
construction, assembling and installation as well as reconstruction and modernization of buildings, facilities, machinery and equipment before putting them into operation) could be deducted in the 
tax period during which actual costs were incurred.  These tax preferences were applicable to 
industrial buildings and constructions, machinery and equipment which were put into operation for the first time and were used for at least three years.  
66. Investment preferences in the automobile sector had been granted under the free 
warehouse regime, which included local content requirements.  In addition, preferences 
conditioned upon the use of local materials were described in the section "Free Zones, Special 
Economic Areas" of this Report.  The cust oms duty exemptions granted under the Law 
"On Investments" described above were distinct structurally and legally from the exemptions 
resulting from local content requirements in the free warehouse regime and the local content 
requirements in Kazakhstan's automotive investment programme described in the TRIMs section of the draft Working Party report.   
67. The representative of Kazakhstan added that according to Article 3 of the 
Law "On Investments", foreign investment activities could be limited or banned in certain areas 
due to national security considerations.  Pursuant to Article 5 of Law No. 451-1 "On the Mass 
Media" of 23 July 1999, foreign physical and juri dical persons were not allowed to directly or 
i n d i r e c t l y  o w n ,  u s e ,  o r  m a n a g e  m o r e  t h a n  2 0 %  o f  t h e  c a p i t a l  o f  a  m a s s  m e d i a  e n t e r p r i s e  i n  
Kazakhstan.  Pursuant to Article 5 of Law No. 85-II "On Guarding Activities" of 19 October 2000, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 24 - 
 
  foreign juridical persons, domestic juridical persons with foreign participation, as well as foreign 
and stateless individuals, could not engage in secu rity and safety (guarding) activities.  She added 
that, pursuant to Law No. 233 "On National Security" of 26 June 1998, in the field of 
telecommunications, total foreign equity was limi ted to 49% of the charter capital of juridical 
persons supplying services as operators of long distance and/or international communications owning terrestrial communication lines (cable, including optical fibre, and radio relay).  
68. According to the Law "On Use of Air Space and Activities of Aviation", foreign participation 
in the authorised capital of air companies, performing regular air transportation was limited to 49%.  She also noted that, pursuant to Article 36 Law No. 136-I "On Pensions in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 20 June 1997, the total charter (reg istered) capital of pension funds with foreign 
capital participation could not exceed 25% of the aggregate charter capital of all pension funds in 
Kazakhstan.  For investment management companie s managing pension assets, this figure was set 
at 50%.  In addition, at least one third of the Board of Directors of such pension funds or investment management companies had to be made up of Kazakhstani nationals.  However, she 
noted that the provisions of Law No. 107-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Licensing and Consolidated Supervision" of 
23 December 2005 and Law No. 128-III "On Amendments and Addenda to the Legislative Acts of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan on Insurance" of 20 February 2006 had eliminated similar restrictions 
on foreign participation affecting banks and insurance/reinsurance companies.  She added that 
Law No. 204 "On Amendments to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Architectural, 
Town-building and Construction Activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan'" had eliminated the 49% foreign equity cap in architectural, urban development and construction services joint ventures.   
69. She noted that pursuant to Article 23 of the Land Code No. 442-II of 20 June 2003, private 
ownership of land plots located in the border zo ne and boundary territories of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan by foreigners and foreign juridical entities was prohibited.  Also foreign citizens and 
foreign legal entities could not privately own lands used for farming/agricultural production or 
forest planning purposes.  Foreigners might be granted the right of temporary land use for 
farming/agricultural production purposes for a period of up to 10 years.  Lease-holding of land 
plots for agricultural purposes adjacent to the State border of Kazakhstan was also restricted for foreigners.   
70. In response to questions on the existence of any restrictions or conditions, which did not 
apply to domestic juridical persons, but were applicable to foreign-owned juridical persons of Kazakhstan investing in land or leasing subsurface rights, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that all restrictions applied equally to domestically-owned and foreign-owned juridical persons of 
Kazakhstan.  She added that Article 12 of Law No. 291-I "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 
24 June 2010, had been amended in line with the provisions of Law No. 233 "On National Security" 
of 26 June 1998, which stipulated that economic security extended to the preservation and increase of the energy resources of Kazakh stan.  According to these amendments, the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 25 - 
 
  Government of Kazakhstan had the priority in purchasing the rights to subsurface utilisation, when 
sold by their current holder.   
71. A Member asked the representative of Kazakhstan to clarify whether any financial actions 
affecting a change in ownership of an enterprise which owned the rights to subsurface utilisation, 
such as the sale of private equity in the enterprise, would also trigger the application of Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use".  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in 
accordance with Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", if subsurface user intended to alienate 
the subsurface use right (a part thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use rights
1, the 
State had a priority right to purchase the subsurfa ce use right (a part thereof) and/or an object 
related to subsurface use rights.  Subsurface user  that intended to alienate the subsurface use 
right (a part thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use rights had to submit application to 
the competent authority.  The decision on acquis ition of alienable subsurface use right (a part 
thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use right was taken by the competent authority on behalf of the Government of Kazakhstan.  Therefore, any financial actions resulting in change of 
ownership of an enterprise which owned the rights to subsurface utilisation, such as the sale of 
private equity in the enterprise, would bring into  effect the provision of Law "On Subsurface and 
Subsurface Use", giving the Government of Kazakhstan the priority right to subsurface utilisation, 
when sold by the current holder.  
72. A Member expressed concerns regarding the effect that the amendments to the 
Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" could have on the investment climate in Kazakhstan.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 291-I "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010, would not negatively affect the investment climate in 
Kazakhstan, as it did not discriminate between foreign and domestic investors.  The Law provided 
only for transparency and compliance with the te rms of subsurface use contracts by subsurface 
users in order to ensure stable economic growth.  As of November 2011, 142 companies operated 
in the subsurface sector, among which 86 companies had foreign participation.   
73. [In response to questions from some Members, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that Kazakhstan would provide foreign invested juridical persons of Kazakhstan, producing crude 
oil and gas in accordance with the national legislation of Kazakhstan, non-discriminatory access to pipelines which were partly or fully owned and re gulated by the Government in accordance with 
the national legislation
2 within the available remaining capacities of such pipelines, based on 
existing rights of access.  The access would be allocated in a fair and equitable manner, and proportional to the production capacity of compan ies, producing crude oil and gas in Kazakhstan.  
                                               
1 Items related to subsurfa ce use rights means participating intere sts (shareholdings) in a legal entity 
holding the subsurface use right, as well as in a legal entity which may directly and/or indirectly determine, and/or influence on, decisions adopted by such subsurface user if the principal activity of that legal entity is 
related to subsurface use in the Republic of Kazakhstan.   Items related to subsurfa ce use rights also include 
securities evidencing the title to shares or securities  convertible into shares of  a legal entity holding a 
subsurface use right as well as a legal entity who may dire ctly and/or indirectly dete rmine, and/or influence on, 
the decisions adopted by such a subsurface user if the principal activity of such legal entity is related to 
subsurface use in the Republic of Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 26 - 
 
  When applying measures relating to such pipeline transportation, including access to pipelines for 
foreign invested juridical persons of Kazakhstan  producing crude oil and gas in Kazakhstan, the 
Government of Kazakhstan would ensure that the following principles were respected:  (i) fully 
transparent legal and regulatory measures on access and pipeline transportation tariffs; 
(ii) non-discrimination with respect to the origin of crude oil and gas production within the territory of Kazakhstan and the destination; and (iii) application of non-discriminatory transportation tariffs 
with respect to foreign and domestic investors.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
74. The representative of Kazakhstan added that, according to Article 193-1 of the Civil Code, 
the sale/purchase of shares and any alienation of objects of strategic importance were subject to 
approval and authorisation by the Government.  The sectors of strategic importance were defined 
in Article 193-1 of the Civil Code.  The list of ob jects of strategic importance was approved by 
Resolution of the Government. 
75. A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that the list of objects of strategic importance was 
currently approved and whether it was publicly available and regularly updated.  
The representative of Kazakhstan responded that the list of strategic objects transferred into the 
authorised capital of and (or) owned by national holdings and (or) national companies or their 
affiliates, as well as other legal entities with State participation, and strategic objects owned by 
legal entities non-affiliated to the State, as well as by individuals was approved by the Resolution 
of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan  No. 651 of 30 June 2008.  The list was regularly 
updated (as last amended on 21 July 2011) and pub licly available on the official websites of the 
Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning of the Republic of Kazakhstan (www.minplan.kz) and the 
Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhst an (www.minjust.kz) in both Kazakh and Russian. 
- State Ownership, State-Tradin g Entities and Privatization  
(a) Privatization  
76. The representative of Kazakhstan said that privatization-related issues were regulated by 
Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 (hereinafter – Law No. 413-IV, which had replaced Law No. 2721 "On Privatization" of 23 Dece mber 1995, the Civil Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (General Part) of 27 December 1994, Law No. 415-II "On the Joint Stock Companies" 
of 13 May 2003, Law No. 220-I "On the Limited Liability and Additional Liability Partnerships" of 22 April 1998, and Law No. 461-II "On the Securities Market" of 2 July 2003.  
77. State property consisted of both Republican and communal property.  Republican property 
included the republican budget, the National Fu nd of the Republic of Kazakhstan, property 
allocated to republican State enterprises and republican State-run institutions, property of which 
was in republican ownership, and other property  of the Republic of Kazakhstan, except for 
property at the communal level, i.e., the territorial administrative level.  Communal property 
                                                                                                                                               
2 This applies only to pipelines regulated as natural monopolies within the framework of the Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan "On Natural Monopolies". WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 27 - 
 
  included local budget, property allocated to communal State enterprises and communal State-run 
institutions, property of which was in the communal ownership and other property of the administrative territorial units. 
78. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the National Fund of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was a separate entity from the National Fund Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna".  T h e  N a t i o n a l  F u n d  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t an was established by Decree of the President 
No. 402 of 23 August 2000 with the objective to en sure stable socio-economic development of the 
State through reduction of dependence of the national economy on oil sector and adverse impacts of external factors.  According to Article 21 of  the Budget Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 95-IV of 4 December 2008 (hereinafter - Budget Code), the National Fund fulfilled both saving 
and stabilization functions.  The National Fund represented assets of the State in the form of 
financial assets, and other property, except intangible assets
3, accumulated on the Government's 
account at the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  According to Article 22 of the Budget Code, receipts into the National Fund consisted of the following: 
- direct taxes, collected from organizations of the oil sector (except taxes collected by local 
budgets):  corporate income tax; excess profit tax; mineral extraction tax; export rent tax; bonuses; Kazakhstan's share received under production sharing agreements; and additional payment of subsurface users, op erating activity under production sharing 
agreements;   
- other receipts from operations, conducted by companies of the oil sector (except payments 
collected by local budgets), including payments received as a result of breaching the terms 
of oil contracts; 
- receipts from privatization of State property  in republican ownership engaged in mining 
and processing sectors; and 
- receipts from selling land plots for agricultural purposes. 
79. She further clarified that according to Article 23 of the Budget Code, the National Fund of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan could be used:  
 (i) in the form of the guaran teed transfer from the National Fund into the Republican 
  budget; and 
 (ii) for covering of expenses related to the management by the National Fund and    conducting annual audit. 
Investment revenues from the management by the National Fund proceeded from investments of 
the financial assets of the National Fund into financial instruments, except for intangible assets.   
80. The representative of Kazakhstan said that pursuant to Law No. 413-IV, State property 
could be alienated in the following forms:  (i) privatization via auction, tender, on the stock 
exchange, or by sales of derivatives; (ii) privatization via direct sales; or (iii) other forms of 
alienation without conducting a tender, for instance, transfer of State property as contribution to 
the charter capital of limited liability companies (hereinafter - LLPs) or purchase of shares of 
joint-stock companies (hereinafter – JSCs).  Privatization was the sale of State property to natural 
                                               
3 Intangible assets included goodwill, trade-marks, title and publishing rights, computer software, 
licenses and franchises, copyright, patents and other ri ghts on industrial property, rights on services and 
exploitation, formulae, models, sketches and samples.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 28 - 
 
  persons and non-State juridical persons conducted in accordance with the special procedures 
established by Law No. 413-IV.  She further explained that State property was privatized upon decision of the authorised body on State proper ty or a local executive body – in the case of 
municipal property, except for:  (i) natural monopolies or enterprises with dominant position on 
the respective market, which were privatized based on the decision of the Government; and 
(ii) transfer of State property as a contribution to the charter capital of LLPs or purchase of shares 
of JSCs – which were privatized based on the deci sion of the Government or a local executive body 
– in case of municipal property.  The detailed de scription of the rules and procedures governing 
the privatization process was available to the public from the State Property and Privatization 
Committee at the website:  www.gosreestr.kz.  
81. Concerning the results of privatization, th e representative of Kazakhstan informed 
Members that between 1991-2005, Kazakhstan had held six two-year privatization programmes.  
Three of the programmes had focused on large scale privatization.  The last two programmes had been developed within the framework of the State Property Management and Privatization 
Concept.  During the period from 1991-2012, a total of 45,631 entities, or approximately 85% of 
State property, had been privatized (Annex 3(a)).  Data on State property privatization in various sectors of the economy for 2000-2012 were provided in Annex 3(b).  Data on State enterprises 
and enterprises with State participation were provided in Annexes 3(c), (d) and (e).  As a result of 
the privatization process by 1 January 2013, the total number of existing State enterprises had 
been 5,449.  By 1 January 2013, among the 130 JSCs with State participation, the State owned 
100% of shares in 106 JSCs; from 50 to 100% of th e shares in 8 JSCs; 25 to 50% of shares in 
10 JSCs; and less than 25% of shares in 6 JSCs.  
82. Asked about operations of State-owned and State-controlled enterprises, in the 
agricultural sector and the existence of plans for their privatization, the representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that agricultural production was predominantly privately-owned.  
Major commercial activities, including production, distribution, and food catering were no longer 
under State ownership or control.  State interventi on in the welfare of the agricultural sector was 
conducted through the National Company "Food Cont ract Corporation", the JSCs "KazAgroFinance" 
and "KazAgroProduct", as outlined in sub-section (b) below.   
83. With respect to restrictions in the privatization process, the representative of Kazakhstan 
informed Members that paragraph 3 of Article 94 of Law No. 413-IV determined the category of 
State property that could not be alienated or privatized.  However, this category of property could be transferred as a contribution to the charter capital of a national managing holding, a national 
holding or a national company, a limited liability partnership, or a joint-stock company. 
84. State property not subject to privatization,  was approved by Decree of the President 
No. 422 "On the List of State Property Objects, Not Subject to Privatization" of 28 July 2000.  
The list of State property objects that could not be privatized included land (except for land in private ownership on grounds stipulated by the le gislation of Kazakhstan), subsurface and water 
resources, flora and fauna; natural environmental zones under special protection; military WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 29 - 
 
  organizations and property essential for national security; main-line railroads and highways, as 
well as accompanying engineering structures, as part of the State international routes network or designed for defence purposes; navigable waterways, as well as lighthouses, navigation devices 
and seamarks that ensured safety and regulated navigation; mainline oil and gas pipelines, and 
interregional electricity networks of 220, 500kW and 1,150kW voltage; water reservoirs with hydraulic facilities, water control pivots, dams and water barrages; first-aid medical organizations 
operating in rural areas, specialised medical centres (maternity welfare, radiological medicine, 
oncology, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and STD centres, blood banks, and mental asylums), organizations and centres acting as the sole provider of medical services in a given area; social 
protection services, children's homes, orphanages , nursing homes, hospitals and health resorts for 
the disabled, war veterans, children, and the elderly; secondary schools; and historic and cultural 
sites protected by the State.  
85. Asked about "strategic entities", the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
Kazakhstan's legislation provided a definition of the term "strategic object", which according to 
Article 193-1 of the Civil Code, was a property of social and economic importance for the 
sustainable development of Kazakhstan's society, the ownership, use or disposal of which would affect the national security interests of Kazakhstan.  Strategic objects consisted of main-line 
railroad networks; main-line oil pipelines; main-line gas pipelines; national electric network; 
main-line communication lines; national postal network; international airports; international sea 
ports; air navigation devices of the air traffic control system; devices and navigation signs 
regulating and ensuring the safety of ships; enti ties using nuclear energy; space industry entities; 
water facilities; public roads; shares (common stocks, ordinary shares) in juridical persons, which 
owned strategic objects; shares (common stocks, ordinary shares) owned by physical and juridical 
persons, which could directly or indirectly determine decisions or influence decisions of juridical persons which owned strategic objects.  Strategic objects could be either in State or private 
ownership.  Strategic objects could be encumbered by third party rights or disposed/sold only on 
the basis of the decision of the Government.  The Government of Kazakhstan had the priority right 
to purchase a strategic object at the market price, in case the owner intended to sell such an 
object.  Strategic objects were enumerated in Resolution of the Government No. 651 of 30 June 2008.   
86. Concerning the participation of foreign persons in the privatization process, she said that in 
accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 188 of Law No. 413-IV, restrictions applied with respect to 
the sale of strategic objects to foreigners and stateless persons, juridical persons with non-resident 
participation and their affiliated persons.  Such restrictions applied in a limited number of sectors 
of Kazakhstan's economy and were described in the section "Investment Regime".  
87. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the readiness of Kazakhstan to ensure the 
transparency of its privatization process.  Kazakhstan would provide annual reports to WTO Members (along the lines of the information provided to the Working Party) on developments WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 30 - 
 
  in its privatization process for as long as the process continued.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment.]   
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Enterprises, Enterprises with Special and 
Exclusive Privileges 
88. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that State property in Kazakhstan included the 
property of State enterprises and State-owned shar es (rights of participation) in JSCs and LLPs 
with State participation.  State enterprises and mechanisms for their management by the State 
were regulated by the Civil Code, Law No. 413-IV  and Law No. 527-IV "On National Security" of 
6 January 2012.   
89. According to paragraph 5 of Article 8 of Law No. 413-IV, the State could establish the 
following juridical persons:  (i) State enterprises; and (ii) JSCs and LLPs with State participation.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that State enterprises were considered as 
State-owned, while JSCs/LLPs with majority (i.e . 50% or more) State ownership were considered 
as State-controlled enterprises.  State enterprises were defined by Law No. 413-IV as enterprises established by the Government or local executiv e bodies to render State services with the 
objective to address the social and economic need s of the society and the State.  The State was 
responsible for the liabilities of State enterprises
4 and had a right to dispose their property.  
The property assigned to State enterprises entirely belonged to the State, which was indivisible, 
e.g. could not be distributed among employees of State enterprises or alienated by them.  State enterprises were prohibited to conclude transactions not related to the subject or purpose of 
their activity, assigned by the Government or loca l executive bodies.  Annex [22] describes the list 
of spheres where State enterprises could be established.  When State enterprises were engaged in commercial activity, the sales of produced good s and services were performed independently, 
except for transactions aimed at disposing the property, where the approval of the competent 
authority was required by law.  This requirement resulted from the need to preserve the property 
of the owner (the State) and constituted the di fference between State enterprises and other types 
of juridical persons with State participation.   
90. The representative of Kazakhstan added that th e legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
did not provide for the possibility for the Govern ment to exercise special control or special 
management of the activity of JSCs and LLPs with State participation, whose shares in full or in part were owned by the State.  JSCs and LLPs were governed by the provisions of the Law 
"On Joint Stock Companies", the Law "On Limited and Additional Liability Partnerships", Law 
No. 413-IV and the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's 
legislation, the JSCs and LLPs with State participation were not State enterprises due to the 
following reasons:  (i) the property of JSCs and LLPs did not belong to the State; (ii) the Government did not have a right to dispose their property; and (iii) the degree of control over 
                                               
4 In cases of bankruptcy resulted from actions of the founder, authoris ed State body, or local executive 
body, and insufficiency of financial resources in cases of liquidation.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 31 - 
 
  operations of the JSCs and LLPs was limited to competence of the Government to act as a 
shareholder or participant. 
91. The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that according to Article 171 of Law 
No. 413-IV, depending on the proportion of State's shares/rights of participation, the JSCs and 
LLPs with State participation were divided into two categories:  (i) State-controlled JSCs and LLPs, in the charter capital of which the State owned controlling portfolio of shares (rights of 
participation), i.e. more than 50% of the voting shares (rights of participation); and (ii) JSCs and 
LLPs with non-dominant share of participation of the State.  
92. The representative of Kazakhstan further added that according to Law No. 413-IV, 
State-controlled JSCs could be established in the following forms:  (i) national managing holding; 
(ii) national holding; and (iii) national company.  
93. A national managing holding was a JSC, the founder and sole shareholder of which was the 
Government.  National managing holdings were established for effective management of shares (rights of participation in charter capital) of national development institutions, national companies 
and other juridical persons.  There were two national managing holdings in Kazakhstan:  the 
National Welfare Fund "Samruk Kazyna" and the National Managing Holding "KazAgro".  
94. A national holding was a joint stock company, the founder and sole shareholder of which 
was the Government, established for effective management of shares of national companies and 
other JSCs, and rights of participation in the charter capital of LLPs.  There were two national 
holdings in Kazakhstan: the National Info-Communication Holding "Zerde", the National 
Scientific-Technological Holding "Parasat"
5. 
95. A national company was a JSC, established by the decision of the Government or local 
executive bodies, controlling portfolio of shares  of which belonged to the State, a national 
managing holding, or a national holding, and which operated in spheres, that formed the core of the national economy, or established for prom oting development of the economy of regions 
(socio-entrepreneurial corporations). The national companies, controlling shares (50% and more) 
of which belonged to national managing holdings and national holdings, were not considered as 
State-controlled JSCs.  The national companies, controlling shares of which did not belong to 
national managing holdings or national holdings, were considered as State-controlled.  
96. With respect to national managing holdings, national holdings, and national companies
6 
and other State-controlled JSCs and LLPs, the Go vernment exercised the following competences 
(Article 11 of the Law No. 413-IV):  
                                               
5 The "National Medical Holding" had been removed from the list of national holdings by Government 
Resolution No. 336 of 11 April 2013, and had been transf erred to the autonomous educational organization 
"Nazarbayev University".   
6 Except for the national companies which be longed to the national managing holdings 
"Samruk-Kazyna" and "KazAgro", and nation al holdings "Zerde" and "Parasat". WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 32 - 
 
  - took decisions on the establishment, reorganiza tion, change of the title and liquidation of a 
company; 
- determined the procedure for elaboration,  approval, monitoring and evaluation of 
development strategies and plans; and 
- determined the procedure for reporting on im plementation of development strategies and 
plans.  
In reply to a question, the representative of Kazakhstan also clarified that the National Managing 
Holding "KazAgro", the National Info-Communication Holding "Zerde", the National 
Scientific-Technological Holding "Parasat" and State-controlled national companies conducted 
procurement of goods and services in accordan ce with their own Procurement Rules, which 
stipulated local content requirements by application of conditional price discounts in total of up to 
20% for locally produced goods and services in tender procurements.   
97. The representative of Kazakhstan added that, Article 177 of Law No. 413-IV and Article 13 
of the Law "On Joint Stock Companies" provided for the possibility of introduction of a golden 
share by the decision of the shareholders.  The golden share could be owned by the Government 
or by a private shareholder.  At present, the Go vernment did not own any such share.  She further 
clarified that a "golden share" did not participate in the formation of the charter capital and earned 
no dividends.  The owner of a "golden share" had the veto right with regard to decisions of the 
general shareholder meetings, the Board of Dire ctors and the executive body on the issues, 
determined by the Charter of the company.   The veto right was non-transferrable. 
98. The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that the Government's role in the 
decision-making process and activities of State enterprises, as well as JSCs/LLPs with State 
participation was strictly defined by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The Constitution 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan stipulated equal pr otection of both private and State property and 
ensured that the principle of non-discrimination would be observed regarding the treatment of 
companies and enterprises of different forms of prop erty rights.  The Constitution also provided for 
the regulation and restriction of monopolistic activity.  In her view, this was a sound guarantee 
that State enterprises and JSCs/LLPs with State participation would not act in a manner that would 
distort the competitive environment.   
99. In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan presented statistical data on the participation 
of State enterprises in the economy (Annex 3(f)), which demonstrated that the share of State property, including State enterprises in the total Gross Value Added
7 accounted for 9.6% in 2011.  
In particular, the share of State property, including State enterprises in agriculture, forestry and 
fishery in 2011 accounted for 6.8% of the Gross Valu e Added.  The share of services produced by 
State enterprises in 2011 accounted for 14.8% in Gross Value Added (see Annex 3(g)).   
100.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to enumerate all enterprises that were State-owned or 
controlled and all enterprises that enjoyed special privileges, based on an agreed standard, in 
                                               
7 Gross Value Added - is the difference between output  of goods and services (e.g. sales revenue) and 
intermediary consumption (e.g. cost of goods and services used in production).  Gross Value Added does not include net taxes, which are included into the Gross Domestic Product. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 33 - 
 
  respect to Kazakhstan's energy sector, and to provide detailed descriptions of all such enterprises 
in the energy sector.  This Member also requested Kazakhstan to provide a more detailed description of "KazMunaiGaz" and the so-called "natural monopolies" that operated pipelines.  
101.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that there were no enterprises with special 
privileges in the energy sector of Kazakhstan with in the meaning of Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  
For example, the National Company "KazMunaiGaz" accounted for 11% of the total production of 
the oil and gas sector (according to data in 2010) .  "KazMunaiGaz" was engaged in the extraction, 
transportation and processing of oil and natural gas.  The company's main activities included 
exploration and survey work, development of oil, gas and gas condensate deposits; production and 
transportation of oil and natural gas; primary processing of oil and gas, sales of hydrocarbons and 
processed products.  In the oil transportation sector, the JSC "KazTransOil", a subsidiary of 
"KazMunaiGaz", operated the Uzen – Atyrau (Kazakhstan) – Samara (Russia) oil pipeline.  
This part of the activity was regulated by the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies.  
With respect to gas transportation, the principal transporter of natural gas by main-line pipelines 
was Intergas Central Asia, a subsidiary of "KazMunaiGaz".  It provided domestic transportation, 
international transit, and export transportation services.  Transportation services rendered to domestic consumers were regulated by the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies.  
Tariffs for export routes and transit of natural gas by pipelines were not subject to State 
regulation.   
102.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that a number of companies with 50% or 
greater State participation in equity had been includ ed in the portfolio of the National Welfare Fund 
"Samruk-Kazyna", a national managing holding, established in the form of the JSC with 100% 
participation of the State.  The Fund had been established with the objective to improve corporate 
governance in national companies and enhance the competitiveness of the national economy.  Independent ownership also allowed companies to operate more as commercial entities and 
generate their own profits.  The sole founder and shareholder of the Fund was the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, which managed the Fund exclusively through fulfilling the 
competences of the shareholder and through represen tation in the Board of Directors.  The Prime 
Minister of Kazakhstan ex officio chaired the Boar d of Directors.  The Fund interacted with its 
companies through exercising functions of the shareh older and its representation in their Boards of 
Directors. 
103.  In reply to the request of a Member for further clarifications on the role of the 
Government, the representative of Kazakhstan stat ed that according to Article 7 of Law No. 550-IV 
"On the National Welfare Fund" of 1 February 2012, exclusive competences of the Government, as 
the sole shareholder of the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", were stipulated as the 
following:  
1) Approval and introduction of amendments  and addenda to the Charter of the Fund; 
2) Approval of the Annual Financial Statement of the Fund; 3) Approval of the Development Strate gy of the Fund and introduction of 
amendments and addenda to the Strategy; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 34 - 
 
  4) Decision-making on voluntary reorganization and liquidation of the Fund; 
5) Decision-making on increase of number of authorised shares of the Fund or 
changing the type of unallocated authorised shares of the Fund; 
6) Determination of the term of office of the Board of Directors of the Fund, election 
of its members and early termination of their office; 
7) Sales of shares of the daughter companie s, determined by the sole shareholder of 
the Fund, and transfer of these shares into trust management; 
8) Decision-making on liquidation, reorganization of daughter companies, determined 
by the sole shareholder of the Fund; 
9) Appointment and early termination of office of the Chairman of the Board; 
10) Distribution of net income for the reporting financial year, payment of dividends on 
ordinary shares and approval of the amount  of dividends per one ordinary share of 
the Fund; 
11) Decision-making on non-payment of dividends on ordinary shares in cases, 
stipulated by the Law "On Joint Stock Companies"; 
12) Approval of the dividend Policy of the Fund; 13) Approval of the decision of the Board of Directors of the Fund, on the price, 
quality, structure of placement of shares of companies within the Fund, offered on 
the stock market for the purposes of implementing a decision of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan;    
14) Decision-making on the purchase and sale s of shares of banks and transfer thereof 
to trust management; 
15) Approval and introduction of amendments  into the Code of Corporate Governance; 
and 
16) Other issues according to the Law "On the National Welfare Fund" and (or) Charter 
of the Fund.  
104.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  the selection of the Board of Directors was 
performed on the basis of the Law "On Joint Stock Companies" and the Law "On the National 
Welfare Fund".  In accordance with Article 35 of the Law "On Joint Stock Companies", the 
Government, as a single shareholder, had an exclusive competence to select members of the Board of Directors.  Pursuant to Article 8 of the Law "On the National Welfare Fund", the Board of 
Directors consisted of the Chairperson and members elected by the single shareholder.  The Board 
of Directors was formed from the Cabinet me mbers, CEO, independent directors and other 
persons.  Number of the Directors was defined by the Charter of the Fund provided that the 
number of independent directors was not less than two fifths of the total number of the Board of Directors. The criteria and procedure for selecting independent directors were set in Article 1 of the 
Law "On Joint Stock Companies" and Rules for the Election of Independent Directors.  
In particular, independent directors could not be: 
- affiliated with the given JSC, and affiliated  with the affiliated persons of the given JSC 
 within the last three years prior to election; 
- in subordination with an executive of the give n JSC or organizations - affiliated persons of 
 the given JSC  within the last three years prior to election; - a civil servant; 
- a representative of the shareholder on the m eetings of the bodies of the given JSC within 
 the last three years prior to election; and - did not participate as an auditor in auditing of the given JSC within the last three years  prior to election. 
105.  Strategic decisions of the Fund's companies were made from the perspective of increasing 
their long-term value and effective management of assets.  The Government did not interfere into the day-to-day activities of the Fund.  The Government was not accountable for liabilities of 
companies under the "Samruk Kazyna" and was not authorised to dispose their property.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 35 - 
 
  The companies under the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" were neither "State 
enterprises", nor companies with State participation since their shareholder was the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", and not the Gove rnment of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
106.  Based on data provided by the Statistics Agen cy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in 2011 
the "Samruk-Kazyna" accounted for 7.2% of Kazakhstan's GDP.  There were no immediate plans for the privatization of the "Samruk-Kazyna"'s holdings.  She added that the majority of the Fund's 
portfolio consisting of key national companies operating in oil extraction, telecommunication, 
mining, railway, electric power transmission and the defence industry, included:  "KazMunaiGaz", 
"Kazakhtelecom", "Kazakhstan Temir Zholy", "KEG OC" and "Kazpost", "Samruk-Energo", National 
Atomic Company "Kazatomprom", "Kazakhstan Engineering", "Air Astana", and "Samruk-Kazyna 
Pharmacia".  Other holdings of the "Samruk-Kazy na" were represented by companies operating in 
the financial sector, transportation and the chemical industry.  For the most part, the 
"Samruk-Kazyna" companies were classified as "strategic objects" as they operated assets indicated in paragraph [85].  Services provided by national companies in the spheres classified as 
natural monopolies were regulated in accordance  with Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and 
Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998 (for more detail ed information please see section on "Pricing 
Policies").   
107.  The National Company "Kazakhtelecom" was an operator of fixed-line telephony services, 
which rendered traffic transit services providing connection between operating networks of 
countries bordering Kazakhstan.  The National Company "Kazpost" rendered public postal services, 
including, delivery, distribution and mailing of pe riodicals, cash transactions in settlements, and 
mailing of registered letters within the geogra phical boundaries of Kazakhstan.  The National 
Company "Kazakhstan Temir Zholy" rendered main railway network services, cargo transportation 
services in domestic and import-export routes, and passenger transportation services.  The National Company "KEGOC" rendered electric power transmission services via the national 
electricity grid; technical traffic control services; regulation and reservation of electric power; and 
management of electric power production-consumption balance.  
108.  The JSC "Samruk-Energo" operated in the following spheres: production of electric and 
heating energy; transmission and distribution of electric energy and coal mining; reconstruction, 
extension and construction of energy-related  facilities.  The National Atomic Company 
"KazAtomProm" was engaged in the following ac tivities:  geological exploration; uranium 
extraction; production of nuclear fuel cycle products; construction of reactors, nuclear power plants, nonferrous metals industry; and building of constructional materials.  The National 
Company "Kazakhstan Engineering" was a holding company managing enterprises related to 
production of goods and services for national defence and law-enforcement purposes.  The JSC 
"Air Astana" was an airline company, which rendered air transportation services in international 
and local directions.  The LLP "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" was a single distributor of pharmaceuticals within the framework of the Government's programme providing guaranteed free 
medical treatment to the population. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 36 - 
 
  109.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that in 2011 Government Resolution No. 1027 of 
8 September 2011 approved the Programme on sales of shares of daughter and affiliated companies of the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" on the stock market – the "Halyk IPO".  
Subsequently, the Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" approved the programme on the sales of minority 
shares of the JSC "KazTransOil" on the stock market.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to provide a description of "KazTransOil" itself, information on  percentage of shares authorised for sales and 
on quantity of shares that had been sold, and implications of the sales in terms of management 
control.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the JSC "KazTransOil" was a subsidiary of the National Company "KazMunaiGaz", which tran sported crude oil and oil products through the 
main pipelines.  The shares of "KazTransOil" were  offered to citizens of Kazakhstan and pension 
funds of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Citizens of  Kazakhstan, owning the shares, would be able to 
participate in the management of the company by voting in the general shareholder meetings and 
would be entitled to receive dividends paid from  the net income of the company.  Overall, 10% 
minus one share of the authorised common shares of the "KazTransOil" had been placed on the 
stock market and approximately 80% of these shares  had been sold to more than 34,000 citizens 
of Kazakhstan.   
110.  The "Samruk-Kazyna" managed its subsidiaries in accordance with Law No. 415-II 
"On Joint Stock Companies".  Procurement of goods and services by the Fund and organizations, in 
which the Fund directly or indirectly owned 50 % or more of the voting shares (rights of 
participation), was conducted in accordance with the Procurement Rules, approved by the Board of 
Directors of the Fund on 26 May 2012.  In reply to a Member's question as to whether the requirement for local content in procurement for the "Samruk-Kazyna" was initiated with the 
May 2012 Procurement Rules, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that initially the local 
content requirements had been introduced by the Procurement Rules approved by the Decision of 
the Board of Directors of 18 November 2009 in accordance with the previous Law "On the National 
Welfare Fund" of 13 February 2009.  The curren tly applied Procurement Rules were approved in 
accordance with the new Law "On the National Welfare Fund" of 1 February 2012.  
The Procurement Rules did not apply to companies, in which the Fund's share ownership (rights of 
participation) was less than 50%.  Tender was the main method applied for the procurement of goods and services.  The Rules stipulated criteria for the evaluation of bids and provided for the 
application of conditional price discount in total of up to 20% for locally produced goods and 
services.  
111.  Asked to describe the structure of the local content requirements in procurement contracts 
in terms of scope and duration, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the procurement 
contracts, concluded by the "Samruk-Kazyna" companies, had to contain the local content 
provisions, which were indicated by a supplier in his/her tender offer or price quotation.  The Fund 
"Samruk-Kazyna" signed a contract with a supplier,  who accepted the lowest conditional price, as 
a result of application of conditional price discounts, provided that the technical requirements of 
tender documentation had been met.  Thus, there were several factors affecting tender results, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 37 - 
 
  such as conformity with technical requirements, proposed price for goods and services, and the 
share of local content in goods or services. 
112.  A Member requested to clarify which firms were engaged in commercial activities and 
distinguish them from those that were conducting business for the Government.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that al l the "Samruk-Kazyna" subsidiaries were engaged 
in commercial activities, except for the JSC "Kazakhstan Engineering" and the LLP 
"Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia".  The JSC "Kazakhstan Engineering" produced goods for the national 
defence purposes.  The LLP "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" conducted procurement of pharmaceuticals, medical equipment and materials which were distributed to public hospitals and 
polyclinics for provision of guaranteed free medical treatment to the population by the State.   
113.  Some Members noted that in practical, if not in legal, terms, many of the enterprises in 
Kazakhstan appeared to enjoy exclusive or spec ial privileges.  These Members of the Working 
Party requested Kazakhstan to submit a draft notification prepared in conformity with the provisions of Article XVII of the GATT 1994 and sought a strong commitment from Kazakhstan that 
State-enterprises including JSCs/LLPs with State participation, engaged in commercial activities 
operated in compliance with WTO provisions, including on a commercial basis.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan had acknowledged the existence of about 6,000 State-owned enterprises and 
JSCs and LLPs with State participation in their ownership, which included a number of 
State-controlled enterprises, some of them involved in import-export operations, and enquired 
whether a number of these enterprises, including JSCs and LLPs with State participation, would 
qualify as State-trading enterprises under the crit eria set-out in Article XVII of the GATT 1994, 
whether or not "funded by the national budget" or operating as monopolies.  This Member pointed 
out that the substantive provisions of Arti cle XVII of the GATT 1994 were applicable to 
State-controlled enterprises, such as JSCs and LLPs with State participation in their ownership even without special or exclusive privileges that made them eligible for notification, and that the 
obligations of this provision also applied to all purchases and sales "involving either import or 
export".  This Member requested Kazakhstan to submit a revised notification on State-trading 
enterprises. 
114.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that there were only three companies, 
subsidiaries of the National Managing Holding "KazAgro", that were involved in import and export 
operations with the use of budget funding – the National Company "Food Contract Corporation", 
the JSC "KazAgroProduct" (previously known as "Mal Onimderi Korporatsiyasy") and the JSC "KazAgroFinance".  However, the representative of Kazakhstan asserted that these enterprises did 
not fall under notification obligations of the Un derstanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994 as 
they did not enjoy either exclusive nor special rights with respect to the importation or exportation 
of goods.   
115.  The National Company "Food Contract Corporation" had been established to ensure the 
country's food security by maintaining and renewing the State grain reserve through the State 
grain resource.  The "Food Contract Corporation", as an agent of the Government, had an WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 38 - 
 
  exclusive right to implement the budget programm e on procurement, storage and transportation 
of State grain resources (comprising of State grain reserve and grain products), as well as the stocks for market interventions.  The Governme nt approved the rules governing purchases for 
State grain resources and annually established the volumes and prices for such purchases.  
The Government had the right to use State resources as food aid to foreign countries through the "Food Contract Corporation".  The "Food Contra ct Corporation" conducted its foreign trade 
operations in competition with private traders an d subject to market prices.  The total share of 
procurement of the "Food Contract Corporation" constituted 16.8% of the total volume of grain produced in Kazakhstan.   
116.  The JSC "KazAgroProduct" had been established in 2001 with the objective to support 
domestic producers of livestock products.  The company was engaged in (i) procurement, storage, 
processing and the sale of livestock, raw materials and livestock products in the domestic market 
and for export; (ii) importation of agricultural and livestock products for further processing and sale; and (iii) purchase (including importation) of specialised transport, technological equipment 
for processing and storage of agricultural and livestock products for the company's needs or for 
sale.  The company conducted import and export operations alongside private companies in a competitive environment and its share was less than 1% of the total volume of meat produced in 
Kazakhstan.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
"KazAgroProduct" conducted its procurement of goods and services in accordance with the 
Procurement Rules approved by the Decision of the Board of Directors of 18 April 2011.  
The Procurement Rules provided for application of a conditional price discount in total of up to 20% for locally produced goods and services in tender procurements.  Procurements exceeding 
4,000 monthly calculation indices
8 should be conducted via tender.  She further added that 
since 2007 there were no purchases of speciali zed transport and technological equipment for 
processing and storing of agricultural and livesto ck products.  Therefore, there were no local 
content requirements applied for those particular types of purchases. 
117.  The JSC "KazAgroFinance" was established to implement the State policy of creating a 
competitive and export-oriented agricultural sector through rendering financial services and 
provision of agricultural machinery and equipment under financial leasing schemes.  "KazAgroFinance" purchased agricultural machinery in the domestic and international markets for 
subsequent leasing to farmers.  In the sphere of  foreign economic activity, "KazAgroFinance" was 
engaged in importation of agricultural machinery, equipment, and animals, and had no monopoly or any other exclusive rights or privileges in th is sphere.  The Government did not regulate the 
prices, the volume or the types of agricultural machinery or equipment purchased by the company.  
All such decisions were made by "KazAgroFinance" in accordance with available financial resources 
and based on applications from agricultural producers with the specification of the type of 
machinery they planned to lease from "KazAgroFinance".  The Government determined only the interest rates in leasing schemes and other financial support programmes of the "KazAgroFinance" 
                                               
8 One monthly calculation index (MCI) is equal to  1,731 tenge.  4,000 MCIs are equal to around 
US$46,160. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 39 - 
 
  funded from the State budget, and did not regulate the interest rates for its financing activities 
funded from other sources.  In reply to a question, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that the "KazAgroFinance" conducted its procuremen t of goods and services in accordance with the 
Procurement Rules approved by the Decision of the Board of Directors of 4 April 2011.  
The Procurement Rules provided for application of a conditional price discount in total of up to 20% for locally produced goods and services in tender procurements. However, procurement of 
agricultural machinery and equipment for subsequent leasing to agricultural producers was 
conducted based on applications from farmers.  Therefore, conditional price discounts foreseen for tender procurements were not applied to the purchases of agricultural machinery and equipment 
for subsequent leasing to agricultural producers. 
118.  In reply to the question from a Member regarding the establishment of State monopolies in 
the field of importation or exportation of goods, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
currently Kazakhstan did not maintain and was not envisaging establishment of State monopolies for importation or exportation of goods, except for exports of sturgeon roe and other sturgeon 
products.  According to Article 11-1 of Law No. 593 "On Protection, Reproduction and Use of 
Fauna" of 9 July 2004, exports of sturgeon roe and ot her sturgeon products, as well as the activity 
on catching of Acipenseridae  fish species and their procurement and processing, was referred to 
the sphere of State monopolies.  At the moment, the Government was in the process of 
establishing a State enterprise in the given sphe re.  When established, Kazakhstan was planning 
to notify the enterprise as provided for in the Understanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  
119.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan had State-owned and 
State-controlled enterprises that operated in the commercial sphere.  She further confirmed that 
from the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, such enterprises, when engaged in 
commercial activity, would make purchases, which were not intended for governmental use, and 
sales in international trade in a manner consistent with applicable provisions of the 
WTO Agreement.  She confirmed in particular, that such enterprises would make such purchases 
and sales in accordance with commercial considerations, including price, quality, availability, 
marketability, and transportation, and would affo rd enterprises of other WTO Members adequate 
opportunity in conformity with customary business practice, to compete for participation in such purchases or sales.  She also confirmed that within the scope of the services commitments of 
Kazakhstan, including the limitations, set-out in its Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services, 
the rights and obligations of Kazakhstan under  the GATS, and the regulatory measures of 
Kazakhstan covered by the WTO Agreement, includ ing pricing regulations, and without prejudice 
to such commitments, rights, obligations, and measures that are consistent with these 
commitments, rights and obligations, Kazakhstan would ensure that such enterprises would act in 
accordance with the provisions set-out in this paragraph.  She also confirmed that, upon 
accession, Kazakhstan would notify enterprises falling within the scope of the Understanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 40 - 
 
  - Pricing Policies  
120.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that within the framework of the Single Economic 
Space (SES), Kazakhstan jointly with the Republic  of Belarus and the Russian Federation signed 
the Agreement on Common Principles and Rules of Regulation of Activities of Natural Monopolies 
on 9 December 2010, which provided for basic princi ples and rules of regulation of activities of 
natural monopolies.  The Agreement, enacted as of 1 January 2012, was aimed at ensuring 
balance of interests of consumers and natural monopolies, effectiveness of functioning and 
development of natural monopolies, and harmonization of national legislations in this sphere.  In particular, the Agreement provided for non-discriminatory access to services rendered by 
natural monopolies of a SES Party to consumers from the other SES Parties.  Regulation of tariffs 
was based on the principle of separate accounting of  costs related to services provided by natural 
monopolies. 
121.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and 
Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998 (hereinafter  – Law No. 272-I) had established the legal 
framework for State regulation in the sphere of natural monopolies and regulated markets, 
including price setting by natural monopolies and regulated market participants.  The Law aimed at protecting the interests of consumers, natural monopolies and regulated markets, as well as at 
balancing consumer interests vis-à-vis  the interests of natural monopolies.  A natural monopoly 
was deemed to exist in a market in which creati on of a competitive environment for the provision 
of a particular type of services (goods, works) was not possible or economically viable, due to the 
technological characteristics of the production process and supply of services (goods, works).  
State regulation was implemented through establishing (i) tariff rates (prices, fee rates); (ii) tariff 
estimates; (iii) temporary compensatory tariffs; (i v) temporary decreasing coefficients; (v) special 
order for cost formation; (vi) separate calculat ion of revenue, expenditures and used assets for 
each type of regulated activity; and (vii) coordi nation of accounting policies.  The coverage of 
Law No. 272-I extended to both foreign and domestic juridical persons (their branches and 
representative offices), individual entrepreneurs, public bodies and natural persons in Kazakhstan.  
The provisions of Law No. 272-I, however, did not extend to individual entrepreneurs and juridical 
persons, engaged in activities classified as natural monopolies related to the construction and 
operation of facilities used for their own needs.  She added that Order of the Agency on Regulation 
of Natural Monopolies No. 91-OD of 19 March 20 05 had approved the "Rules on Increase or 
Decrease of Tariffs (Prices, Rates and Fees) or the Maximum Levels for Rendered Services (Goods, 
Works) Subject to Regulation" (hereinafter – "Rules on Tariffs").  Pursuant to Law No. 272-I and 
the Rules on Tariffs, the maximum level at which tariffs were set, as well as any tariff rate 
changes, had to cover the production cost of serv ices rendered and take into account the profit 
margin required for effective operation.  In addition, many of these controls regulated the price of 
certain goods (e.g., energy) supplied to househol ds and other non-commercial users, and were 
also based on domestic social policy considerations.  The list of services regulated by the State as 
natural monopolies is contained in Annex 4.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 41 - 
 
  122.  A regulated market participant set a ceiling price for its goods (works, services) based on 
production and marketing costs, as well as profit ma rgins.  The ceiling price had to be approved by 
the authorised body as being reasonable, based on the findings of a price expertise.  A regulated 
market participant had the right to decrease and increase the price for produced (sold) goods 
(works, services) within the ceiling price level.   
123.  She added that Resolution No. 1005 of 30 Se ptember 2010 had approved the "Programme 
on the Tariff Policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014", which was aimed at establishing 
an effective and balanced regulation system in the sphere of natural monopolies, which encouraged investments in modernization and technological upgrades, quality improvements, and 
the enhancement of competitiveness of the infrastr uctural sectors.  She added that the legislation 
did not prevent foreign and domestic enterprises from competing in sectors dominated by "natural 
monopolies".  In response to a specific question, she confirmed that "natural monopoly" was a 
legal term.  
124.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that all natural monopolies were subject to a 
uniform set of requirements and applied prices (t ariffs) that were approved by the Agency on 
Regulation of Natural Monopolies.  When considering applications, the Agency conducted a financial and, if necessary, technical evaluations of the proposed increases, while taking into 
account the operations of other similar enterprises.  The tariffs approved by the Agency had to 
cover costs required to provide the regulated services and take into account an adequate level of 
profits necessary to ensure the company's effici ent operation.  Based on the outcome of the 
review, the Agency developed a preliminary decision, which was discussed at public hearings (consultation process).  The Agency was required to hold public hearings when reviewing 
applications of natural monopolies for approval of tariffs ceiling levels.  Public hearings involved 
members of local legislative branches, representatives from Government agencies, consumers and their public associations, the media, independen t experts, as well as the applicant (natural 
monopoly).  Relevant information (e.g. Agency decisions) was published regularly in the media 
and was available from www.regulator.kz or the ma gazine "Regulator".  Asked to provide the list 
of natural monopolies, she referred to the Agency website – www.regulator.kz. 
125.  She further noted that the adoption of the Measures on Improvement of the Tariff Policy 
for Natural Monopolies for the period 2008-2010 had demonstrated the Government's effort to 
ensure the sustainable operation of natural mono polies.  Measures were aimed at improving the 
legal and regulatory framework, and the methodology for establishing tariffs, including the introduction of forward-looking methods.   
126.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that th e production of electric power, natural gas 
and gas condensate, as well as other forms of energy, were not regulated as a natural monopoly.  
She added that the Law "On Amendments and Addenda into Legislative Acts on Natural 
Monopolies" of 5 July 2006 had introduced the concep t of "strategic goods" that included:  coal, 
gas, mazut, diesel fuel, and electric power used by natural monopolies.  The provisions of the Law 
required that a natural monopoly (consumer) had to purchase those strategic goods directly from WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 42 - 
 
  producers or direct importers, except in cases where supply shortages existed in a particular 
market.  This requirement had been introduced as  a result of the fact that the fuel cost had 
reached 70% of the expenses of natural monopolies  due to the large number of intermediaries in 
the supply chain from producer to natural monopoly (consumer).  In reply to a question, she noted 
that the term "strategic object" was not related to the term "strategic good".  The term "strategic object" was used for regulation of certain infrastructural assets important for protecting the 
national integrity of Kazakhstan's economy, whereas the term  "strategic good" was used for the 
purpose of tariff regulation of natural monopolies. 
127.  In reply to the question from a Member re garding the regulation of energy prices, 
especially gas prices, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, according to Law No. 532-IV 
"On Gas and Gas Supply" of 9 January 2012, her Government had established maximum wholesale 
prices for liquefied petroleum gas on the domestic market, based on the proposal of the Ministry of 
Oil and Gas.  In accordance with Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998, retail prices for oil products and gas charged by market participants with dominant or 
monopolistic position on the relevant market we re regulated by the Agency on Regulation of 
Natural Monopolies.  Companies with dominant or monopolistic position submitted to the Agency notification on the proposed price increases for oil products and gas, along with the relevant 
justification materials.  The proposed price was subject to the approval by the Agency based on 
the results of the price expertise conducted in accordance with Article 7-2 of Law No. 272-I, which 
regulated price setting in regulated markets, as described in paragraph [122] of the Report.  
These measures had been introduced in order to prevent unfair price increases on utility services 
provided for households and stabilize the situation on the domestic market of oil and gas products, 
in particular to curb high inflation in the country.  She added that the Government regulated prices 
of oil products and gas used by households as part of social policy aimed at stabilization of retail 
prices for socially important products. 
128.  Asked whether the Government had an author ity to apply price controls on goods and 
whether such controls existed, the representative  of Kazakhstan replied that, in principle, in 
accordance with Article 9.7 of the Constitutional  Law No. 2688 "On Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 18 December 1995, the Government had the authority to develop and implement the State pricing policy, as well as to set the pr ices of goods and services.  At the moment, the 
Government set prices for the following goods:  (i) minimum retail prices of vodka, special vodka 
and other hard liquors (Law No. 429-I "On State Re gulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl 
Spirit and Alcohol Beverages" of 16 July 1999; Government Resolution No. 1592 "On Establishing 
Minimum Prices for Alcohol Products" of 23 October 1999, as amended in February 2011); 
(ii) minimum retail prices of filter cigarettes of length between 45 and 85 mm, and of length 
between 87.1 and 160 mm (Law No. 439 "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of 
Tobacco Products" of 12 June 2003; Government Resolution No. 260 "On Establishing Minimum Retail Prices of Filter Cigarettes" of 4 April 2007); (iii) maximum retail prices of petroleum 
products (the Law "On State Regulation of Produc tion and Turnover of Certain Types of Petroleum 
Products" of 20 July 2011); and (iv) maximum wholes ale prices of liquefied petroleum gas on the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 43 - 
 
  domestic market (Law No. 532-IV of 9 Janua ry 2012 "On Gas and Gas Supply", Government 
Resolution No. 1272 "On Establishing Maximum Whol esale Price of Liquefied Petroleum Gas on the 
Internal Market" of 8 October 2012).  Price setting applied only to internal sale, and had not been 
applied in a discriminatory manner between domestically-produced and imported products.  
These measures were introduced as part of public health and social stability policies.   
129.  Concerning the provision of electric power supply services, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that Government Resolution No. 190 of 18 February 2004 had approved the 
Concept of Further Development of Market Relations in the Electric Power Industry in the Republic of Kazakhstan.  She added that Law No. 588 "On Power Industry" had been adopted on 
9 July 2004.  In accordance with the provisions of this legislation, electric power supply services 
(on the retail market for electricity) had been transferred to the competitive market where 
electricity suppliers set tariffs for final consumers on the basis of market principles.  Power supply 
companies with a dominant (monopolistic) position had been registered at the Antimonopoly Agency.  Other new developments included use of centralized bidding for electric power 
procurement for sale to retail customers; the separation of heating networks from generation 
plants; and the creation of a level playing field fo r the supply of electric power with the purpose to 
promote competition between national-level electr ic power stations and regional producers of 
electric power.  Transmission and distribution of  electricity by inter-regional networks (via the 
national company "KEGOC") was considered to be an activity within the sphere of natural 
monopolies, and therefore subject to State price re gulation.  The methodology of setting tariffs for 
electric power transmission services had been amen ded to remove the direct dependence of tariffs 
rates on the distance of power transmission.  An energy deficiency and network capacity 
coefficient had instead been introduced.  She noted that the provisions of the new legislation 
allowed for an easy access to the wholesale market for electricity.   
130.  With regard to the regime governing natural gas, a Member enquired whether foreign 
companies in Kazakhstan benefited from the same prices as Kazakhstan's companies, and whether 
prices charged for domestic consumers were the same as for export.  In addition, this Member 
asked Kazakhstan to confirm that prices of energy  products (notably oil and gas) in Kazakhstan 
covered at least all costs of extraction, producti on, transport and marketing of those products, an 
appropriate contribution to fixed costs and financing charges plus a reasonable profit margin, 
sufficient to remunerate current fixed and capital investments associated with those products and 
secure future ones, including maintenance and upgrade of infrastructure and in the exploration and development of new fields done or planned.   
131.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan sa id that, at present, her Government regulated 
the prices of gas, in particular the wholesale domestic prices for liquefied petroleum gas (as 
indicated in paragraph [128]), and retail domestic prices for oil products and gas charged by 
market participants with dominant or monopolistic position on the relevant market (as indicated in paragraph [127]).  Except for these limitations, gas and crude oil produced in and exported from 
Kazakhstan were sold at market-based prices.  Transportation of gas via pipelines for domestic WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 44 - 
 
  consumption and crude oil via main pipelines was subject to regulation as natural monopolies.  
The regulated tariffs for transportation of gas and oil were based on a "cost plus reasonable profit" principle.  Tariffs for transportation of gas for export via pipelines were not regulated by the 
Government.   
132.  With regard to the regime governing oil, some Members requested more information on 
the natural monopolies operating in the oil (and ga s) pipeline industry and on the procedures set 
by natural monopolies to access oil pipelines.  These Members enquired what criteria were used to 
provide access to pipelines and whether any form of guidance was provided by the Government with respect to the provision of access.   
133.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the procedure for providing consumers with 
equal access to regulated services (goods, works) of natural monopolies was approved by 
"the Rules For Granting Equal Access to Regulated Services (Goods, Works) in Oil and (or) Oil 
Products Transportation Via Main Pipelines" (Order of the Chairman of the Agency on Regulation of 
Natural Monopolies No. 107 of 19 January 2005).  At the moment, Kazakhstan's oil was exported 
via three pipelines:  (i) "Uzen – Atyrau (Kazakhstan) – Samara (Russia)" owned by "KazTransOil"; 
(ii) "Tengiz-Novorossiysk" owned by th e Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC); and 
(iii) "Kenkiyak-Alashangkou", owned by the "Kazakhstan-China Pipeline".  The volume of oil 
exports via the Uzen-Atyrau-Samara pipeline was de termined by its traffic capacity and was based 
on the annual inter-governmental agreement between the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan.   
134.  The Ministry of Oil and Gas allocated available transportation quotas among Kazakhstan's 
companies producing crude oil proportionally to the volume of their production depending on the available transport capacities of the main pipeline  in Kazakhstan and transit capacity provided by 
the Russian Federation.  Applications from producers had to indicate the production volume and 
destination for the transportation of crude oil.  Once the quota volume was agreed, the exporter had to sign an Oil Transportation Agreement with the main pipeline operator - KazTransOil.  
In negotiations on the annual transit quotas with the Russian Federation, the Government of 
Kazakhstan took into account the forecasted needs for crude oil transportation of all of 
Kazakhstan's companies.  To date, all requests for transportation of crude oil had been met and 
there had been no shortage of quotas.  Thus, quotas were allocated to both domestic and foreign invested companies producing crude oil in Kazakhstan on a non-discriminatory basis.   
135.  A Member asked if there was an official double  pricing policy in any sector and a double 
pricing regime in practice as a result of Govern ment measures.  In reply, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan's legislation did not provide for double pricing policy.  
Different tariffs charged for transportation of good s in different directions were explained by the 
differences in costs incurred by natural monopolies when rendering their services.  According to 
the Law "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets", when establishing tariffs of natural 
monopolies, the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies took into account all the costs incurred by the entity and the reasonable profit, which could ensure efficient functioning of the 
operator.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 45 - 
 
  136.  Some Members noted that, although a priori tariff rates for transport of oil by pipeline 
were the same for domestic consumption and export, the application of a decreasing (discount) coefficient for domestic consumption resulted in a higher de facto  rate for transportation of oil for 
export destination.  These Members noted that Ar ticle XI of the GATT 1994 provided that "other 
measures" could not be used to prohibit or restrict the exportation or sale for export of any product destined for the territory of another Member.  These Members stated that Kazakhstan was 
expected to eliminate the discriminatory pricing applicable to oil destined for export prior to its 
WTO accession.   
137.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan had discontinued the practice of 
application of decreasing coefficients for transporta tion of crude oil to domestic refineries in 2010.  
Instead, the tariffs for transportation of crude oil by mainline pipelines for export and domestic 
destinations were calculated separately based on actual costs, reasonable profits, and the physical 
capacity of pipelines.  Such an approach was necessary to ensure transparency in the accounting of revenues, costs and operational assets in regulated services, as well as transparency in the 
elaboration of tariff estimates, and the tariff calculation for regulated services delivered by natural 
monopolies.   
138.  Some Members also noted that the differential oil transport fees applied by Kazakhstan 
were in conflict with the provisions of Arti cle V of the GATT 1994 on freedom of transit.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that there was no discriminatory treatment 
with respect to transit routes in Kazakhstan.  As of 2004, oil transit from the Russian Federation to 
the People's Republic of China through Kazakhstan had been conducted by the Omsk-Pavlodar-Atasu pipeline, the only transit pipeline of crude oil via Kazakhstan.  The transit 
tariffs were regulated by the Agreement between the Government of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of the Russian Federation of 7 June 2002 as amended in November 2009.  
139.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the scope of services monopolization in the 
railway services market, subject to State regulati on as natural monopoly, had been reduced due to 
the restructuring of the railway transport sector which had begun in 2004.  As a result of these 
reforms, currently only the services of main-line railway networks were regulated by the State as 
natural monopoly.  Different tariffs for railway transportation were set depending on distance, rolling stock (wagons) type, cargo and destinat ion.  In her view, the application of these 
differential tariffs did not contradict WTO requirements.  She noted that, in the context of the 
ongoing restructuring of the railway transp ortation sector, between 2006 and 2013 her 
Government undertook a gradual unification of tariffs charged for the main-line railway services in 
domestic, export and import routes.  During the fi rst stage, in 2006, tariffs for transportation of 
construction materials, ferrous and nonferrous metals and their scrap had been unified.  
During the second stage, in 2010, tariffs for transportation of crude oil and coal had been unified.  
During the third stage, in 2011, the unification of tariffs had continued with respect to non-ferrous ore, iron ore, alcohol and alcoholic beverages.  Th e unification of tariffs had been completed during WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 46 - 
 
  the fourth stage in 2012 for all remaining goods, including chemical and mineral fertilizers, 
chemicals and sodium bicarbonate, petroleum products and grain.    
140.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's authorities had a very large discretionary margin to 
qualify activities as natural monopolies and said that this Member did not consider, for instance, 
telecommunications and postal services to be natural monopolies.  Another Member asked Kazakhstan to explain how there was competition in the markets dominated by natural 
monopolies.   
141.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan reiterated that, as evidenced by the 
description of ongoing reforms in key sectors of the economy, her Government was pursuing 
liberalisation programmes in order to facilitate competition and reduce the list of natural 
monopolies.  In particular, her Government had reduced the types of regulated postal services.  
The list had originally included eight types of postal services, but had subsequently been reduced 
to only include universal postal services (cards, letters, packages and postal wrapper).  Regarding telecommunication services, she said that the scope of services subject to Government regulation 
as natural monopoly had been reduced and currently included only:  (i) telecommunication 
services under conditions of absence of competing operators for reasons of technological infeasibility or commercial inexpediency; and (ii) leasing or use of cable channels and other basic 
facilities technologically related to connecting telecommunication.  In addition, operator connection 
services (to the services of the universal telecommunication network) and telephone transit 
services would remain regulated and would only be excluded from the list of natural monopolies 
after the development of a competitive environment.   
142.  Some Members stated that enterprises that had a monopoly position in international trade 
and/or domestic distribution should be notified under the 1994 Understanding on Interpretation of 
Article XVII of the GATT 1994, and enquired whether Kazakhstan intended to notify any of its "natural" monopolies.  A Member said that there was ample evidence that State-owned natural 
monopolies in Kazakhstan did not grant equal access as transporters and enjoyed extensive 
special privileges.   
143.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that natural monopolies in Kazakhstan acted as 
transport carriers with equal non-discriminatory (open) access for all suppliers and operators, regardless of the form and type of ownership.  In this respect, she pointed to the Rules of 
Non-Discriminatory Access for Carriers to the Services of the Main-Line Railway approved by Order 
of the Minister of Transport and Communications No. 401-I of 8 November 2004.  In her view, no 
exclusive rights or special privileges were gran ted to natural monopolies and, therefore, natural 
monopolies did not fall under the notification  requirements of the 1994 Understanding. 
144.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that, upon accession, the Government of 
Kazakhstan would, in regulating prices, ensure that State-owned enterprises and natural 
monopolies in Kazakhstan, in respect of their supplies of goods to industrial users, would recover their costs (including a reasonable profit) in the ordinary course of their business.  Kazakhstan was WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 47 - 
 
  also asked to confirm that that the application of price controls on goods and services would be in 
a manner consistent with WTO obligations, including Article III:9 of the GATT 1994, and that price controls would not be used for purposes of affording protection to domestic industries or service 
providers.   
145.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply price controls on products and services contained in Annex 4, and any similar 
measures that would be introduced or re-introduced in the future, in a manner consistent with the 
WTO Agreement.  She further confirmed that pric e control measures on goods would take account 
of the interests of exporting Members, as pr ovided for in Article III:9 of the GATT 1994.  
Price control measures would not be used for purposes of affording protection to domestic 
production of goods, or to impair the service co mmitments of Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan also confirmed that the lists of goods and services subject to State price controls in 
Annex 4 were comprehensive, and that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would publish in the Yegemen Kazakhstan and the Kazakhstanskaya Pr avda, notice of any changes in the coverage 
of goods or services that were subject to price controls.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
- Competition Policy 
146.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that within the framework of the Single Economic 
Space, Kazakhstan jointly with the Republic of  Belarus and the Russian Federation signed the 
Agreement on Common Principles and Rules of Competition on 9 December 2010.  
The Agreement, enacted as of 1 of January 2012, stipulated the following objectives:  
(i) development of common competition policy prov iding for free movement of goods, services and 
capital, freedom of economic activity and effective functioning of the goods market on the 
territories of Kazakhstan, Russian Federation and Belarus, (ii) harmonization of legislation on competition policy; and (iii) prevention of actions that might have negative impact on trade 
between the parties.  In particular, the Agreement was aimed at development of common 
principles and rules of competition, ensuring prevention of anticompetitive actions on the 
territories of the Parties, and actions that might have negative impact on competition in 
transboundary markets. 
147.  She further added  that anti-monopoly legislation of Kazakhstan was developed in line with 
the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and comprised inter alia  of the relevant provisions 
of the Civil Code, the Code on Administrative Vi olations and Law No. 112-IV "On Competition" of 
25 December 2008 (hereinafter – Law No. 112-IV), as last amended by Law No. 81-V of 
6 March 2013, that had entered into force on 1 January 2009 replacing Laws No. 173 "On 
Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Ac tivities" of 7 July 2006 and No. 232 "On Unfair 
Competition" of 9 June 1998.   
148.  The key objective of Law No. 112-IV was protecti on of free competition and creation of a 
favourable environment for entrepreneurial and investment activity, and growth of businesses.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 48 - 
 
  This was to be achieved through:  (i) prevention of monopolistic activity; (ii) prevention of unfair 
competition; (iii) demonopolization of industries; (iv) development of fair and free competition; and (v) protection of consumer interests.  Law No. 112-IV was directly applicable and did not 
contain references to by-laws.   
149.  The Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Protection of Competition (the Antimonopoly 
Agency) was responsible for implementation of the national policy aimed at developing competition 
and restricting monopolistic activities.  The main functions of the Agency were:  (i) to promote 
development of fair competition; (ii) to prevent, detect and investigate violations of the anti-monopoly legislation of Kazakhstan; (iii) to prevent economic concentration; and 
(iv) demonopolization of market participants that restrained competition.  Development of State 
policy on competition and restriction of monopolistic activity was one of the key functions of the 
Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
150.  Asked about measures taken in the framework of demonopolization, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that the decisions on demo nopolization of sectors of the economy were 
made by the Government upon results of the commodity markets analysis conducted by the 
Antimonopoly Agency.  For instance, in 2011, the Agency conducted the analysis of interconnection and traffic transmission (hereinafter – interconnection) in telecommunication 
services.  Based on the results of the analysis , the Government took a decision to exclude 
interconnection services from the sphere of na tural monopolies and transfer into competitive 
environment.  Moreover, within the framewor k of demonopolization policies, Law No. 112-IV 
stipulated rules, under which state enterprises and legal persons and their affiliates, where the Government owned 50% or more shares, had to receive the positive conclusion from the 
Antimonopoly Agency for further activity in the relevant commodity market.  In 2011, 3% of such 
enterprises were transferred to the competitive environment (including enterprises in such spheres as maintenance of hotels and resorts, maintenance of car parks, construction, etc.). 
151.  Asked about merger control regulation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
according to sub-paragraph 1, paragraph 1 of Article 50 of Law No. 112-IV, regulating issues 
related to control over economic concentration, merger transactions fell under the notion of 
economic concentration.  Articles 49-57 of Law No. 112-IV regulated issues of economic concentration control.  The Antimonopoly Agency conducted control over economic concentration 
v i a  a n  a p p r o v a l  p r o c e d u r e  o f  m e r g e r  t r a n s a c t i o n s  ( a c t i o n s ) .   I n  r e p l y  t o  a  s p e c i f i c  q u e s t i o n  o n  
current merger thresholds to trigger the obligation for notification in Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that co nsent of the Antimonopoly Agency to perform 
transactions, acknowledged as economic concentration was required the following in cases:  
(i) merger or acquisition of a market participant; (ii) acquisition by a person (group of persons) of 
more than 25% voting share (right of participation) of a market participant; and (iii) the aggregate 
balance value of assets of reorganized market participants (group of persons) or the acquirer (group of persons), and also market participant whose voting shares (rights of participation) in the 
charter capital had been acquired, or their aggregate volume of goods sold for the last financial WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 49 - 
 
  year exceeded 10 million monthly calculation indices9.  Consent for economic concentration with 
participation of financial organizations could be given in case when the value of assets or amount of equity capital of a financial organization exceeded the amount jointly established by the 
Antimonopoly Agency and the National Bank (for financial organizations).  Market participants had 
to notify the Antimonopoly Agency in the following cases of economic concentration:  (i) acquisition of rights (including rights on the basis of trust management agreement and joint 
activity agreement) by the market participant allowing him/her to give mandatory instructions to 
other market participant when conducting commercial activity or to perform functions of its executive body; and (ii) participation of the sa me individuals in executive bodies, boards of 
directors, supervisory boards, and other managing bodies of two or more market participants if 
these individuals determine conditions of commercial activities conducted by the market 
participant.  The consent of the Antimonopoly Agen cy was not required for the following deals, not 
considered as economic concentration:  (i) acquisition of shares (rights of participation) of the market participant by financial organizations, if this acquisition was conducted with the aim of 
further resale, with the condition that this financial organization did not have voting rights in the 
managing bodies of the market participant; (ii) acquisition by financial organizations of property, main production assets and/or intangible assets of another market participant with the aim of 
repayment of the debtor's liability fully or in part , if this acquisition was conducted with the aim of 
further resale, with the condition that these financial organizations did not use such property to 
gain profit in their own interest; (iii) appointm ent of rehabilitation or bankruptcy manager, 
temporary administration (temporary administrator); and (iv) economic concentration within one group of persons.  
152.  Asked about the test for a merger to be prohibited, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that, according to Law No. 112-IV, a general rule was that all mergers leading to restriction of competition, were prohibited.   
153.  Consent of the Antimonopoly Agency could be gr anted provided that the participants of the 
economic concentration fulfilled certain requirements and commitments eliminating or alleviating 
the negative impact on competition.  For instance, economic concentration should not result in the 
following: 
- restriction of competition; 
- breach of the conditions contracted with customers; 
- suspension of services being rendered; - deterioration of quality of the services rendered; - non-fulfillment of the commitments under the investment contracts concluded with the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies; and 
- unreasonable reduction of production or sales.  
154.  Such conditions could include restriction in management, use or disposal of property.  
The Antimonopoly Agency, on its own initiative or upon the claim of an interested person, could 
change its decision on economic concentration in cases, when:  
                                               
9 One monthly calculated index (hereinafter - MCI) is equal to 1,731 tenge (around US$10.9); 10 million 
MCI equals to approximately US$114.6 million. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 50 - 
 
  - within three years upon adopting it, the circ umstances giving reasons to reject it were 
revealed; 
- it was adopted on the basis of unreliable information, which led to adopting illegal 
decision; and 
- undertaken requirements and commitments were not fulfilled.   
155.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Law No. 112-IV distinguished three types of 
monopolistic activities:  (i) "anti-competitive agreements"; (ii) "anti-competitive coordinated actions"; and (iii) abuse of dominant or monopolistic position.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
noted that agreements or coordinated action s between competing and non-competing market 
participants, as well as agreements of public and local executive bodies, or between public bodies 
and market participants, were prohibited when they restricted competition or violated the rights of 
juridical and physical persons, including by establishing and (or) maintaining cooperative pricing or other conditions of acquiring and selling goods, unreasonable limitation of production or sale of 
goods, unreasonable refusal to conclude contracts with certain sellers (providers) or buyers, and 
application of discriminating conditions to equivalent contracts with other market participants.  She further explained that Law No. 112-IV differentiated between "anti-competitive coordinated 
actions" and "anti-competitive agreements".  The difference between anti-competitive agreements 
and anti-competitive coordinated actions was that anti-competitive agreements provided for 
intended written arrangement between market participants to conclude anti-competitive 
agreements, for example, agreements on sale of products at the same price or within certain territory.   
156.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Law No. 112-IV redefined the term "group of 
persons".  Abuse of dominant or monopolistic posi tion by a group of persons was considered as 
abuse by a single market participant.  Market participants were not obliged to seek for approval of 
economic concentration in cases when transactions were made within one group of persons.  
Law No. 112-IV also contained new definitions of what constituted a dominant and monopolistic 
position.  The position of a market participant(s) in the relevant commodity market was recognised 
as dominant or monopolistic, if such market participant(s) acquired a capability to control the market.  A market participant was deemed to have a dominant position if it had 35% or more of 
the relevant market.  Several market participants were considered to have a dominant position 
(i) if the aggregate share of up to three market  participants in a given commodity market was 
equal or exceeded 50%; or (ii) if the aggregate share of up to four major market participants in a 
given commodity market was equal or exceeded 70%.  A financial organization was deemed to 
have a dominant position (i) if the aggregate share of up to two financial organizations in a given 
financial services market equalled or exceeded 50%;  or (ii) if the aggregate share of up to three 
financial organizations in a given financial servic es market equalled or exceeded 70%.  A company 
with less than a 15% share of the market, including a financial services market, could not qualify 
as a company with a dominant position.  Natural monopolies, state monopolies and market 
participants that owned 100% dominant share in the relevant commodity market were considered as companies (market participants) with a monopolistic position. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 51 - 
 
  157.  Asked to clarify the differences between the concepts of dominant or monopolistic position 
and monopolistic activity, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the concept of monopolistic activity was wider than the concept of dominant or monopolistic position.  
Monopolistic activity was an activity or actions performed by a market participant, while dominant 
or monopolistic position was a characteristic of a ma rket participant, defined by the market share.  
According to paragraph 4 of Article 26 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
monopolistic activity was regulated by the law.  Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position had to observe restrictions set-out in Law No. 112-IV.  Hence, monopolistic activity was restricted, but not prohibited.  Monopolistic types of activities restricted by Law No. 112-IV are 
described in paragraph [155].   
158.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the dominant 
or monopolistic position itself was not considered breach of the anti-monopoly legislation.  
Article 13 of Law No. 112-IV listed prohibited cases of abuse of dominant or monopolistic position:  
- establishment, maintenance of monopolistically high (low) or monopsonistically low prices;  
- application of different prices or conditions to equivalent agreements with market 
participants or customers without objectively justified reasons;  
- establishing restrictions for distribution of goods, works or services based on territorial 
factors, group of customers, purchasing conditions, and also quality and price;  
- preconditioning or imposing a conclusion of an agreement where a market participant or a 
customer would accept additional obligations, which in their essence or according to customary business practice were not related to the subject of such agreements; 
- unreasonable refusal to conclude an agreement with or selling a good to independent 
customers while having the ability to produce or sell good, work or service.  This also 
included deviation from concluding such an agreement within thirty calendar days of such request;  
- preconditioning supply of goods, works or serv ices to accept restrictions for purchasing 
goods, works or services, produced or sold by competitors;  
- unjustified reduction of volumes of production  and/or supply, including production and/or 
supply of goods, works or services, for which there is demand or customer orders; 
- withdrawal of goods from circulation, if it resulted in the good's price increase; 
- imposition of economically or technologicall y unjustified agreements terms on  a partner, 
not connected with the subject of the agreement; 
- creation of obstacles for another market pa rticipants to accede or exit from a goods 
market; and 
- unjustified establishment of different prices (tariffs) on the same good; creation of 
discriminating conditions.   
In addition, Kazakhstan's legislation did not prov ide penalty for dominant or monopolistic position 
itself, only for abuse and actions to restrict competition.  
159.  In reply to the question of a Member regarding economic indicators taken into account for 
identification of market participants with domina nt or monopolistic position, the representative of 
Kazakhstan noted that in accordance with the Methodology on Analysis and Assessment of the 
Competitive Environment in the Commodity Market, approved by the Order of the Chairman of the 
Antimonopoly Agency No. 8-OD of 12 January 2009 and the Methodology on Analysis and 
Assessment of the Competitive Environment in th e Financial Services Market, approved by the 
Order of the Chairman of the Antimonopoly Agency No. 57-OD of 19 February 2009, the Antimonopoly Agency conducted analysis of the competition environment.  The results of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 52 - 
 
  analysis provided the picture of development of competition in the given market and identified 
market participants with dominant or monopolistic position.  The methodology of analysis included the following steps:  (i) identification of good s or substitute goods; (ii) identification of 
geographical boundaries of the commodity market ; (iii) identification of time intervals; 
(iv) identification of structure of the market; (v) calculation of commodity market volume and shares of market participants in the market; (v i) assessment of competitive environment in the 
commodity market; and (vii) detection of entry barriers to the commodity market.  Based on these 
factors the Antimonopoly Agency drew its findings on the competition environment. 
160.  Law No. 112-IV expanded the list of types of unfair competition which included the 
following:  (i) illegal use of trademarks and packing; (ii) illegal use of a product of another 
manufacturer; (iii) copying of product design; (iv) discrediting a market participant; 
(v) deliberately misleading, unfair and false advertisement; (vi) tie-in sale of goods; (vii) calling 
for a boycott of a seller (provider); (viii) calling for discrimination against a buyer (provider); (ix) calling for a market participant to terminate a contract with a competitor; (x) bribing a seller's 
(provider's) employee; (xi) bribing a buyer's employee; (xii) illegal use of trade secrets; 
(xiii) selling goods with giving the customer of unreliable information regarding the character, method and place of production, consumer properti es, the good's qualities and quantities and (or) 
it's producers; and (xiv) improper comparison by the market participant of its goods with the 
goods produced and (or) sold by another market participants.   
161.  The State could participate in commercial activity in the following cases:  (i) failure to 
ensure national security, national defence capability and protection of the social interests by other means; (ii) use of State-owned strategic objects; and (iii) public need in public manufacturing of 
goods where competition was absent or was underdeveloped.  In the last case, the activity of 
public enterprises was regulated in coordination with the Antimonopoly Agency.  The State could participate in commercial activity in the form of the following types of enterprises:  (a) a State 
enterprise, or (b) a juridical person 50 or more per cent of shares (rights of participation) of which 
belong to the State and its affiliated entities.  State enterprises could engage only in the spheres 
stipulated in Article 134 of Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 (see Annex 22).  
If establishment of such enterprises was not direct ly mentioned in the laws of Kazakhstan, consent 
of the Antimonopoly Agency was required in the case mentioned in clause (iii) above.  
The Antimonopoly Agency could deny creation of a state enterprise or a juridical person by the 
State, if such creation could lead to restriction of competition on the market where there was no competition or it was underdeveloped.  Nevertheless, the Antimonopoly Agency could grant its 
consent if a state enterprise or a juridical person undertook special commitments to eliminate or 
alleviate negative impact to competition.   
162.  Law No. 112-IV also introduced the term "state monopoly" as an exclusive right of the 
State to produce and (or) sell, purchase, or use goods.  The State had the right to restrict competition by establishing a state monopoly only in those spheres where sale of goods on the 
competitive market could have negative consequences for the constitutional system, national WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 53 - 
 
  security, the protection of public order, human  rights and freedoms, or health of people.  
The representative of Kazakhstan added that a state monopoly could be established only by law.  State monopolies could be established only in the form of state enterprises by the decision of the 
Government or local executive bodies.  In reply to a specific question, she said that the notion of 
"state monopoly" differed from the notion of "natural monopoly".   
163.  State monopoly activities were defined in Law No. 85 "On Safeguarding Activity" of 
19 October 2000, Law No. 339 "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002, Law No. 456 "On Trademarks, 
Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods" of 26 July 1999, Law No. 422-I "On Protection of Selective Achievements" of 13 July 1999, La w No. 331 "On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002, 
Law No. 593 "On Protection, Reproduction and Use of Fauna" of 9 July 2004, as well as in 
Law No. 427 "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999, the Land Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 442 of 20 June 2003 and the Forestry Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 477 of 8 July 2003.  The Agency on Protection of Competition of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was responsible for regulation and monitoring activities of state monopolies.  
At present, state monopolies provided special types of services, including:  hydro meteorological 
monitoring and monitoring of the environmental situation; liquidation of centres of extra hazardous contagious animal diseases; security services for facilities subject to the State 
protection; production of identification documents of the Republic of Kazakhstan; monitoring of 
education quality, etc.  Kazakhstan's legislation did not prohibit private sector participation in 
sectors, where state enterprises were present, except in the spheres of state monopoly.  
She explained that the Law No. 34-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts on Issues of State Monopoly" of 10 July 2012 provided  for the reduction of state monopolies spheres 
by inviting the private business to certain sectors.  According to this Law, activities transferred to 
the competitive market included certification and registration of selective-seed and selective-genetic facilities located on the territory of the State forest fund, disposal of waste, 
construction and operation of landfills, accredit ation in the sphere of conformity assessment. 
164.  In reply to a specific question on the scope of exemption for state monopolies, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the scope of activities of state monopolies were narrower 
than the sphere of activities of state enterpri ses engaged in commercial activity.  The types of 
state monopoly activities were defined in special legal acts, which clearly stipulated the types and 
scopes of their activities.  State monopolies were not allowed to:  
- produce goods, works and services, not connected with the state monopoly sphere; 
- hold shares (rights of participation in the charter capital) and otherwise participate in the 
activity of legal persons; 
- transfer rights, associated with state monopoly; and - establish prices for produced or sold good s, works and services, different from those 
established by the Government.  
165.  The Antimonopoly Agency initiated investigations upon receiving information on violations 
of anti-monopoly legislation such as:  (i) files/documents from the Government bodies; (ii) application from a physical or juridical person; (iii) detection of anti-monopoly legislation 
violations by the Agency; and (iv) appeal to the Agency by the mass media; (v) information in the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 54 - 
 
  mass media.  The Agency within its competencies conducted investigations on violations of 
anti-monopoly legislation and adopted a decision based on its results. Investigation was conducted within two months from the date of issuing an order of its initiation. This term could be extended 
for up to two months.  
166.  The representative of Kazakhstan added th at the Agency took one of the following 
decisions on the basis of investigation results:  (i) suspend an investigation in cases envisaged by 
Law No. 112-IV; (ii) initiate administrative proceedings; (iii) adopt instructions on elimination of 
the anti-monopoly legislation violations; or (iv) initiate criminal proceedings by the law-enforcement bodies.  
167.  She informed Members that Article 147 of the Code on Administrative Violations provided 
the following sanctions for violations of the anti-monopoly legislation:  a fine in the amount of 
150 Monthly Calculated Indices
10 (hereinafter - MCIs) for individual entrepreneurs, 5% of profit 
receipts from the monopolistic activity for small and medium-sized businesse s, and 10% of profit 
receipts from the monopolistic activity for other businesses.  The Criminal Code (Article 196) 
provided for criminal liability for actions causing severe damage, including fines of 500 to 
1,000 MCIs, or up to two years of correctional labour, custodial restraint, or imprisonment.  For repeated offences, or for actions committed by (organized) groups or officials, the sanctions 
consisted of fines in the amount of 1,000 to 2,000 MCIs, or the equivalent of five to seven months' 
salary or other income of the convicted person, or imprisonment for up to five years that could be 
accompanied by deprivation of the right to hold specific posts or engage in certain activities for up 
to three years, and property expropriation.  Offe nces committed with the use of force or the threat 
to use force or which could lead to damage, or threat of damage of third party's property, were 
punishable by three to seven years of imprisonment that could be accompanied by property 
expropriation. 
168.  The representative of Kazakhstan added th at Chapters 9, 10 and 11 of Law No. 112-IV 
defined responsibilities for violation of the anti-monopoly legislation and established procedures for 
adoption, appeal, and execution of instructions an d decisions taken by the Antimonopoly Agency.  
The Antimonopoly Agency had the right to review administrative violations regarding competition 
protection and restriction of monopolistic activity, impose administrative sanctions provided in the Code on Administrative violations, and appeal to the courts for enforcement of its instructions and 
decisions.  Law No. 112-IV did not provide for introduction of fixed prices by the Government in 
case of repeated abuses by market dominating entity of their monopolistic positions.  In a case in which a market participant that had a dominant or monopolistic position twice within one calendar 
year and violated the provisions of Law No. 112-IV on (i) "anti-competitive agreements"; 
(ii) "anti-competitive coordinated actions"; and (iii) abuse of dominant or monopolistic position; 
and continued taking actions that restrained competition, the Antimonopoly Agency had the right 
to appeal to the court seeking the splitting of the market participant into several juridical persons 
                                               
10 Monthly Calculated Index - index used in Kazakhsta n for the purposes of calc ulation of pensions and 
other social allowances as well as for the application of  penalties, calculation of taxes and other payments to 
the budget - annually approved by the Law "On Republican Budget".   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 55 - 
 
  or the detachment of one or several juridical persons from the market participant.  
The instructions and decisions of the Antimonopoly  Agency could be appealed in accordance with 
the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Instructions of the territorial bodies of the 
Antimonopoly Agency could be appealed to the Agency or directly to the courts within 
three months of the date of handling to the entity concerned.     
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
- Powers of Executive, Legislative an d Judicial Branches of Government 
169.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Republic of Kazakhstan was a unitary 
State with a Presidential form of Government.  Power was divided among the legislative, 
executive, and judicial branches.  The Presid ent ensured the coordinated functioning of all 
branches of power.  The Parliament of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan was the highest representative 
body and performed legislative functions.  The Go vernment exercised executive power, headed the 
executive bodies and provided guidance to them .  Judicial power was exercised through civil, 
criminal and other statutory forms of judicial pr oceedings by the Supreme Court, local courts and 
other courts.  
170.  The President was elected for five year terms on the basis of universal, equal and direct 
suffrage by secret ballot.  The President a ppointed and could dismiss the members of the 
Government (including the Prime Minister, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Defence, Internal 
Affairs and Justice and Heads of State Committees ), the Heads of diplomatic missions, higher 
Officers of the Armed Forces, the Chairperson and two members of the Constitutional Council, the 
Chairperson and two members of the Central Election Committee, the Chairperson and two members of the Accounting Committee for Contro l Over the Implementation of the Republican 
Budget, 15 Deputies of the Senate, chairperso ns and judges of local and other courts, the 
Prosecutor General, the Chairperson of the National Security Committee, the State Secretary, the Chairperson of the National Bank, and Akims. 
171.  The President approved laws submitted by the Senate (the upper house of the Parliament) 
within one month, or returned laws with his comments to the Parliament for consideration, to be 
reviewed within one month.  If the specified deadline was not met, the President's objection would 
prevail and the law was adopted in the version pr oposed by the President.  If the Parliament 
overturned the President's objection by a two-thirds majority vote of each Chamber, the law was 
adopted in the version initially proposed by the Parliament.  In cases where the Parliament failed 
to overturn the President's objections, the la w was adopted in the version proposed by the 
President.  The President could prioritize draft laws for consideration by the Parliament and could 
invite the Parliament to announce a draft law as urgent, i.e. to be considered within one month of 
its submission.  If such a request was not fulfille d, the President could issue a decree, which would 
remain in effect until the adoption of the new law by the Parliament.  Laws came into force within 
ten calendar days after the date of their first official publication, unless the laws or the relevant implementation acts had specified different terms for entry into force.  The Parliament could WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 56 - 
 
  delegate its legislative powers to the President fo r a period of up to one year, while the President 
had the right to dissolve Parliament in certain circumstances.  The President could decide to hold a national referendum, to issue decrees, and to issue decrees having the force of a law. 
172.  The Parliament was a bicameral legislative body, consisting of a lower chamber, called the 
Majilis, and an upper chamber, called the Senate .  The Parliament was responsible for adopting 
constitutional laws, laws, resolutions of the Parliament, separate resolutions of the Senate and the 
Majilis, and for passing Constitutional amendments, upon the initiative of the President.  
The Parliament could adopt and amend the State budget, as well as put forward an initiative calling for a national referendum.  At separate sessions, the Majilis, and then the Senate, ratified 
international treaties and took decisions on Stat e loans and other forms of economic assistance.  
The Senate, inter alia , had exclusive jurisdiction, at the init iative of the President, to elect and 
discharge the Chairperson and Justices of the Supreme Court.  The Majilis, inter alia , had exclusive 
jurisdiction to accept draft laws for consideration and to announce regular Presidential elections.   
173.  The Government was organized and chaired by the Prime Minister.  The Government was 
accountable to the President and to the Parliament.  The Government submitted draft laws to the 
Majilis, and was responsible for their implementa tion when enacted.  By-laws in the form of 
resolutions and directives could be issued by the Government.  By-laws of the Government, as well 
as the acts of municipal chief executives could be annulled by the President.  The mandate of the 
Government expired with that of the President, unless specifically terminated by the President. 
174.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Government was responsible for directing 
the national socio-economic policy.  Kazakhstan's socio-economic and trade policy were developed and coordinated by the Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning.  The Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies was the principal body responsible for development of industrial and investment 
policy.   
175.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the governmental authority in Kazakhstan 
was administered at both the central and regional level.  Local governmental power was divided 
between representative bodies called Maslikhats and executive bodies called Akimats.  Akimats 
were local executive bodies.  These were headed by Akims - representatives of the President and 
the Government - who (i) administered the local ex ecutive bodies; (ii) ensured the implementation 
of State policy on the relevant territory; and (iii) ensured the coordinated functioning of all 
territorial branches of the central State bodies.  Akims also fulfilled the functions of a local public 
administration and were responsible for the social and economic development of the administered territory.  She further noted that local governments had (i) partial autonomy to regulate 
region-specific economic relations; (ii) a regional (local) administrative system; (iii) authority to 
make provisions for the development of business activities; (iv) the right to conclude concession 
contracts; (v) the authority to monitor the local budget; and (vi) the obligation to coordinate 
foreign trade-related issues.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 57 - 
 
  176.  Referring to item (vi) of the preceding para graph, some Members asked the representative 
of Kazakhstan to explain if local administration bodies had to consult with the Government when initiating foreign-trade related projects and if they had an obligation to perform foreign-trade 
activity on behalf of the Government.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in 
accordance with Article 61 of the Constitution, only the President, as well as members of the Parliament and Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan had the right to initiate legislation, and 
local administrative bodies did not have the right to initiate legislation related to foreign trade.  
Local administrative bodies had the right to submit their proposals on the improvement of 
legislation to the Government, which in turn had the right to initiate the drafting of a regulatory 
legal act on the basis of the submitted proposals.  Local administrative bodies were not authorised 
to perform foreign-trade activity on behalf of the Government.  However, they had to adhere to 
the national foreign, internal, financial and investment policies, determined by the State 
(Government, President and Parliament).  
177.  Asked to explain the relationship between local (sub-central) authorities and the central 
Government in the implementation of WTO provisions, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, 
according to Article 4 of the Law "On Local Government in the Republic of Kazakhstan", Maslikhats and Akimats did not have the right to adopt decisions inconsistent with national policy or 
Kazakhstan's international commitments, as set-out in ratified international agreements.  
In particular, sub-central authorities could not independently impose measures aimed at hindering 
the free exchange of goods and services within the country, such as imposing taxes and issuing 
regulations.  Decisions of Akims or Maslikhats, which derogated from Kazakhstan's commitments ensuing from international agreements (includi ng WTO commitments), could be annulled by the 
President, the Government, the Akim, as well as through court procedures.  In addition, the 
Prosecutor General's Office exercised constant supervision over the precise and uniform application of laws and other legislative acts. 
178.  Judicial power was exercised by means of civil,  criminal, and other legislation, within the 
framework of a three-tier unitary court system .  The Supreme Court was the supreme body for 
civil, criminal and other cases.  It exercised supervisory powers over the conduct of general 
jurisdiction courts within a statutory framework, and provided clarifications on issues relating to court practice.  The Supreme Court could also act as a nisi prius  court (first instance court) whose 
decisions came into legal force from the date of their adoption.  Oblast and rayon (district) courts 
were courts of first instance and proceedings, conducted in these courts, took place within two months upon receipt of the claim.  This period could vary, however, depending on the 
category of civil case.  Questions challenging the co nstitutionality of laws or by-laws were reviewed 
by the Constitutional Council. 
179.  She further explained that the Code "On Administrative Violations" of 30 January 2001 was 
aimed at preventing administrative violations, while protecting the rights, freedoms and lawful 
interests of persons, citizens and organizations.  The Code addressed issues concerning the 
sanitary and epidemiological welfare and health of  the population, the environment, public morals, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 58 - 
 
  property, public order and safety, and the estab lished procedure for exercising State powers.  
A hearing with a judge or an authorised body us ually took place within 15 days (with a possible 
one month extension).  A request to reconsider the rulings of a judge or an authorised body could 
be made within one year from the date the court decision entered into force; the submission of 
such a request suspended the ruling's execution.  The Prosecutor-General or his deputies could ask a board of the Supreme Court to verify the legality and legal grounds of a decision on 
administrative violations, which had already taken legal effect.  The Supreme Court could 
reconsider previous rulings made by Oblast and Rayon (district) courts. 
180.  Some Members asked whether, following accession, the WTO Agreement would have 
priority over Kazakhstan's national legislation and further sought a description of how, in legal 
terms, would WTO rules and commitments be ratified.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that Article 4, paragraph 3 of the Constitution stipulated that international 
agreements ratified by Kazakhstan, had priority ov er national legislation and this provision also 
applied to the terms of the WTO accession accepted by Kazakhstan.  Ratified international 
agreements were applied directly, except in cases when a law had to be adopted before an 
international agreement became applicable.  Asked to confirm that Kazakhstan needed to adopt a 
law domestically in order to make WTO Agreements applicable, the representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that a law had to be adopted in cases, where (i) the current legislation did not comply with 
WTO Agreements and had to be amended to comp ly with the WTO Agreements; or (ii) issues 
contained in the WTO Agreements were not addressed in existing legislation.  Kazakhstan would 
ensure compliance of its legislation with commitments undertaken in accordance with the Protocol of Accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan to th e WTO.  She further stated that in cases were 
obligations ensuing from WTO accession contradicted the provisions of other international 
agreements, Kazakhstan would apply the Vienna Convention "On International Treaty Law" of 1969, which stated that a preceding agreement applied only to the extent its provisions 
complied with the provisions of a subsequent ag reement.  Thus, the WTO Agreements would have 
a priority over international agreements concluded earlier.  She also stressed that no 
contradictions were expected to arise between WTO Membership obligations and Kazakhstan's 
international agreements. 
181.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that the provisions of the WTO Agreement 
would be applied uniformly throughout the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including in 
regions engaging in frontier traffic, special economic zones and other areas where special regimes for tariffs, taxes and regulations could be established.  She added that, in order to ensure 
compliance with provisions of the WTO Agreement any individual or entity could bring to the 
attention of the authorities of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan or competent 
Customs Union body cases of non-application or non-uniform application of provisions of the 
WTO Agreement in the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Such cases would be referred promptly to the responsible authorities without requiring the affected party to petition through the courts, and 
when non-application or non-uniform application actually existed, the authorities of the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  or a competent Customs Union body would act WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 59 - 
 
  promptly to address the situation, consistent with the laws and international obligations of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  The individual or entity notifying the authorities of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan or a competent Customs Un ion body would be informed promptly in writing 
of any decision and action taken.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
182.  [The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that with respect to matters subject to 
the WTO Agreement, Kazakhstan's authorities woul d provide the right for independent review in 
conformity with WTO obligations, including but no t restricted to, Article X:3(b) of the GATT 1994, 
and relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property 
Rights (TRIPS) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services.  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments.] 
- Framework of the Customs Union among th e Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian 
Federation and the Republic of Belarus 
(a) Legal Framework Establishing the Customs Union 
183.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed  Members that in 2007, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan), the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Belarus (Belarus), had 
concluded the "Treaty on Establishment of the Common Customs Territory and the Formation of 
the Customs Union" of 6 October 2007 (hereinafter:  "Treaty on the Formation of the CU).  With the objective to form a Customs Union, Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Belarus had 
concluded a number of international treaties and pursuant to the "Protocol on Rules on Entry into 
Force of International Treaties Aimed to Form  the Legal Framework of the Customs Union, 
Withdrawal and Accession to Them" of 6 October 2 007 (hereinafter:  Protocol of 6 October 2007), 
the EurAsEC Interstate Council (the Supreme Body of the Customs Union) determined the list of international agreements constituting the legal ba sis of the Customs Union within the EurAsEC.  
This list of international agreements was set-out in Interstate Council Decision No. 14 of 
27 November 2009, and these agreements and others subsequently agreed by Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Belarus, through the end of 2009, constituted the legal basis for a 
Customs Union, and formed a single undertaking, i.e., withdrawal from any of these agreements 
automatically resulted in withdrawal from all of these agreements.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that these Agreements laid out a framework for progressively increasing 
economic cooperation among entities of the CU Part ies, starting with plans for the unification of 
foreign trade, customs policies, and trade remedies; and initiating cooperation between the 
financial and banking systems; cooperation in social and humanitarian areas; and cooperation in 
the field of legal regulation.  Additional agreemen ts could be added to the single undertaking upon 
decision of the Interstate Council for the current list of agreements constituting a single 
undertaking).  On 27 November 2009, the EurAsEC Interstate Council had approved the 
Customs Union's Common External Tariff (CET) as well as the Treaty on the Customs Union 
Customs Code.  On 1 January 2010, a Customs Union between Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation 
and Belarus (CU) had become operational.  Th e CET and a number of basic agreements and 
protocols on tariff and non-tariff regulation had also come into force on 1 January 2010.  The CU 
Customs Code had entered into force in Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation on 1 July 2010 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 60 - 
 
  and for Belarus on 6 July 2010.  She noted that the CU Parties were still engaged in concluding 
new treaties and agreements within the framework of the CU (hereinafter:  CU Treaties or CU Agreements) and were implementing them throug h an ongoing process of regional integration. 
184.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the Treaty on the Formation of the CU 
required CU Parties to establish unified regulation of foreign trade activities in line with their obligations arising from CU Treaties and through harmonization of standards and rules envisaged 
by bilateral agreements on the unified regulation of foreign trade activities.  The Treaty on the 
Formation of a Customs Union also specified that the CU Parties' had to unify regulation of foreign trade activity and coordinate decision making process in order to simultaneously introduce 
changes or amendments to rules of regulations, which were to include the following areas: 
- tariffs on foreign trade; 
- non-tariff measures in trade with third countries; 
- unification of customs regulations and customs procedures; and 
- establishment of a unified trade regime with third countries. 
 This Treaty and other international agreements forming the legal basis of the CU 
established the principles and timing for achieving the objective of unified regulation of foreign 
trade activities. 
(b) Customs Union Structure and Competency in the Area of Trade 
185.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the following bodies were responsible for 
the implementation of the CU Agreemen ts and further development of the CU: 
- the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council; 
- the Eurasian Economic Commission; and 
- the EurAsEC Court. 
(c) The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council  
186.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council 
was the supreme Body of the CU, which pursuant  to the Agreement dated of 18 November 2011, 
exercised the powers of the Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) 
and performed the following functions: 
- defined the strategy and objectives of formation and further development of the 
Customs Union and took decisions on its realisation; 
- took decisions on issues of common interest to CU Parties and the EurAsEC 
member-States; 
- defined the list of international treaties comprising the legal framework of the CU; - took decisions on entry into force of the CU agreements forming the legal basis of the CU;   
- took decisions on issues related to integrat ion of the customs territories of the EurAsEC 
member-States into a single customs territory in  accordance with Article 2 of the Treaty on 
the Formation of the CU; 
- approved the structure of the Eurasian Economic Commission; - appointed the Chairman of the Eurasian Economic Commission; 
- approved the rules on procedures of the Eurasian Economic Commission; 
- upon request of one of the CU Parties, reco nsidered decisions of the Eurasian Economic 
Commission where one of the CU Parties objected to the decision; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 61 - 
 
  - reconsidered decisions of the Eurasian Economic Commission at the request of one or 
more CU Parties; 
- considered, upon request, proposals of the Eurasian Economic Commission which failed to 
collect the number of votes necessary to adopt them; 
- nominated candidates to the Court of the EurAsEC for the hearing of the cases concerning 
CU issues to the Inter-Parliamentary Assembly of the EurAsEC;  
- gave recommendations to and requested information from the Inter-Parliamentarian 
Assembly of the EurAsEC and the Court of the EurAsEC on CU issues. 
The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council made its decisions by consensus. 
187.  The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council had to be held at the level of Heads of State and 
Heads of Government.  Meetings of the Council of Heads of State had to be held at least once a year, and meetings of the Council of Heads of Government had to be held at least twice a year.  
The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council also had the authority to define the list of international 
treaties that comprised the legal basis of the CU.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the Interstate Council of the EurAsEC (at present, the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council) had 
determined the list of international treaties comprising the legal basis of the CU, which consisted of two parts:  Part 1 - international treaties effective within the framework of the EurAsEC; and 
Part 2 - international treaties aimed at the completion of the formation of the legal basis of the CU.  
The second list constituted the single undertaking of each CU Party.  She noted that neither of these lists was exhaustive and that agreements coul d be added to both of these lists.  There were 
no special criteria for identifying the trea ties to be included in these lists.   
 (d) The Eurasian Economic Commission 
188.  Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – the Commission) was a permanent, 
supranational, regulatory body of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space.  
The Commission was established on the basis of the Treaty on Eurasian Economic Commission of 
18 November 2011 and replaced the Custom Union Commission. 
189.  The Commission carried out its activities within  the competences stipulated in the Treaty 
on the Eurasian Economic Commission, resolutions of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council and 
international treaties that formed the legal framework of the Customs Union and the Single 
Economic Space.  The following agreements, ratifi ed by the three CU countries and enacted as of 
1 January 2012, formed the legal framework of the Single Economic Space: 
1. Agreement on Common Rules of Granting Industrial Subsidies; 
2. Agreement on Common Rules of State Support of Agricultural Sector; 3. Agreement on State (Municipal) Procurement; 
4. Agreement on Common Principles and Rules of Competition; 
5. Agreement on Common Principles and Rule s of Regulation of Activities Natural 
Monopolists; 
6. Agreement on Uniform Rules and Principles of technical regulation; 
7. Agreement on Coordinated Macroeconomic Policy; 
8. Agreement of Regulation of Access to the Se rvices of Railway Transport, Including Basics 
of Tariff Policy; 
9. Agreement on Common Principles of Regulation in the Sphere of Protection of Intellectual 
Property Rights; 
10. Agreement on Trade in Services and Investments; 11. Agreement on Coordinated Pr inciples of Monetary Policy; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 62 - 
 
  12. Agreement on Free Movement of Capital; 
13. Agreement on Legal Status of Natural Persons and Members of Their Families; 14. Agreement on Coordinated Principles on Co unteraction to Illegal Labour Migration from 
Third Countries; 
15. Agreement on Rules of Access to Services of Natural Monopolies in the Sphere of Electro 
Energy, Including Basics of Pricing and Tariff Policy; 
16. Agreement on Organization, Management, Functioning and Development of Common 
Markets of Oil and Oil Products; 
18. Agreement on Rules of Access to the Services of Natural Monopolies in the Sphere of Gas 
Transportation, Including Basics of Price and Tariff Formation. 
190.  The Commission consisted of the Council and the Collegium.  The Council consisted of one 
representative from each CU Party at the leve l of Deputy Prime Minister.  The Council took 
decisions by consensus and had the authority to cancel or revise any decisions made by the 
Collegium.  The Collegium of the Commission consisted of nine members, including three members 
from each CU Party.  The Collegium took decisions by qualified majority voting (i.e. ⅔ of the 
aggregate membership of the Collegium).  Voting t ook place on all issues or decisions taken by the 
Collegium.  
191.  The competences of Council and Collegium were approved by the Treaty on Eurasian 
Economic Commission and the Regulation of the Eurasian Economic Commission dated 
18 November 2011. 
 (e) The Council of the Commission 
192.  Council of the Commission carried out overa ll management on the Commission activity, 
and performed the following functions: 
- submitted drafts of international treaties signed by the Commission to the Supreme 
Eurasian Economic Council for approval; 
- organized the work aimed at enhancing the regulatory framework of the Customs Union 
and the Single Economic Space; 
- submitted proposals on main directions of the integration process within the Customs 
Union and the Single Economic Space to the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council for approval; 
- reviewed revocation or amendments to the Commission's decisions taken by the Collegium 
of the Commission; 
- reviewed issues in respect of monitoring an d controlling implementation of international 
treaties that constitutes the legal framework of the Customs Union and the Single 
Economic Space; 
- performed functions on organization of the Commission's activity; and - provided instructions to the Collegium of Commission. 
 (f) The Collegium of the Commission 
193.  The Collegium of the Commission was an executive body of the Commission that 
elaborated proposals aimed at enhancing integration within the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space.  The Collegium of the Commiss ion provided implementation of the following 
functions and powers:  
- elaborated proposals on further integration within the Customs Union and the 
Single Economic Space, including development and implementation of main directions of 
the integration; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 63 - 
 
  - implemented decisions taken by the Suprem e Eurasian Economic Council, and decisions 
taken by the Council of the Commission; 
- ensured monitoring and control on implementation of international treaties constituting the 
legal basis of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space; 
- annually reported to the Council of the Commission on implementation of the main 
directions of the integration process; 
- assisted Parties in resolving disputes within the Customs Union and the Single Economic 
Space before appealing to the Court of the Eurasian Economic Community; 
- represented Commission's interests at court instances, including the Court of the Eurasian 
Economic Community; 
- interacted with public authorities of the CU Parties within its competence; - developed drafts of international agreemen ts and decisions of the Commission, taken by 
the Council of the Commission, as well as other documents, necessary for performing 
functions of the Commission; 
- established consultative bodies within the Collegium of the Commission; - ensured organization of meetings of the Collegium and the Supreme Eurasian Economic 
Council; and 
- performed functions to organize Commission's activity. 
194.  A Member asked whether the Eurasian Economic Commission had the authority to 
negotiate international agreements and if so, what is the legal person signing and being the 
contact partner for such agreements.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in accordance 
with the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Co mmission, the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council 
had the right to authorise the Commission to conduct negotiations and sign international 
agreements.  The decision on granting such mandates was to be taken on case-by-case basis.  
When a mandate was granted to the Commission, the Council empowered the Collegium to 
negotiate international agreements within its competence, and vested the right to sign 
international agreements to the Chairman of the Collegium.  
195.  A Member enquired how the Commission interacted with Kazakhstan's domestic law 
authorities in the following areas:  sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary measures, technical 
barriers to trade, any other areas where special committees or commissions reporting to the EEC Collegium had been established to administer trade related authorities.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that in the field of technical regulation, sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary 
measures Kazakhstan's national authorities actively participated in drafting CU Agreements and 
regulations through special mechanisms established by CU legislation.  In particular, the 
Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (hereafter:  the Consultative Committee) was a special consultative body that 
represented a platform for consultations among representatives from the CU member-States.  
Within the framework of the Consultative Committee Kazakhstan's relevant authorities participated in preparing proposals on draft CU regulation s on TBT and SPS, including draft technical 
regulations; conducted expertise of CU legal acts, etc.   
196.  In particular, according to the CU procedures, draft CU technical regulations were 
developed by CU Parties.  A CU Party responsible for the development of a draft technical 
regulation designated a State body responsibl e for the development of the draft technical 
regulation.  The State body prepared the draft technical regulation and, taking into account WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 64 - 
 
  proposals from the competent authorities of the CU Parties, formed a working group on the 
development of the draft technical regulation.   
197.  In general, all CU legal acts on TBT, sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary measures had 
to be reviewed and approved by the relevant nati onal authorities prior to their adoption by the 
Eurasian Economic Commission. 
198.  With regard to other areas, according to Arti cle 19 of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic 
Commission, the Collegium had the right to establish consultative bodies.  At present, the 
Collegium had established the following consultative bodies: 
- Consultative Committee on Natural Monopoly 
- Consultative Committee on Transport and Infrastructure 
- Consultative Committee on Trade - Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Veterinary, Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
measures 
- Consultative Committee on Ta x Policy and Administration 
- Consultative Committee on Customs Regulation - Consultative Committee on Electro Power - Consultative Committee on Oil and Gas 
- Consultative Committee on Industry 
- Consultative Committee on Agricultural Sector - Consultative Committee on Statistics - Consultative Committee on Macroeconomic Policy 
- Consultative Committee on Migration Policy 
- Consultative Committee on Entrepreneur Issue - Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property 
Consultative committees prepared proposals to the Collegium and developed drafts of 
agreements and regulations.  Consultative committ ees consisted of representatives of State bodies 
of each SES Party and independent experts.  Chairman and Secretary of the Committee were EEC 
representatives.  Therefore, Parties, through thei r representatives, participated in the decision 
making process of the EEC. 
199.  Asked whether there would be a common EEC procurement regime for "state and (or) 
municipal procurement", the representative of Ka zakhstan replied that the Agreement on State 
(Municipal) Procurement had become effective on 1 January 2012 within the Single Economic Space.  The Agreement provided that Kazakhstan would grant national treatment for government 
procurement to other SES Parties from 1 January 2014 on a reciprocity basis.  
200.  Concerning the EEC competency on "mutual trade in services and investments" the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that trade in services and investments between the SES Parties 
were regulated by the Agreement on Trade in Services and Investments enacted on 1 January 2012.  The main objective of the Agreement was to promote and liberalise trade in 
services between the SES Parties, to create common principles and rules for mutual trade in 
services and create a favourable investment climate within the SES.  The Agreement did not regulate trade in services and investments between SES Parties and third countries, and did not 
provide the EEC with the authority to regulate services and investments between the SES Parties 
or with third countries.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 65 - 
 
  201.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify the meaning of the phrase "safety and protection of 
intellectual activity and means of individualizatio n of goods, works and services" found in Article 3 
of the Treaty on the EEC and, in particular, whether it encompassed the protection of intellectual 
property rights in general, or only trademarks.  Kazakhstan was also asked to clarify the authority 
of the EEC in intellectual property protection be yond border control.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with th e Treaty on the EEC, the EEC conducted general 
supervision over the implementation of the Ag reement on Common Principles of Intellectual 
Property Rights Protection.  The Agreement estab lished common principles of copyright, trademark 
and patent regulation within the SES.  Currently, the EEC had not been given any authority in 
intellectual property protection beyond border control.   
202.  In response to the request to elaborate on the scope of authority of the EEC in "labour 
migration" and in "financial markets (banking , insurance, foreign exchange market, stock 
market)", the representative of Kazakhstan said that the Agreement on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families was enacted within the SES on 1 January 2012.  
The Agreement regulated procedures related to labour activity of migrant workers and social 
protection of migrant workers (medical assistance and social insurance), who were citizens of the SES Parties.  The EEC was responsible for genera l supervision over the implementation of the 
provisions of the Agreement, as in the case of all 17 Agreements establishing the legal framework 
of the SES.  The Consultative Committee on migration policy was established in order to develop 
proposals on the establishment of a unified legal regime for employment of citizens of the 
SES Parties and the formation of a common immigration policy legal framework. 
203.  As for the scope of authority of the EEC in "financial markets" (banking, insurance, foreign 
exchange market, stock market)", the representati ve of Kazakhstan explained that the following 
Agreements regulating financial markets were in force within the SES as of 1 January 2012:  the Agreement on Trade in Services and Investments and the Agreement on Free Movement of Capital 
and the Agreement on Coordinated Principles of Monetary Policy.  The Agreement on Trade in 
Services and Investments contained Annex on Financial Services, which provided for 
stage-by-stage harmonization of the national legislation of the SES Parties in banking, insurance 
services and the securities market.  The Agreem ent on Free Movement of Capital was aimed at 
creating conditions in the financial markets of the SES Parties with the purpose to ensure the free 
movement of capital and develop mutually beneficial cooperation in the financial sector.  
The Agreement on Coordinated Principles of Mo netary Policy was aimed at ensuring free 
movement of goods, services and capital within  the SES Parties.  The Agreement established a 
number of measures to be taken by the Parties in order to conduct a coordinated monetary policy.  
These agreements did not delegate to the EEC the authority to regulate the financial markets of 
the SES Parties.  
(g) Decision-making within the Customs Union Bodies 
204.  In accordance with Article 5 of the Treaty  on the Eurasian Economic Commission of 
18 November 2011, the Commission within its authority took decisions mandatory for WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 66 - 
 
  implementation by the Parties.  Decisions of th e Commission consisted of decisions made by the 
Council and the Collegium and were included in th e legal framework of the Customs Union and the 
Single Economic Space, and were directly applicable in the territories of the CU Parties.  
The Council of the Commission and the Collegium of the Commission adopted decisions and 
recommendations of the Commission within their powers.  
205.  In accordance with Article 13 of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Commission, any 
CU Party or member of the Council had the right to make a proposal to the Collegium on repealing 
or amending the decision within 10 calendar days from the date when the decision was adopted by the Collegium. 
206.  Upon receipt of all required documents from the Collegium of the Commission, the Council 
of the Commission had to make its decision with in 10 calendar days.  A CU Party that did not 
agree with the adopted decision of the Collegium of the Commission could send a letter signed by 
the Head of its Government to repeal or amend the decision of the Collegium by the Eurasian 
Economic Supreme Council.  This decision could not enter into force before its consideration by the 
Eurasian Economic Supreme Council. 
(h) The EurAsEC Court 
207.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that, on 5 July 2010, the Interstate 
Council of EurAsEC had adopted Resolution No. 502 adopting the Statute of the Court of the 
EurAsEC (hereafter:  EurAsEC Court).  In addition to establishing the EurAsEC Court, the Statute of 
the Court established the Court's competency and pr ocedures to be applied in the context of the 
Customs Union.  She explained that pursuant to Article 13 of the Statute, the Court was authorised 
to:  
- ensure uniform application of the EurAsEC Treaty and other treaties in force within the 
framework of the EurAsEC, including CU Agr eements and decisions taken by the EurAsEC 
bodies, including the decisions taken by th e Supreme Eurasian Economic Council (SEEC) 
and the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC); 
- consider disputes of an economic nature, i.e. , non-political, arising between the Parties on 
the implementation of decisions of the bodies  of the EurAsEC, and treaty provisions in 
force in framework of the EurAsEC; and  
- interpret provisions of international treaties in force within the framework of the EurAsEC, 
and the decisions of the EurAsEC bodies. 
208.  In connection with the operating of the Customs Union, the EurAsEC Court: 
(a) considered cases on compliance of acts of SEEC and EEC with the international 
treaties constituting the legal basis of the CU; 
 (b) examined cases on challenging the deci sions, actions (inaction) of SEEC and EEC; 
(c) interpreted the international treaties that made up the legal basis of the CU, and 
the acts adopted by the SEEC and EEC;  
(d) resolved disputes between the EEC and CU  Parties, as well as between CU Parties 
on fulfilment of their commitments, taken within the framework of the 
Customs Union; and  
(e) considered other disputes, as provided in international agreements constituting the 
framework of the EurAsEC and the CU. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 67 - 
 
  209.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in the cases specified in 
sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (d) above, the Court could not consider the case, unless the matter had been submitted to the EEC previously.  Howeve r, if the EEC did not act on the matter within 
two months, the case could then be referred to th e Court.  The Court was required to issue its 
decision within 90 calendar days after receipt of the case.  If a case involved a CU Decision, that decision continued to operate during the case.  
210.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized  that the competence of the EurAsEC Court 
was defined solely by the provisions of Article 13 of the Statute of the Court.  The EurAsEC Court 
did not have jurisdiction to opine directly on a Party's WTO obligations and the Court could not rule 
on compliance with such obligations.  She also noted that the competence of the Court could be 
enlarged or limited only if it was prescribed directly by an international agreement constituting 
part of the legal framework of the CU.  The Trea ty "On the Functioning of the Customs Union in 
the Framework of the Multilateral Trading System" was such a Treaty.  Under this Treaty, from the 
date of accession of any CU Party to the WTO, th e provisions of the WTO Agreement, as set-out in 
its Protocol of Accession, including the commitments undertaken by that CU Party as part of the 
terms of its accession to the WTO, which related to matters that the Parties had authorised to the SEEC and EEC to regulate in the framework of the CU, as well as to the legal relationships 
regulated by the international treaties constituting the legal framework of the CU, became an 
integral part of the legal framework of the CU.  As  such, these provisions were part of the single 
undertaking and were CU Agreements that were part  of the single undertaking for each CU Party.  
Since this Treaty was part of the legal framework of the CU, an infringement by a CU Party, SEEC 
or by EEC of such rights and obligations under the Treaty to the extent that they were a part of 
the legal framework of the CU could be challenged  by a CU Party or by EEC before the EurAsEC 
Court in accordance with the Court's Statute.  In addition, economic operators could assert breaches of the provisions of the above-mentioned Treaty in the EurAsEC Court. 
211.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Statute Establishing the EurAsEC Court 
also authorised the Court to issue advisory opinions on the application of the international treaties 
of the EurAsEC and the CU, as well as decisions of  SEEC and EEC.  Such opinions were issued at 
the request of the Parties, or the bodies of EurAsE C or the CU, or the highest judicial authorities of 
the Parties, and were in the nature of a recommendation. 
212.  With regard to who could apply to have the Court hear a case, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that with regard to cases involving the CU, cases could be brought before the Court based on an application submitted by: 
- a Party to the Customs Union; 
- SEEC and EEC; and - economic operators. 
213.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan reported that on 9 December 2010, 
EurAsEC member-States had signed the Treaty on Judicial Recourse to the EurAsEC Court of the 
Economic Operators on Disputes Within the Framew ork of the CU and Peculiarities of the Judicial WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 68 - 
 
  Procedure on them, approved by the Decision of the Interstate Council of EurAsEC No. 534 of 
9 December 2010 (hereinafter:  Treaty on Judici al Recourse).  This Treaty was being applied 
provisionally and would formally go into effect once three EurAsEC members had ratified it.  
Under the Treaty on Judicial Recourse, economic operators of CU Parties and of third countries 
were able to bring actions to the EurAsEC Court to:  
- challenge the acts of the EEC, i.e., decision s of the EEC, which were binding and affected 
the rights and lawful interests of economic operators in the field of entrepreneurial and 
other economic activities, or the individual provisions of such acts; and  
- challenge the actions (inaction) of EEC.  
214.  The grounds to challenge acts of EEC, or their individual provisions, or any action 
(inaction) of EEC were their non-compliance with international treaties concluded within the 
framework of CU, which resulted in the violation of the rights and lawful interests of economic operators in the field of entrepreneurial and other economic activities, provided for by those 
international treaties.  She further explained that the EurAsEC Court would not consider 
applications to bring an action, if the decision of the Court on a previously considered case 
regarding the same subject and based on the same grounds was in effect.  A decision of the Court 
could be reviewed due to newly-discovered circumstances.  
215.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explai ned that, in the Treaty on Judicial Recourse 
the EurAsEC, member-States had created an appeal s chamber within the EurAsEC Court.  A party 
to the case had the right to appeal the decision of a panel of judges to the Appeals Chamber of the 
Court.  The Appeals Chamber consisted of judges of the Court from the CU Parties, which had not 
participated in the panel that had taken the decision that was being appealed.  The decision of the 
Appeals Chamber was the final decision in the case and could not be appealed.   
216.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, with regard to disputes of an economic 
nature arising between the Parties on the implemen tation of decisions of EurAsEC bodies, treaty 
provisions in force in the framework of the EurAsEC, and cases in connection with the CU, the 
decisions of the Court were binding on the Partie s to the dispute.  The decision of a panel of 
judges, if not appealed, entered into force 15 days after the date of its pronouncement.  Decisions of the Appeals Chamber were effective on  the date of pronouncement.  In accordance 
with Article 20.2 of the Statute of the Court, its decisions were to be implemented within the 
time-frame specified by the Court.  If the decision of the Court was not implemented within the 
time-frame specified by the Court, any CU Party to the case could apply to the Interstate Council 
of EurAsEC (Heads of State) for a decision on implementation.  In cases involving an economic operator where the EEC failed to implement the decision of the EurAsEC Court, the economic 
operator had the right to file an application to the Court on introduction of measures on the 
execution of said decision.  The Court was obliged, within 15 days from receipt of the application from the economic operator, to address the Interstate Council on the level of Heads of 
Governments with a request to take a decision on the issue. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 69 - 
 
  217.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Ar ticle 3 of the Treaty on Judicial Recourse 
established a procedure under which the highest judicial authority of a CU Party could apply to the EurAsEC Court for an opinion regarding the implementation of international treaties concluded 
within the framework of CU and the acts of the EEC affecting the rights and lawful interests of 
economic operators, if these issues significantly affected in substance the consideration of the case.  The national judicial authorities were required to apply for an opinion, if the decision of the 
national court could not be appealed, and provided that the issues on which an opinion was 
requested significantly affected in substance the consideration of the case, and the Court had not 
previously delivered opinions on similar issues. Under the existing regulation of the CU, the 
economic operators or WTO Members did not have a right to request that the EurAsEC Court issue 
an interpretation of CU Agreements and EEC acts, including on their compatibility with the 
WTO commitments of Kazakhstan.   
(i) Transparency 
218.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that proposals for the introduction, 
amendment, or elimination of a CU measure were prepared by the interested CU Party in 
accordance with its national legislation.  This CU Party consulted with interested stakeholders on the proposal as provided for in its applicable national legislation.  She also informed Members that 
such proposals by another CU Party, once submitted to Kazakhstan for consideration, would be 
promptly made subject to public consultation s in the same way as proposals prepared by 
Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Article 12 of th e Agreement on Introduction and Implementation 
of Measures Concerning Trade in Goods in th e Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third 
Countries of 9 June 2009, organizations or individual entrepreneurs of a CU Party might also 
provide their comments within the procedure of  the development of draft CU Decision on 
Introduction, Implementation, and Abolishment of Non-Tariff Measure, Concerning Trade in Goods with Third Countries.  Furthermore, in cases when an international Treaty of a CU Party with a 
third country provided for consultations, organizations and entrepreneurs of such a country could 
present their views to that CU Party with regard to the proposal consistent with the procedure stipulated by the provisions of the relevant international Treaty.   
219.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the date when a Decision of the EEC was 
published on the CU website was the basis for determining the date of entry into force of that 
decision.  Specifically, Decisions of the EEC, which were obligatory, rather than recommendations, 
entered into force not earlier than 30 days after the date of publication on the CU website.  She explained that, additionally, CU Parties were to  ensure the publication of all EEC decisions in 
their respective dedicated national official journals, as well as in the СU official journal, stating the 
date of entry into force of a decision, which was de termined based on the date of its publication on 
the CU website.  Decisions of the EEC were  posted on the website www.tsouz.ru within 
two working days from the date of their adoption.   
220.  Members expressed concerns regarding transparen cy, and also noted that it appeared that 
neither CU Agreements, nor EEC Decisions, includ ing those promulgating CU Regulations and other WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 70 - 
 
  acts, provided WTO Members and interested persons of WTO Members with the right to consult 
with and provide views directly to EEC.  This deficiency raised concerns about whether CU Agreements and procedures complied with WT O requirements.  These Members requested that 
Kazakhstan explain how it intended to implement its commitments under the "Transparency" 
section of this Report in cases where EEC was responsible for proposing or adopting CU legal acts, including CU decisions, or other measures. 
221.  With regard to concerns raised by Member s about transparency and access to EEC, the 
representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that nothing precluded WTO Members from providing comments directly to EEC.  She noted that Kazakhstan invited views from Members on 
proposals that it was presenting to EEC. 
222.  [ T h e  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  c o n f i r m e d  t h a t  C U  C o m m i s s i o n  D e c i s i o n  N o .  3 0 8  
"Decision-Making at the Commission of the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 had been amended to 
establish and put into effect a mechanism for publication of proposed CU legal acts covered under paragraph [860] of the "Transparency" section of this Report before their adoption and to provide 
a reasonable period of time for Members and interested persons to provide comments to the 
competent CU Body, which was authorized to take these comments into account in its consideration of the proposed draft legal act.  Moreover, from the date of Kazakhstan's accession 
to the WTO, pursuant to this mechanism, no CU  legal act covered under paragraph [861] of the 
"Transparency" section of this Report will become effective prior to publication as provided for in 
the applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.]  
(j) Implementation of WTO Commitments under the CU Regime 
223.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the CU Parties had concluded a Treaty 
"On the Functioning of the Customs Union in the Fr amework of the Multilateral Trading System" of 
19 May 2011 (hereinafter:  "Treaty on the Multilateral System").  This interstate CU Treaty had 
entered into force in accordance with the provisions of the Protocol on the Rules of Entry into Force 
of International Treaties Comprising the Legal Basis of the Customs Union.  According to the 
Treaty on the Multilateral System, from the date  of accession of any CU Party to the WTO, the 
provisions of the WTO Agreement, as set-out in its Protocol of Accession, including the 
commitments undertaken by that CU Party as part of the terms of its accession to the WTO, which 
related to matters that the Parties had authorised  SEEC and EEC to regulate in the framework of 
the CU, as well as to the legal relationships regulated by the international treaties constituting the legal framework of the CU, became an integral part of the legal framework of the CU.  As such, 
these provisions were part of the single undertaking and were CU Agreements that were part of 
the single undertaking for each CU Party.  Under this Treaty, CU Parties were obligated when making an international treaty in the framework of the CU to ensure that the CU Agreement was 
consistent with the WTO commitments of each CU Party.  Similarly, when SEEC and EEC adopted 
and applied CU acts, those acts had to comply with those commitments.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan further explained that the rights and obligations of the Parties resulting from the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 71 - 
 
  WTO Agreement, as they were set-out in the Prot ocol of Accession of each Party, including the 
commitments undertaken by each Party as part of the terms of its accession to the WTO and that 
became a part of the legal framework of the CU co uld not be subject to abrogation or limitation by 
decision of SEEC and EEC, including the EurAsEC Cour t or by an international treaty of the Parties.  
When another CU Party became a WTO Member, the rights and obligations of that Party under the WTO Agreement also became an integral part of  the legal framework of the CU.  She explained 
that WTO provisions which regulated the creation and functioning of customs unions also applied.  
She noted that a CU Party that was not a WTO Member could deviate from provisions of the WTO Agreement in certain cases.  When that Party became 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 Party.  Finally, the CU Parties were required to adopt measures to 
adjust the CU legal framework and decisions of SEEC and EEC to comply with the WTO Agreement 
as set-out in the Protocol of Accession of each Party.  Until those measures were adopted, other 
CU treaties and decisions of SEEC and EEC would a pply only to the extent that they complied with 
the WTO Agreement.  Thus, the rights and obligations of a CU Party under the WTO Agreement 
would override prior and future CU Agreem ents and Decisions of SEEC and EEC.  
224.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  the Treaty on the Multilateral System was 
a CU Treaty and part of the domestic legal framework of each CU Party.  As such, the national 
courts would apply the provisions of the Treaty.  She also confirmed that the Treaty on the 
Multilateral System, established obligations on CU Parties and SEEC and EEC regarding the 
commitments undertaken by each Party as part of the terms of its accession to the WTO and that 
became part of the legal framework of the Customs Union.  Thus, an infringement of such rights 
and obligations by a CU Party or a SEEC and EEC could be challenged by a CU Party, or EEC before 
the EurAsEC Court.  In addition, economic operator s could assert breaches of the provisions of the 
Treaty on the Multilateral System in the EurAsEC Co urt, as provided for in Article 13 of the Statute 
of the Court and in the Treaty on Judicial Recourse.  
- Government Entities Responsible for Ma king and Implementing Policies Affecting 
Foreign Trade; Right of Appeal 
225.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed  Members that the EurAsEC Court and the 
national judicial system of the Republic of Kazakhstan were independent.  The Treaty on Judicial Recourse and the Statute of the Court provided that  the highest judicial authority of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan was authorised to apply to the EurAsEC Court for an opinion on interpretation of 
certain international treaties.  The EurAsEC Court, however, did not serve as an Appeals Court 
from the national judicial system.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance 
with the Statute of the EurAsEC Court, the nati onal Supreme Court of a CU Party could ask the 
EurAsEC Court to provide an advisory opinion in respect of implementation of CU legal acts.  
Subsequently, the national Supreme Court could reflect this opinion in a Normative Resolution, 
which would be taken into account by all lower national courts. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 72 - 
 
  226.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Decision of the Interstate Council of 
EurAsEC at the level of Heads of State No. 16 of 27 November 2009 had established the Experts 
Council of the Supreme Body of the CU and had al so adopted regulations on the operation of the 
Experts Council.  The Interstate Council Decision No. 69 of 9 December 2010 had appointed the 
members of the Experts Council.  Economic operators could apply to the Experts Council for an opinion on whether an EEC Decision complied with an international treaty that was part of the 
legal framework of the CU.  If the Experts Council accepted an application, a Conciliation 
Commission was formed to examine the issue and to  provide an opinion to the EEC on whether the 
EEC Decision conformed with the legal basis of th e CU and, if the CU Decision did not conform, 
recommendations on revising the CU Decision.  The EEC was required to inform the Supreme 
Eurasian Economic Council of the opinion of the Experts Council and the results of the 
consideration by the EEC of that opinion. 
227.  Some Members enquired about the administrati ve and judicial channels for appeal of 
administrative decisions made on WTO-related issues – namely how importers and exporters could 
appeal (i) customs and other WTO-related decisions within administrative channels; and 
(ii) administrative rulings to a court or other "ind ependent tribunal" as provided for in Article X of 
the GATT 1994.   
228.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Kazakhstan applied the Customs Code of the 
Customs Union that had entered into force as of 1 July 2010.  According to Article 9 of the 
CU Customs Code, any person had the right to appeal against decisions made by the customs 
bodies, action (inaction) of the customs bodies and their officials.  At the same time, such persons had to appeal in accordance with the national le gislation of the country where the customs body or 
a n  o f f i c i a l  m a d e  a  d e c i s i o n .   T h u s ,  i n  a c c o r d a n c e  w i t h  A r t i c l e  1 2  o f  t h e  L a w  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  
"On Order of Review of Physical and Juridical Pers ons' Requests" physical and juridical persons had 
the right to appeal against actions (inactions) of the customs officials and decisions made by the 
c u s t o m s  b o d i e s  t o  a  s e n i o r  o f f i c i a l  o r  h i g h e r - l e v e l  b o d y  n o  l a t e r  t h a n  t h r e e  m o n t h s  f r o m  t h e  
moment a physical or juridical person learned about an action or decision made by the relevant 
customs body or an official.  In case there was no senior official or an appellant did not agree with 
the decision, an appellant could appeal to the cour t in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure 
of Kazakhstan (CCP).  The CCP (Article 278) defi ned the common judicial procedure for appeals, 
including administrative appeals, as well as for special proceedings.  According to Article 280 of the 
CCP, physical and juridical persons had the right to appeal to the court within three months from the date it had become known that their rights, freedoms and interests protected by law, were 
abused.  Besides, in both cases, a failure of a phys ical or juridical person to submit an application 
for appeal within the stated term of three months could not constitute a ground for rejecting an 
application.  The reason for failure to submit an application within the term of three months had to 
be investigated when considering a complaint and could be one of the grounds for rejection of the complaint.  The review of judicial decisions – of Rayon (district), Oblast (regional) and other local 
courts made at first instance – was carried out through an appeal/supervision procedure.  
Prior appeal to higher bodies did not constitute a mandatory precondition for a direct appeal to the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 73 - 
 
  courts.  Irrespective of whether or not they participated in the hearing, the Prosecutor-General, 
Oblast, Rayon and other public prosecutors of equal stature, as well as their deputies, had the right to appeal against court judgments which had not yet come into force (other than judgments 
of the Supreme Court).  Parties to a case, as well as other parties affected by the decision, could 
also appeal against such decisions.  Appeals must be made within one month of the date of infringement and were heard no later than one mont h from the date of receipt of the appeal by the 
court of first instance.  The court of appeal was authorised to make new findings of fact within the 
limits of the claim and investigate new evidence, which, for valid reasons, had not been presented 
at first instance.  Court decisions, rulings, decrees and orders, which had already come into force, 
could be reviewed and appealed within a year, on grounds stipulated in the CCP (e.g. discovery of 
new facts), in line with the judicial supervisio n procedure.  Reviews of decisions made by the 
supervisory board of the Supreme Court, and a se cond review of the case by the supervisory 
board of the Supreme Court, were also allowed in certain cases.   
229.  As regards appeals and complaints in the sphere of technical regulation (including 
SPS issues), the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, under the CU, there was a common 
system of technical regulations, including SPS matters, and thus the EurAsEC Court had jurisdiction over appeals covered by the relevant CU Agreements, EEC Decisions, including those 
promulgating CU Regulations and other CU measures.  With regard to decisions, actions or inaction 
of the authorised bodies of the Republic of Kaza khstan related to technical regulation, including 
SPS issues, she explained that legal measures were in place to allow appeals to be made via the 
independent judicial system against any decisions of the relevant authorities of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and to ensure corrective action was taken, in accordance with decisions by the Court, 
when a complaint was justified. 
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
- Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations 
230.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the right of all domestic and foreign natural 
and juridical persons to carry out foreign trade activity in Kazakhstan, and any exceptions or restrictions upon those rights, were stipulated in Customs Union (CU) Agreements, CU Commission 
Decisions, other CU legal acts and national legislation.  In general terms, Article 2 of the Civil Code 
of Kazakhstan No. 269-XIII of 27 December 1994 pr ovided that goods, service and money moved 
on a free basis within the territory of Kazakhstan , and the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 296-IV "On Customs Procedures" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter:  "the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan") elaborated on that mandate.  She stated that from 1 January 2010, as a result of the 
formation of the Customs Union with the Russi an Federation and Belarus, the principal 
requirements for importing goods into and exporting goods from Kazakhstan were based on the following:  the Agreement "On Common Measures of  Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of Third 
Countries", signed on 25 January 2008 (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff 
Regulation"), the Agreement "On the Procedure of Introduction and Implementation of Measures, 
Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 74 - 
 
  Countries", signed on 9 June 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on Measures Concerning 
Foreign Trade"), the Agreement "On the Rules of Li censing in the Area of Foreign Trade in Goods", 
signed on 9 June 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on Licensing"), Decision No. 132 of 
27 November 2009 "On a Single Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of the CU Commission (hereinafter:  "CU Decision No. 132 of 27 Novemb er 2009") and the Decision of the Collegium of 
the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 134 "On Normative Legal Acts in the Area of Non-Tariff 
Regulation" of 16 August 2012 (hereinafter:  "the Collegium Decision No. 134").  The procedure for the importation of specific products, such as ethyl spirit and alcohol products, products with 
cryptographic capabilities ("encryption products"), and medicines and pharmaceutical ingredients, 
were set-out in Regulations of the CU Commission approved by CU Decision No. 132 of 
27 November 2009 and re-approved by the Collegium Decision No. 134.  Specific sections in this 
Working Party Report relating to the import and export regimes of Kazakhstan provided 
descriptions of the provisions of these CU Agreements, CU Commission Decisions, and other CU 
legal documents, including requirements for non- automatic import or export licenses and/or 
automatic licenses (permits).  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, pursuant to these CU Agreements, Decisions, and Regulations, the au thorised body of each CU Party was responsible 
for issuing non-automatic import and export licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits), as well 
as activity licenses.   
231.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that only declarants (importers or exporters), 
or their representatives registered for that purpose, could perform the customs activities associated with the importation or exportation of goods (presenting customs documents, declaring 
origin and valuation, paying tariffs and taxes, securing release of the goods, right of appeal, etc.).  
The requirements and rights of declarants (impor ters/exporters) were regulated by the Agreement 
on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Customs 
Code") and the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  Pu rsuant to Article 284 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, as well as Article 186 of the CU Cust oms Code, the declarant had to be a natural or a 
juridical person of one of the CU Parties who either had a contract for importation or exportation 
(or had had the contract concluded on his behalf) or owned the goods being imported or exported.  The requirements for a person or an entity to register as a juridical person of Kazakhstan were 
provided in Law No. 2198 "On State Registra tion of Juridical Persons and Statistical 
Record-Keeping Registration of Branches and Representative Offices" of 17 April 1995 (hereinafter:  "the Law on State Registration"), Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and 
Currency Control" of 13 June 2005 (hereinafter:  "the Law on Currency Regulation"), the Budget 
Code of Kazakhstan No. 95-IV of 4 December 2008 (hereinafter:  "the Budget Code of 
Kazakhstan") and the Code of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to 
the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter:  "the Tax Code of Kazakhstan").   
232.  A Member raised concerns about the ability of natural and juridical persons located outside 
Kazakhstan to act as a declarant (importer of record) when importing goods into Kazakhstan.  
This Member noted, in particular, that Kazakhstan 's regime did not appear to permit such natural WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 75 - 
 
  and juridical persons to serve as a declarant (importer of record) so as to be responsible for 
clearing all customs formalities in connection with their imports.  This Member asked Kazakhstan what steps it would take to provide such rights.  
233.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Articles 186 -194 of the CU Customs Code 
set forth the requirements for persons to import goods into the customs territory of the CU and perform all necessary customs procedures, including payment of customs duties and charges.  
Article 186 of the CU Customs Code provided that only a juridical person of a CU Party could 
become a declarant.  Therefore, a subsidiary of a foreign company registered as a juridical person 
of Kazakhstan could become a declarant.  However, a foreign natural person could act as a 
declarant of goods for personal use without registering as a juridical person of Kazakhstan. 
234.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at requirements for actual registration of 
natural and juridical persons for commercial activity, including importing and exporting, were 
strictly a matter of the national legislation of each CU Party and this situation was not expected to change.  She emphasized that the requirement to be registered in Kazakhstan was necessary to 
ensure proper implementation of customs legislation, including its provisions on conditional release 
of goods into the territory of Kazakhstan and post-entry control that permitted accelerated 
customs procedures at the entry and destination customs checkpoints.   
235.  Concerning registration requirements, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
pursuant to Article 3 of the Law on State Registration, State registration was mandatory for all 
juridical persons established on the territory of Kazakhstan regardless of the purpose and type of 
their activities.  Registration was necessary for:  (i) certifying and keeping a record on creation, reorganization and liquidation of juridical persons, branches and representative offices; (ii) keeping 
a single State Register of Juridical Persons, and a Register of Branches and Representative Offices; 
and (iii) dissemination of the data on juridical persons, branches and representative offices registered in Kazakhstan (other than confidential  information and commercial secrets) in the order 
established by the national legislation.   
236.  Pursuant to Article 9 of the Law on State Registration, State registration of small 
businesses, as well as medium and large-scale enterprises operating on the basis of a Model 
Charter, was performed within one business day and their re-registration within three business 
days from the date of submission of a complete set of application documents.  State registration 
(re-registration) of medium and large-scale enterprises not operating under a Model Charter was 
performed within seven business days from the date of submission of a complete set of application 
documents.  According to Article 6 of the Law on State Registration, to apply for registration, 
juridical persons had to submit three copies of th e following documents:  (i) standard application; 
(ii) articles of incorporation (charter); (iii) proof of payment of the registration fee; (iv) document 
certifying location/address of its office or its agen t's office; and (v) for juridical persons established 
as a result of restructuring, the act of transfer , including proof that creditors had been notified 
about the restructuring.  In response to a spec ific question, the representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that pursuant to Article 6 of the Law on State Registration, either of the following WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 76 - 
 
  documents was recognised as a document certifying location/address of a juridical person:  
a notarised copy of (i) a leasing contract, (ii) a sales contract, or (iii) other documents confirming the property right.  If the owner of the leased office was a natural person, a notarised document 
confirming consent of the natural person for the us e of the office as a place of location of the 
juridical person had to be presented.  She noted that pursuant to Law No. 60-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of  Kazakhstan on Issues of State Registration of 
Juridical Persons and Statistical Record-Keeping Registration of Branches and Representative 
Offices" of 24 December 2012, state registration of all commercial juridical persons, except for 
Joint Stock Companies, was performed within on e business day.  Furthermore, article of 
incorporation (charter), except for Joint Stock Companies (article of incorporation (charter) was 
required), and document certifying location/address of its office or its agent's office were no longer 
required for state registration as a juridical person. 
237.  In addition to submitting the documents described above, and unless otherwise provided 
by international treaties, juridical persons of Kazakhstan with foreign participation had to submit:  
(i) a notarised and consularised (legalised) document certifying that the applicant was established 
in accordance with the legislation of the foreign country, accompanied by a notarised translation in Kazakh and Russian languages; and (ii) a copy of the identification papers of the person 
registering the company (e.g., passport, identification card, or residency permit), accompanied by 
a notarised translation in Kazakh and Russian lang uages.  These requirements applied in a uniform 
manner to all juridical persons with foreign participation and did not constitute actual 
discrimination against them.  
238.  Registration could only be refused for lack of compliance of the company's founding 
documents with Kazakhstan's legislation and breaching the legal rules on the establishment of 
juridical persons.  The basis for refusal of registration (or re-registration) was provided in Article 11 of the Law on State Registration.  Refusals were communicated in writing within 
10 working days, with a reference to the underlying reasons, and could be appealed to the courts.   
239.  Pursuant to the Law No. 537 "On Amendments and Addenda to Legal Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on State Registration of Juridical Persons" of 18 March 2004, juridical persons, their 
branches and representative offices, obtained all certificates from the justice authorities on the basis of the "one-stop-shop" principle.  These certificates included a State registration certificate, a 
taxpayer registration certificate and a statistical certificate of registration in the State Statistical 
Register.  Registration certificates were issued for an unlimited period and a single registration was valid on the entire territory of Kazakhstan.  A re gistration certificate would be replaced only at 
re-registration or when there had been a change in location.  A table summarising the 
requirements for registration of juridical person s, including the duration of the procedure and 
applicable fees, is provided in Annex 5(a). 
240.  Some Members raised concerns about the requirement for re-registration and duplicate 
registration, since this requirement would amount to an ad valorem  fee that appeared to place an 
extra burden on foreign businesses/entities.  These Members of the Working Party asked WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 77 - 
 
  Kazakhstan to confirm that it would bring its registration fees into conformity with the 
requirements of Article VIII of the GATT 1994 prior to WTO accession, given that commercial registration was a requirement to import or to export goods other than for personal use in 
Kazakhstan.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to the 
Methodology for Calculation of Fees and Fees for State Registration of Juridical Persons (approved by Order of the Ministry of Economy and Budget Pl anning No. 135 of 28 October 2005) registration 
fees for juridical persons, including small busine sses, reflected the cost of services rendered.  
The same criteria were applied to the calculation of fees for activity licenses necessary for importation or for exportation.  Fees for State registration of juridical persons were calculated 
based on the Monthly Calculated Indices (hereinafter:  "MCI") defined by the Tax Code of 
Kazakhstan.  The registration fee for small bu sinesses was set at 2 MCI (approximately US$23 
in 2013); the rate for other juridical persons was 6.5 MCI (approximately US$74 in 2013).  
This difference was caused by the different level of costs/resources involved.  Less time and resources were required for the assessment of a registration for small businesses due to the lesser 
number of documents required for the registration of small businesses.  Therefore, the cost of 
service rendered was less than for the registration of other juridical persons.  All registration fees were applied uniformly on the territory of Kazakhstan.  The methodology for the calculation of fees 
is provided in Annex 5(b).   
241.  A Member noted the substantial difference between the time required for registration of 
small businesses and other juridical persons and encouraged Kazakhstan to implement further 
reform so that the turnaround time for registration applications was equal for all business entities.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that simplified State registration procedures 
applied to small businesses, including a reduced li st of documents required for registration, and, 
consequently, a shorter registration period and smaller registration fee.  These simplified procedures were based on the fact that all such enterprises operated on the basis of a simplified 
Model Charter.  To date, her Government had not received any complaint on these procedures.  
These preferential terms for small businesses were part of the Government's broader efforts aimed 
at addressing the strategic goal of reducing po verty and social disparity, and strengthening the 
middle class, a policy goal shared by other countries that provided special help to the formation and development of small businesses.  She held the view that these policy measures were applied 
on a non-discriminatory basis to both domestic and foreign entities and natural persons applying 
for registration and as such, did not, in her view, contradict WTO norms.  She further recalled that pursuant to Law No. 60-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Issues of State Registration of Juridical Persons and Statistical Record-Keeping 
Registration of Branches and Representative Office s" of 24 December 2012, state registration of all 
commercial juridical persons, except for Joint Stock Companies, was performed within one 
business day. 
242.  In response to another question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that an "authorised economic operator" was a juridical entity of a CU Party that met 
certain conditions, set forth in Article 39 of the CU Customs Code and Chapter 6 of the Customs WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 78 - 
 
  Code of Kazakhstan, including provision of a gu arantee for the payment of customs duties and 
taxes, a history of engaging in foreign economic activity, the absence of unfulfilled obligations or 
debts to the customs authority, the absence of administrative offences in the year prior to the 
application date, the availability of sufficient record-keeping procedures, and compliance with 
other relevant requirements of the CU Party, in this case, Kazakhstan, under which the entity was 
established.  According to Article 41 of the CU Customs Code and Article 65 of the Customs Code 
of Kazakhstan, an authorised economic operat or enjoyed simplified and expedited customs 
procedures, including those concerning goods in tran sit.  Authorised economic operator status and 
access to simplified procedures applied only in th e territory of the CU Party, which granted that 
status.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that an authorised economic operator could 
use simplified procedures provided that this operator had the right to act as the declarant of 
goods, towards which such special simplifications were applied. 
243.  A Member asked the representative of Kazakhstan whether a firm or an enterprise 
registered in Kazakhstan was considered a "resident" for the purposes of preferential trade with 
other CIS countries.  This Member asked Kazakhstan to provide a clear distinction between 
juridical personhood in Kazakhstan through registration and being a "resident".  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that when a ratified international agreement did not 
contain a definition of the term "resident" for th e purposes of the given agreement, the "residency" 
status was regulated by the provisions of the Budget Code, the Law "On Currency Regulation", and 
the Tax Code of Kazakhstan.  According to these legal acts, companies were eligible to benefit 
from preferential trade under Free Trade Agreem ents, including among the CIS, if they were 
registered in Kazakhstan as resident tax payers.   
244.  Several Members noted that laws and regulations relating to the right to trade in goods, 
"registration requirements" or "activity licensing" had not to be more burdensome than necessary and, thus, restrict imports in violation of the general prohibition on quantitative restrictions under 
Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994, nor should they discriminate against imported goods in violation of 
the provisions of Article III:4 of the GATT 1994.  Fu rthermore, fees and charges levied on the right 
to import had to be limited to the cost of services rendered as under Article VIII:1(a) and 
Article VIII:4(c) of the GATT 1994, and internal taxes or other internal charges on the right to trade in imported goods had not to lead to discrimination in favour of like domestic products as 
required by Article III:2 of the GATT 1994.   
245.  Members also asked Kazakhstan to confirm that foreign juridical persons could be the 
"importer and exporter of record" and that foreign importers and exporters could legally sign 
import/export contracts with foreign entities with a physical presence in Kazakhstan.  In reply, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that foreign juridical person who registered their 
commercial presence in the form of juridical persons of Kazakhstan could be the importer and 
exporter of record, and such importers and expo rters could legally sign import/export contracts 
with foreign entities and act as declarants for the purposes of importation and exportation.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 79 - 
 
  246.  [In response to further questions from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that the Government, in respect to measures a ffecting trade in goods with other WTO Members, 
would continue its policy of maintaining an expeditious registration process, and applying 
transparent and predictable requirements that were  not burdensome to satisfy.  She added that 
Kazakhstan would not apply registration requiremen ts to limit the possibility for juridical persons 
to engage in importing and exporting, and that once  registered in the form of juridical persons of 
Kazakhstan, they could import or export products as described in this Report.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would not make the procedures or overall requirements to register as a juridical person more burdensome than necessary, would not discriminate between 
foreign and domestic applicants in approving requests for registration and would also comply with 
other applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
- (a) Ethyl Spirit and Alcohol Products 
247.  Some Members expressed concern over the restrictive consequences of the activity 
licensing system for the sale of alcoholic bevera ges.  They requested information on the current 
legislation and Kazakhstan's intention to introduce new legislation in this area.  In particular, these Members sought information on the activity licensin g fees charged for the right to import alcoholic 
beverages and on any plans for establishment of a State monopoly on alcohol beverages. 
248.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that pursuant to the Law No. 461-IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues 
of Improvement of Permissible System" of 15 July 2011 amending the Law on Licensing, the 
requirement for an activity licence for importation of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, which was 
used as a condition for obtaining an import licence for ethyl spirits and alcohol products, had been 
eliminated as of 30 January 2012.  She noted, however, that importers into Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products were still required an activity licence for production, distribution, or 
storage of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, and to  obtain and apply strip stamps for the purposes 
of excise tax payments, as described in the section "Application of Internal Taxes to Import" of this 
Report.   
249.  In addition, in accordance with CU Commission Decision No. 747 "On Amendments to 
Normative Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Non-tariff Regulation in Relation to 
Ethyl Spirits and Alcoholic Products" of 16 August 2011, upon accession of any CU Party to the 
WTO, non-automatic import licensing requirements to ethyl spirits and alcohol products would be eliminated and replaced by an automatic licens ing requirement.  As a consequence, existing 
domestic legislation requiring non-automatic import licensing for these products would be 
amended accordingly, including the following legisl ation:  the Law No. 429 "On State Regulation of 
Production and Turnover of Ethyl Spirits and Alco hol Products" of 16 July 1999 (hereinafter - Law 
No. 429 "On Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcoho l Products") and Resolution of the Government 
of Kazakhstan No. 578 "On Approval of the Rule s on Export and Import Licensing, including 
Licensing of Goods Subject to Export Controls, and the Rules on Automatic Import Licensing of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 80 - 
 
  Certain Goods, Qualification Requirements for Licens ed Activities and Approval of the List of Goods 
Subject to Export and Import Licensing" of 12 June 2008. 
250.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
according to Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 731 "On Approval of the 
Qualification Requirements for Storage, Wholesale and (or) Retail Sales of Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and (or) Retail Sale of Alcohol Products within the Territory of Production" 
of 23 August 2007, the prerequisites for obtaining an activity licence for the production, storage 
and wholesale distribution of alcohol products in cluded the requirement that the applicant had to 
either own or lease specialised premises for produc tion, storage, distribution and taking deliveries 
of alcohol products provided that they complied with qualification requirements.  In this case, the 
applicant had to submit a copy of a sales or leasing contract.  
251.  A Member asked whether importers of non-food products containing denatured alcohol, 
e.g., cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, pain ts and stains, etc. were required to obtain an 
activity licence for the "manufacture of alcohol pr oducts", the "storage, wholesale and (or) retail 
sale of alcohol products", and the "import of ethyl alcohol and alcohol products".  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the terms "manufacture of alcohol products", 
"storage, wholesale and (or) retail sale of alcohol products", and the "import of ethyl spirits and 
alcohol products" (found in Article 36 in the Law on Licensing) did not include non-food products 
containing denatured alcohol, e.g., cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, 
etc.  Pursuant to Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products, the term 
"alcohol product" was defined as a food product with alcohol by volume of more than 1.5% produced with the use of ethyl spirits from food raw material and (or) alcohol-containing food 
product, except for those of medical purpose registered as medicine in accordance with the 
legislation of Kazakhstan.  The Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products and CU legal acts did not regulate the importat ion of non-food products containing denatured 
alcohol, such as cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, etc.  
- (b) Pharmaceuticals 
252.  A Member asked if the requirement for an activity licence to perform "pharmaceutical 
activities:  production, manufacture, wholesale and retail sale of medical preparations" included 
the act of importation only without the right to di stribute in Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that activity licensing in respect of pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, 
was maintained on production and distribution of  pharmaceutical products because of potential 
damage of such activity to human or animal life and health.  Pursuant to Article 80 of the Code 
No. 193 "On People's Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009, the right to import 
pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, wa s granted to the following Kazakhstan entities, 
including foreign-invested enterprises, registered as a juridical person of Kazakhstan:  
- producers holding an activity licence for production;  
- enterprises holding an activity licence for wholesale of pharmaceuticals;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 81 - 
 
  - R&D organizations and laboratories importing pharmaceuticals for the purposes of 
development and State registration of the pharmaceuticals;  
- foreign producers or their authorised representatives for the purposes of conducting 
clinical trials, State registration, and exhibitions; and  
- medical organizations for provision medical services.  
More detailed information regarding registration and import licensing procedures for 
pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, could be found in the section "Import Licensing" of this Report. 
- (c) Products containing cryptograp hic capabilities, including goods   
  with encryption technology  and special technical devices 
253.  Some Members noted that Kazakhstan required an  activity licence to engage in production 
or distribution of goods with encryption technolo gy, and required that applicants for a licence to 
import certain goods with encryption technology also to have an activity licence.  In the opinion of a Working Party Member, an activity licence requirement imposed by Kazakhstan as a condition of 
importation or exportation for encryption products, as opposed to domestic distribution, 
constituted an unnecessary impediment to the ri ght to import and export.  The Working Party 
Member asked how Kazakhstan would bring its import licensing regime for encryption products 
into conformity with WTO requirements.  Working Party Members also asked for assurances that the requirement to have an activity licence as a condition for obtaining an import licence, i.e., 
simply to import such goods, would not be applied as an unjustifiable restriction on imports.   
254.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that the term "distribution" in this 
case did not include the term "import".  Under the Law on Licensing, production and domestic 
distribution of encryption products were licensed activities in Kazakhstan, and an activity licence 
for production or distribution of encryption produc ts was required to import encryption products.   
255.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled the se nsitivity of the goods that were subject to 
the import licensing requirement, and noted that many WTO Members regulated trade in encryption goods.  She added that no discrimination against imports was intended by this licensing 
system.  Moreover, the representative of Kazakhstan  explained that pursuant to the CU Regulation 
"On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Removal of the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryp tion (Cryptographic) Means" approved by the 
Collegium Decision No. 134 (hereinafter:  "the CU Encryption Regulation"), and as described in 
part (iii) of the section "Quantitative Import Restrictions, Including Prohibitions and Quotas, and 
Import Licensing Systems" of this Report, many goods with encryption technology no longer 
required an import licence and hence their importation did not require an activity licence either.   
256.  In response to a specific question, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan informed Members 
that to obtain an activity licence related to prod uction and sale of encryption products, a company, 
including a foreign-invested company, registered as a juridical person of Kazakhstan, had to have in its structure one expert with high education in engineering.  The expert could be a citizen of 
Kazakhstan or a foreign national.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 82 - 
 
  257.  A Member stated that pursuant to Article 18 of the Law on Licensing, the "technical 
protection of State secrets", including the "repair and servicing of technical means for protection of State secrets" and the "development and selling (including another transfer) of means for 
information cryptographic protection" both required an activity licence.  This Member asked if 
these activities included:  importation, wholesale, or retail sales and leasing of commercially available electronic equipment and software with encryption technology used for purposes other 
than protecting State secrets, e.g., computers, smart cards, cell phones, etc.; or service and 
repair of after-sales or leased commercially ava ilable electronic equipment and software containing 
encryption technology used for purposes other than protecting State secrets.  In reply, the 
representative of Kazakhstan noted that the requirement for an activity licence for the "technical 
protection of State secrets", including "repair and servicing of technical means for protection of 
State secrets" had been eliminated by the Law No. 36-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Reduction of Licensing Documents and Optimization of Control and Supervisory Functions Of State Bodies" of 10 July 2012.  
The representative of Kazakhstan noted that within the framework of the Customs Union, pursuant 
to paragraph 11 of the CU Encryption Regulation, the importation of certain goods with encryption technology, including "mass market goods", was subject to a one-time notification and hence did 
not require an import licence or an activity licence.  Maintenance and repair services of goods were 
not subject to licensing.  However, for distributi on of goods with encryption technology in both 
wholesale and retail sales on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, an activity licence was 
required for both domestic and imported goods.  
258.  An activity licence was a prerequisite to obtain a licence to import a special technical 
device as defined in the Resolution "On the Order of Importation into the Customs Territory of the 
CU and Exportation from the Customs Territory Special Technical Devises Designed to Search Technical Channels of Information Leakage" approv ed by Collegium Decision No. 134.  An activity 
licence for development and production or repair and distribution of special technical devices was 
required when imported or produced domestically special technical devices were supplied to 
Operative-Investigation Agency entities in the territory of Kazakhstan.  To obtain an activity 
licence, the founders of such company had to have access to State secrets of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
259.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan said that domestically 
produced special technical devices had to undergo the same approval procedure at the Committee on National Security as imported special technical devices.  An activity licence was required for 
"development and manufacturing" and "repair and distribution" of special technical devices.  
She confirmed that the term "distribution" in this case did not include importation as a separate 
action, but that importers of special technical devices were required to hold one of the other 
actively licenses due to the sensitivity of the goods.  Previously, an activity licence had been issued within 45 days.  However, pursuant to the Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to 
Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakh stan on the Issues of Im provement of Permissible WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 83 - 
 
  System" of 15 July 2011, the period for issuing an activity licence had been reduced to 15 days.  
Activities subject to licensing were listed in the last column of Annex [14].  
- (d) Conclusion 
260.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, the 
application of all laws, regulations and other measures affecting importation or exportation of 
goods, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bo dies of the CU, would be in conformity with 
relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and Articles I, III, VIII, and XI of  the GATT 1994.  She confirmed that, upon its 
accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure th at the person who had the right, according to 
CU Agreements, CU Commission Decisions or Kazakhstan legislation, to declare the imported 
goods would be permitted to pay relevant customs duties, fees and charges in connection with importation of alcohol products, pharmaceuticals or products with encryption technology without 
presenting an import and/or activity license(s) to the customs authorities, and that these goods 
would be permitted to be withdrawn from the territory of the customs checkpoint for the purpose 
of free circulation in the territory of the Republic  of Kazakhstan by the holder of the respective 
import and/or activity licenses.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
A. IMPORT REGULATIONS 
- Ordinary Customs Duties 
261.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that from 1 January 2010, the legal basis for 
the customs tariff of Kazakhstan was the Agreement on Common Customs and Tariff Regulations 
of 25 January 2008 between the Governments of th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation (hereina fter:  Agreement on Customs Regulation), as 
elaborated in the Common External Tariff of the CU (CET), and approved by Decision No. 18 of 
27 November 2009 "On the Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the 
Republic of Belarus, Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of the Interstate Council 
of EurAsEC (hereinafter:  Decision No. 18).  Acco rding to Article 1 of the Agreement on Customs 
Regulation, the main objectives and purposes of th e CET were:  (i) to rationalise the structure of 
the import of goods to the common customs area of the Parties; (ii) to maintain a rational 
proportion of imported and exported goods on the territory of the common customs area of the 
Parties; (iii) to create conditions for progressive changes in the structure of manufacturing and consumption of goods in the CU; and (iv) to provide conditions for effective integration of the CU 
into the world economy. 
262.  Pursuant to Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 18 "On the Common Customs 
and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union between the Republic of Belarus, Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 Nove mber 2009, tariff rates we re established by the 
Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – EEC).  Furthermore, the rules for granting tariff 
preferences to developing and least-developed countries were stipulated in the Protocol on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 84 - 
 
  Common System of Tariff Preferences of the Cu stoms Union of 12 December 2008 (hereinafter:  
Protocol on Tariff Preferences).  
263.  According to the Agreement on Customs Regulation, the EEC issued decisions on CET rates 
based on the results of negotiations among the CU  Parties.  From 1 January 2010, the CU Parties 
had no authority to change import customs duty rates unilaterally.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the tariff exempt ions applied by the CU Parties were described 
in sections "Investment Regime", "Tariff Exemptio ns" and "Trade-related Investment Measures" of 
this Report. 
264.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that decisions on CET rates would normally be 
taken by the EEC by a two thirds qualified majority  vote, except for sensitive products (the 5,012 
specified tariff lines listed in Annex 6) on which consensus was required.  Consensus might also be 
required in other cases specified in the agreements comprising the legal basis of the CU.  
She added that the position of Kazakhstan on trad e policy issues that had been delegated to the 
competence of the EEC, including changes proposed by Kazakhstan or other CU parties in CET and 
non-tariff measures, was reviewed and approved by the Government Inter-Agency Commission on 
Trade Policy Issues and Participation in International Economic Organizations.  
265.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan had replaced a 9-digit tariff 
nomenclature with a 10-digit nomenclature on 1 January 2004, which had been based on the 2002 
revision of the Harmonized Description and Coding  System (HS 2002).  Later, new import duties 
had been established by Government Resolution No. 1317 "On Customs Tariff and Goods 
Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 28 December 2007 and these had been applied until 1 January 2010.  Asked to provide the Customs Tariff schedule in 
HS 2007, including the concordance table between HS 2002 and HS 2007, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that CET rates could be found on the official website of the Customs Union (http://www.tsouz.ru/db/ettr/tnved/Pages/default.aspx).  The concordance table HS 2002-2007 
would be provided separately to the WTO Secretariat as soon possible.    
266.  The representative of Kazakhstan added th at, from 1 January 2010, CET applied tariff 
rates had been established in the Common Tariff Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity of 
the Customs Union, which had been based on th e HS 2007 nomenclature, as provided for in the 
Agreement "On Common Tariff Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the EurAsEC" 
adopted on 11 June 2003.  As of January 2012, according to CU Commission Decision No. 850 "On 
New Version of the Common Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs Union and Common External Tariff of  the Customs Union" of 18 November 2011, 
Kazakhstan applied CET tariff rates based on th e HS 2012 nomenclature.  WTO tariff negotiations 
were conducted in the HS 2002 nomenclature, reflecting the tariff nomenclature Kazakhstan was 
using at the time these negotiations commenced.  Based on the results of bilateral market access 
negotiations on goods, the WTO Secretariat had completed the Draft Consolidated Schedule of Tariff Concessions and Commitments and converted it into the HS 2007 nomenclature.    WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 85 - 
 
  267.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  currently the CET consisted of 11,170 tariff 
lines.  A significant majority of tariff lines (9,208 items) were subject to ad valorem  duties and 
216 tariff lines were subject to specific duties.  The ad valorem  rates ranged from 0 to 30%, 
except for a limited number of products.  Tariff items subject to specific rates included apples, 
chocolate, beer, and strong alcoholic beverages. 
268.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the remaining 1,746 tariff items in the 
CET were subject to combined (mixed) duties.  She explained that combined duties were 
expressed in terms of alternative rates, one as an ad valorem  rate and the other as a specific rate 
that served as a minimum rate of duty, e.g., 5%, but no less than €1 per kilogram.  Either the 
ad valorem  duty rate or the specific duty rate was applied depending exclusively on the customs 
value of the good.  In response to a question, she noted that combined tariff rates were applied 
to:  live swine, meat, certain species of fish, fermented or acidified milk and cream, whey, butter 
and cheeses, bird's eggs, flowers, tomatoes, cucumbers, bananas, citrus fruits, coffee and tea, rice, malt and starches, preserved vegetables, plan t oils, sausages and other preparations of meat, 
juices, tea and coffee extracts, yeasts, food preparations not elsewhere specified (ex. HS 2106), 
waters and ethyl alcohol, preparations used in animal feeding, cigars and cigarettes, sodium sulphides, resorcinol and its salts, maleic anhy dride, bleaches and soap, dextrin and modified 
starches, plastics and articles thereof, tyres of rubber, leather and fur articles, articles of paper 
and paperboard, nonwovens, carpets and textile floor  coverings, coated fabrics, textiles, footwear, 
headgear, artificial flowers, ceramic products, imitation jewellery, aluminium and articles thereof, 
tin and articles thereof, apparels, home electronics, cars, watches and furniture.   
269.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that for goods subject to a combined duty, it 
would be ensured, whether by Kazakhstan or  the competent bodies of the CU, that the ad valorem  
equivalent of the specific duty rate for each ta riff line, calculated based on the average customs 
value, would be no higher than the alternative ad valorem  duty rate for that tariff line in the 
Schedule of the Republic of Kazakhstan in accordance with the following provisions: 
(i) On an annual basis, it would be determined, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent 
bodies of the CU, whether it was necessary to reduce the applied specific duty rate to 
ensure that it was no higher than the applied ad valorem duty rate; 
(ii) This calculation would be done two months before the end of each calendar year, 
beginning in the first calendar year after the date of the accession of Kazakhstan; 
(iii) Data for the calculations would be from a three-year period, determined by taking trade 
data from a recent five-year representative period and excluding data for years with the 
highest and lowest trade for that period; 
(iv) Data on trade with countries or territories with which Kazakhstan had a Customs Union or 
free trade agreement would be excluded from the calculation; and 
(v) Data would be drawn from the Official Customs Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
notified to the WTO Integrated Database (IDB) unless such data was unavailable.  In such case, IDB and COMTRADE data would be used. 
 Kazakhstan would inform Members of the results of these calculations on a tariff line basis 
and, if the results showed that it was necessary to  reduce the specific duty rate alternative, this 
reduction would be made and would go into effect automatically, beginning on 1 January of the 
year following the calculation.  In no case would the applied duty (whether expressed in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 86 - 
 
  ad valorem  or specific terms and whether determined by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of 
the CU) exceed the bound rate of the combined duty.  If, after reductions based on the annual 
re-calculation and changed circumstances, the spec ific duty rate alternative became significantly 
lower than the ad valorem  alternative rate of duty, Kazakhstan reserved the right to modify 
permanently the form of the duty to a purely ad valorem  duty, at a level that complied with the 
binding for the relevant tariff line.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
270.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that the provision allowing for the 
application of the customs duties at the double MFN rate to the import of goods of undeterminable country origin had been eliminated pursuant to Law No. 211 of 8 January 2007.  Subsequently, 
such imports were subject to the normal MFN rate.  She further stated that in accordance with the 
Agreement on Customs Regulation and the Protocol on Tariff Preferences, Kazakhstan applied the 
common CU Scheme of Tariff Preferences for developing and least-developed countries (CU GSP 
Scheme).  The lists of developing countries beneficiaries of the CU GSP Scheme (Annex 7), 
least-developed countries beneficiaries of the CU GSP Scheme (Annex 8) and goods originating 
and imported from developing and least-developed countries subject to the CU GSP Scheme 
(Annex 9) were established by CU Commission Decision No. 18 and adopted by CU Commission 
Decision No. 130.  Under the CU GSP Scheme, the import duties applicable to products included 
into Annex 9 and originating from developing countries were at the level of 75% of the MFN duty 
rates and from least-developed countries - at the level of 0%.  
271.  In response to a question by a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
tariff preferences for goods originating from developing or least-developed countries, that were subject to the CU GSP Scheme, would be granted if the goods were purchased in that country from 
a resident of the country.  Such goods had to be delivered directly or in transit through third 
countries to the territory of the CU, without them being put into free circulation in those third countries in case of transit.  As provided for in the Annex to the CU Agreement on Rules for 
Determining the Origin of Goods from Developing and Least-Developed Countries of 
12 December 2008, goods were also considered purchased in the country of origin if they were 
purchased at an exhibition or fair. 
272.  [In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, 
upon its accession to the WTO, the GSP Scheme for developing and least-developed countries 
would be applied, whether by Kazakhstan or by th e competent bodies of the CU, in conformity with 
the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
273.  Some Members expressed concerns that paragraphs 2 and 7 of the CU Commission 
Decision No. 130 could allow the application of import duties in a discriminatory manner, either 
vis-à-vis  third countries or in relation to certain imports exempted from duties for investment 
projects.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all import tariffs were applied by 
Kazakhstan in a non-discriminatory manner vis-à-vis  third countries on the basis of trade and 
cooperation agreements, except if otherwise provid ed for under regional trade agreements or the 
CU Generalised System of Trade Preferences.  Ex emptions from the CET within the framework of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 87 - 
 
  investment projects were described in the sections "Investment Regime", "Tariff Exemptions" and 
"Trade Related Investment Measures" of this Report, as appropriate. 
274.  [In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
Kazakhstan would submit its Information Technology Agreement (ITA) Schedule to the 
ITA Committee for verification [by the time of its accession to the WTO], in accordance with ITA 
procedures, in order to enable Kazakhstan to join the ITA when it became a WTO Member.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
275.  Kazakhstan undertook bilateral market access negotiations on goods with Members of the 
Working Party.  The results of these negotiations were contained in the Schedule of Concessions 
and Commitments on Goods and form Annex 1 to the Protocol of Accession. 
- Other Duties and Charges 
276.  Member sought a commitment from Kazakhstan that it would not list any other duties and 
charges (ODCs) in its Goods Schedule under Article II:1 (b) of the GATT 1994, binding such 
charges at zero from the date of accession to the WTO.   
277.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  from 1 January 2010 duties on imports were 
applied in accordance with the CU Agreement "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation" of 25 January 2008, the EurAsEC Interstate Council Decision No. 18 "On Common Customs and Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union" of 27 November 2009 and the CU Commission Decision No. 130 
"On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union" of 27 November 2009.  These provisions authorised the EEC to establish an d change the customs tariffs of the CU Parties, 
including Kazakhstan, as described in the section "Ordinary Customs Duties".  No other duties and 
charges were authorised.  Therefore, she confirme d that Kazakhstan did not apply any other duties 
and charges on imports within the meaning of Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994.   
278.  Noting this statement, some Members asked Kazakhstan to bind at zero other duties and 
charges (ODCs) in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods and to undertake a 
commitment that it would not apply such measures except in conformity with WTO obligations. 
279.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan had bound all tariffs in its 
Schedule of Concessions and Commitments for Goods.  She confirmed that from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would not apply other duties and charges within the meaning of 
Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994 and would bind such  duties and charges at zero in relation to all 
goods.  These bindings were recorded in the Schedule of Concessions and Commitments of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan annexed to the GATT 1994.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 88 - 
 
  - Tariff Exemptions 
280.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that from 1 January 2010, the legal basis for 
granting tariff exemptions imported into the CU could be found in the Agreement on Common 
Customs and Tariff Regulation of 25 January 2008 between the Governments of the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Ru ssian Federation (hereinafter – Agreement on 
Customs Regulation).  Articles 5 and 6 of this  Agreement provided a framework for a unified 
CU list of tariff exemptions.  Article 8 authorised the EEC to establish the unified lists.  
More specific provisions regarding the CU unified list of tariff exempted goods and the implementation of the Agreement on Customs Regu lation in this area were elaborated in the 
Intergovernmental Council Decision No. 18 "O n Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the 
Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" 
(hereinafter - Decision No. 18) and the CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009 
"On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union between the Republic of 
Belarus, Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" (hereinafter - Decision No. 130).  
The CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 approved the list of temporarily imported 
goods fully exempt from payment of customs duti es. Agreement and the Decisions also provided 
for other types of exemptions, e.g., for investment purposes (further described in the sections 
"Trade-related Investment Measures" and "Industrial Policy including Subsidies" of this Report), 
tariff preferences for developing and least-developed countries, tariff rate quotas (further described in the section "Tariff Rate Quotas"), and special limited derogations for individual 
CU Parties from the CET, as elaborated in the Protocol on Conditions and Procedure for Use in 
Exceptional Cases of the Rates of Import Customs Duties Other than Common Customs Tariff 
Rates of 12 December 2008 (hereinafter - Protocol on Exceptions from the CET). 
281.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that prior to 1 January 2010, the granting of tariff 
exemptions was regulated by the Customs Co de of Kazakhstan, and Resolutions of the 
Government of Kazakhstan. No. 668 "On Adoption of the List of Temporarily Imported Goods 
Exempt from All Customs Duties and Taxes and Temporarily Exported Goods from All Customs Duties" of 8 July 2003, and No. 1092 "On Adoption of the List of Leasing Objects Subject to the 
Customs Regime of Temporary Importation and Temporary Exportation of Goods" of 
21 August 2001.  The Customs Code of Kazakhstan (Article 330) had provided for tariff 
exemptions for (i) diplomatic imports; and (ii) goods imported for implementation of investment 
projects granted for a period of up to five years.  The Investments Committee under the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies had been in charge of providing investment preferences, 
including customs duty exemptions. 
282.  In accordance with Article 5 of the above-mentioned Agreement, tariff exemptions could 
be granted to the following goods imported into the common customs territory of the CU:  
(i) goods imported under the customs control wi thin the customs regimes established by the 
customs legislation; (ii) goods imported as a contribution to the charter capital by foreign investor 
within the time-frame determined by the charter documents for capital formation; (iii) goods 
imported within the framework of international cooperation of the CU Parties with third countries in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 89 - 
 
  the field of research and exploration of space, an d also within the agreements regarding services 
in spacecraft launch.  The specific list of above-mentioned goods to be exempted was approved by CU Commission Decision No. 727 of 22 June 2011. 
283.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted th at Article 6 of the Agreement on Customs 
Regulation also provided that goods could be  exempted from the customs duty within the 
framework of customs regimes provided for in relevant customs legislation e.g., the CU Customs 
Code.  Article 80 of the CU Customs Code listed the situations when customs duties need not to be 
paid, which reflected circumstances faced by customs officials in the course of customs processing.  These circumstances included:  (i) when it was provided for in accordance with the legislation of 
the CU Parties or the provisions of the CU Cust oms Code; (ii) when customs duties had already 
been paid or when the amount owed was less th an €5; (iii) when goods were exempted from 
customs duties during the period of validity of such an exemption and when fulfilling the 
conditions, under which such exemption was granted; (iv) when goods were placed under customs procedures (regimes) not providing for such paymen t; (v) when the total customs value of goods, 
imported by one person on one invoice did not ex ceed €200; (vi) when goods had been destroyed 
or irretrievably lost as a consequence of an accident, force majeure , or as the result of natural 
deterioration under normal transportation and storage prior to their release; (vii) when goods had 
been converted into property of a CU Party in accordance with its national legislation; and 
(viii) when goods were not released.  
284.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Article 6 of the Agreement provided that for 
the unified list of CU-wide exemptions from the cu stoms tariff rates, the following categories of 
goods were exempt from import customs duty:  (i) means of transport of international shipments 
of freight, baggage and passengers, and goods th at maintain them; (ii) products of fishing 
operations owned or leased by entities and indivi duals of the CU Parties; (iii) goods imported for 
official or personal use by third countries' diplomats; (iv) currency and securities in accordance 
with the Parties' national legislation; (v) goods imported as humanitarian or disaster aid; 
(vi) goods imported as assistance (including technical assistance) and charity from third countries 
and international organizations; (vii) goods covered by import customs regimes which call for such 
duty exemption; (viii) goods import ed by individuals for their own use, in accordance with customs 
regulation legislation; and (ix) goods subject to Government expropriation by the CU Parties as 
provided for in their legislation.  
285.  Tariff exemptions in cases not stipulated in  Articles 5 and 6 of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Regulation were applied only by the EEC decisions based on consensus.  The CU 
Commission Decision No. 130 approved tariff exemptions applied by the CU Parties apart from 
tariff exemptions stipulated in Articles 5 and 6. 
286.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the CU Parties could amend the provisions of 
the Agreement on Customs Regulation through separate Protocols to the Agreement.  The EEC was authorised by the Agreement and the Intergover nmental Council Decision No. 18 to operate the 
CU CET, including the authority to add or remove goods from the list of exemptions.  A consensus WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 90 - 
 
  vote was required, if the EEC Decision concerned the changes in customs duty levels on goods 
included into the List of sensitive products, or where the decision on granting of tariff exemptions was taken.  
287.  She added that, in accordance with Article 2 of the Protocol on Exceptions from the CET, 
the EEC could decide that a higher duty rate th an the CU CET would be applied by one of the 
CU Parties, if such a measure was a necessary condition for development of the relevant industry 
of that CU Party.  A lower duty rate would be applied in the following circumstances, provided 
that:  (i) the concerned CU Party faced critical shortage of goods; (ii) such a measure was necessary to address the social needs of the population for the concerned CU Party; or (iii) to 
address the needs of industries, which depended largely on imports from third countries and could 
not be replaced with the production of supplementary or similar goods produced in the CU.  
Article 4 of the above-mentioned Protocol provided  that the EEC Decisions, in these cases, were 
adopted by consensus and that a different tariff rate by one CU Party could be applied for no longer than six months, unless extended, followi ng the relevant procedures foreseen in the 
Protocol.   
288.  A Member asked if there was a process for third parties to challenge such exceptions from 
the CU CET.  The representative of Kazakhstan st ated that the EEC took a decision on application 
of a higher or lower tariff rate upon proposal by a CU Party, provided that such measure was 
justified and other CU Parties did not agree to change the CET tariff rate.  She added that 
exemptions to the CU CET applied in "exception al circumstances" should be based on an MFN 
principle and should not be higher than the import duty bound rates committed by any CU members-State upon accession to the WTO.  Therefore Kazakhstan did not see a basis for 
challenging the exemptions by third parties.   
289.  The CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009 had initially included 409 tariff 
lines, towards which Kazakhstan applied import customs duty rates different from the CU CET 
during various transitional periods of up to five years.  Subsequently, taking into account that for 
some goods the transitional period had already expired, as well as due to difficulties with 
monitoring the movement of goods across the border after the formation of a common customs 
territory and the removal of customs border chec k-points between the Russian Federation and the 
Republic of Kazakhstan as of 1 July 2011, the lis t had been revised and significantly reduced down 
to 72 tariff lines (see Annex 10).  
290.  She further added that CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009 allowed 
duty-free importation of raw cane sugar (HS 1701 11) in 2010-2019 for processing in 
sugar-processing plants on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Raw cane sugar could be 
imported only upon obtaining a permit from the au thorised body of Kazakhstan (the Ministry of 
Economy and Budget Planning).  The permit prescribed the end-use of raw cane sugar.  The raw 
cane sugar and white sugar produced from such raw cane sugar could not be exported to the 
territories of other CU Parties.  Government Resolutions No. 146 "On Certain Issues of Importation 
of Sugar and Raw Sugar to the Territory of th e Republic of Kazakhstan" of 1 March 2010 and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 91 - 
 
  No. 34 "On Certain Issues of Importation of Raw Sugar to the Territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 26 January 2011 determined the duty-free quota for imported raw cane sugar for 2010 and 2011 respectively and approved the lis t of sugar producers to which the quota was 
allocated.   
291.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that in case the CU Party defined individual 
beneficiaries of a tariff exemption, this CU Party had to present to the EEC its proposals on the 
control mechanism over the use of the imported go ods with a view to preventing their misuse and 
release into free circulation on the territory of other CU Parties.  The exemption was granted by approval of the EEC.  
292.  A Member enquired about Government Resolutions Nos. 668 and 1092.  In particular, this 
Member asked Kazakhstan to specify the goods falling within the scope of Government Resolutions 
Nos. 668 and 1092 and clarify the terms of the 3% charge per month on other temporary goods:  
if this was 3 percentage points of the total tariff level or 3% of the duties that would have been collected and if the total charge applicable capped at the amount of the normally payable duty.  
This Member also asked if this covered "trade in transit" or if "temporary importation" was a 
separate customs regime from transit.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Government Resolutions No. 668 "On Adoption of th e List of Temporarily Imported Goods Exempt 
from All Customs Duties and Taxes and Temporarily  Exported Goods from All Customs Duties" of 
8 July 2003, and No. 1092 "On Adoption of the List of Leasing Objects Subject to the Customs 
Regime of Temporary Importation of Goods and Vehicles" of 21 August 2001 were no longer in 
force.  
293.  She further explained that goods temporarily imported to Kazakhstan (i.e., subject to 
subsequent exportation) could be exempt from cu stoms duties and taxes, either in whole or in 
part.  The list of temporarily imported goods fully exempt from payment of customs duties and taxes had been approved by CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 and included the 
following groups of goods:  (i) containers and ot her returnable containers; (ii) goods imported to 
assist foreign trade and international cooperation; (iii) goods temporarily imported for application 
in science, culture, cinematography, sports and tourism; (iv) goods imported for humanitarian aid; 
and (v) other goods.  While goods falling within the scope of the CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 were fully exempt from payment of duties, other temporarily-imported goods as 
stipulated in Article 282 of the CU Customs Code we re subject to a fee of 3% of the amount of the 
import customs duty and taxes payable, that would have been collected if the goods were released 
for domestic consumption, for each month the goods remained on the CU customs territory.  
The term of temporary importation was determin ed by the customs body on the basis of the 
objectives and circumstances of the importation, and could not exceed a period of two years from 
the date the goods were placed under the customs procedure of temporary importation.  The term 
of temporary importation could be extended be yond two years at the written request of an 
applicant.  To conform to the provisions of th e temporary importation procedure, goods had to 
remain unchanged during the period of temporary im portation.  The total charge applicable capped WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 92 - 
 
  at the amount of the normally payable duty.  Sh e added that the provisions established for the 
customs procedures of "temporary import of good s" did not extend to the customs procedures of 
"transit of goods".  
294.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that CU Commission Decisions No. 130 of 
27 November 2009 and No. 331 of 18 June 2010 granted certain tariff exemptions for imported civil aircraft (for more details, see "Trade in Civil Aircraft").   
295.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that Kazakhstan did not apply any 
other tariff exemptions than those described in this and other relevant sections of this Report. 
- Tariff Rate Quotas 
296.  Some Members considered that the introduction of tariff rate quotas (TRQs) had been a 
step backward from the trade liberalisation that sh ould be expected by the country acceding to the 
WTO and that, in their view, a tariff-only regime would be preferable as it would allow for the 
market to select suppliers that provided the best combination of price, quality, and stable offer of 
goods.  They requested a description of the current and prospective legal authority for introducing 
TRQs and determining the rules for allocating quota among importers as well as any related 
licensing procedures in Kazakhstan and in the CU.   
297.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Agreement of the Customs Union 
"On Conditions and Mechanism of Implementation of Tariff Rate Quotas" of 12 December 2008 
(hereinafter:  the CU Agreement on TRQs), that had entered into force as of 1 January 2010 by 
Decision No. 18 of the Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community of 
27 November 2009, provided the general legal framework for the introduction of tariff rate quotas 
in the CU Parties, including Kazakhstan.  The national legislation included the Law "On Regulation 
of Trade Activity" and other measures adopted on the basis of CU Agreements and other CU legal 
acts.   
298.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, pursuant to Article 1 of the CU Agreement 
on TRQs, a tariff rate quota was a measure of control over the importation into the CU common 
customs territory of certain kinds of agricultural products originating in third countries applied within a fixed period of time.  Such measures provided for application of import customs duty rates 
on imports of a certain volume of goods at rates lower than the MFN Common External Tariff (CET) 
rates and these volumes were classified under different HS Codes.  The criteria for introduction of 
TRQs were provided for in Article 2 of the CU Agreement on TRQs.  TRQs could be introduced for 
agricultural products originating in third countries if the like goods were produced (extracted, cultivated) on the CU common customs territory.  Pursuant to this Article, volumes of imported 
goods exceeding quota levels were levied at rates of the Common External Tariff.  Between 2010 
and 2012, the CU Commission allocated TRQs on an annual basis among the CU Parties based on 
proposals from the CU Parties.  Starting from 1 February 2012, the CU Parties delegated this 
authority to the Eurasian Economic Commission. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 93 - 
 
  299.  The CU Commission Decision No. 865 of 9 December 2011 had approved the list of 
products subject to TRQs (beef, pork and poultry), allocated TRQs, and fixed the volumes of TRQs for importation of these goods to the territory of each CU Party for 2012.  Resolution of the 
Government of Kazakhstan No. 269 "On Certain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas Volumes 
for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat" of 24 March 2011 approved the rules for allocation of 
TRQ volumes among suppliers.  Kazakhstan had not applied any TRQs to imports before 2010.  
300.  In accordance with Article 5 of the Agreemen t on TRQs, the method of TRQs allocation 
among participants of foreign trade activity (suppliers) had to be non-discriminatory with respect to the form of ownership, place of registrati on or market share.  The Eurasian Economic 
Commission, when taking a decision on application of TRQs to agricultural products, had to 
observe the following terms:  (i) TRQs had to be established for a specific period of time; (ii) if 
TRQs had to be distributed among third countries, all the interested third countries had to be duly 
informed of the allocated TRQ volumes; and (iii) information on the establishment of TRQs, its global volume and duration, in-quota import duty ra tes, as well as on the distribution among third 
countries had to be published.   
301.  According to Article 3.2 of the Agreement on TRQs, the TRQ volume established by the 
Eurasian Economic Commission on imports of goods into the common customs territory could not 
exceed the difference between the volume of cons umption and production of the like product on 
the common customs territory.  If the production volume of the like product was equal to the 
volume of consumption on the common customs territory, or exceeded it, TRQs could not be 
established.  However, if the production volume of the like product was equal to the volume of consumption of the product or exceeded it in one of the CU Parties, such difference was not 
considered when allocating the TRQ volumes for the common customs territory of the CU.   
302.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that customs clearance of goods 
subject to TRQs had to be made in the CU Party where the supplier received its TRQ share.  
The goods had to be accompanied with an original licence issued by the authorised government 
body, the Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning of  the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In this context, 
she noted that the CU Agreement on the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Trade in Goods 
of 9 June 2009 contained provisions on the licensing procedure.  Licenses were issued within 15 business days from the date of submission of th e following set of documents:  (i) an application 
for a licence; (ii) an electronic copy of the application; (iii) a copy of a foreign trade agreement 
(contract); (iv) a copy of the registration document in tax authorities; and (v) a document confirming payment of a licensing fee.  The set of  documents for a licence had to be submitted to 
the Trade Committee of the Ministry of Econom y and Budget Planning of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  Licenses remained valid until the end of  the calendar year in which they were issued.   
303.  The Eurasian Economic Commission had also determined that the TRQs in the CU Parties 
were to be administered by the governments of th e CU Parties in accordance with their respective 
national legislation.  In Kazakhstan TRQs were regulated by Law No. 544 "On Regulation of Trade 
Activity" and Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 269.  Resolution No. 269 approved WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 94 - 
 
  the rules for allocation of volumes of TRQs between suppliers, which provided for allocation based 
on the "historical principle", i.e. allocations proportionate to the volume of imports in the previous period.  She stated that the Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 269 also contained 
the following definitions:  
(a) TRQ volume - the volume of imported goods determined by the Government of Kazakhstan 
annually which were subject to the in-quota import duty rate; 
(b) participants of foreign economic activity (suppliers) - juridical or physical persons that had 
been importing beef, pork or poultry during the previous period in accordance with the 
following criteria:  it had been import ing beef, pork or poultry (i) from the 
countries-suppliers; (ii) in volumes not less than 25 kg during the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; and (iii) during the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; 
(c) the previous period - two years prior to the year of TRQs establishment;  
(d) countries-suppliers - the countries that had no free trade agreements with the CU Parties 
or had exemptions from the free trade regime with regard to beef, pork or poultry under TRQ; 
(e) the supplier's import volume - the actual volume of beef, pork or poultry under the TRQ 
imported by the supplier from the countries-suppliers, which was determined on the basis of foreign trade statistics; 
A "new entrant" had to import the beef, pork, or poultry under the out-of-quota duty rate to be 
included later in the list of historical suppliers. 
304.  Some Members expressed concern that the TRQ regime that Kazakhstan applied under the 
CU, did not appear to allocate any in-quota volume to new entrants.  As the representative stated 
above, it appeared that an importer newly entering the market had to import at the over-quota rate which acted to limit the quantity of imports.  Thus, in subsequent years, this importer would 
qualify only for a small in-quota allocation, since allocations were based on imports over the 
previous year.  In these Members' view, this did not provide sufficient flexibility in the market.  These Members further emphasized that allocating the TRQ only to historical suppliers could be 
problematic as some suppliers were no longer participants in the market. 
305.  In response to a specific question regarding the "economically viable quantities", the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that in calculation of the share of historical suppliers within 
the total volume of imports during the two preceding years, all supplies exceeding 25 kg were taken into account.  Thus, tariff rate quotas were allocated between historical suppliers in 
proportion to the shares determined based on mathematical formulae.  Suppliers could annually 
apply for the in-quota volume not exceeding their yearly share within the in-quota volume annually established by the Government.  Therefore, in her opinion, the TRQs allocation 
mechanism established by Government Resolution No. 269 was fully consistent with the provisions 
of the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.   
306.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in accordance with the rules approved 
by the Resolution of the Government of Kaza khstan No. 269, TRQ volumes for beef, pork, or 
poultry were allocated in two stages:  at stage 1, annually by 31 December of the year preceding 
the year when a TRQ entered into force, 25% of the total annual TRQ volumes were allocated 
among suppliers according to the formula; and at st age 2, annually by 1 April of the year when a 
TRQ entered into force, 100% of the total annual TRQ volumes were allocated according to the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 95 - 
 
  formula, which deducted the TRQ volume allocated during stage 1.  TRQs for imports of beef, fresh 
or chilled (HS Code 0201) were allocated on a "first come, first served" basis.  The formulae used for allocation of TRQ volumes between suppliers, are provided in Annex 11.   
307.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled that TRQ volumes were determined on an 
annual basis.  She stated that the CU Commission Decisions No. 505 of 18 November 2010 and No. 865 of 9 December 2011 had allocated TRQs fo r beef, pork and poultry, and had established 
the TRQ volumes for each CU Party in 2011 and 2012 respectively.  The TRQ volumes established 
for Kazakhstan had been the same in 2010 and 2 011.  In 2012, TRQ volumes for beef and pork 
had been increased.  The EEC Decision No. 229 "On the List of Products, towards which Tariff Rate 
Quotas, and the Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas to the Territories of the Member-States of the 
Customs Union and Common Economic Space for 2013 are Established" of 20 November 2012, 
had introduced a tariff rate quota on milk whey and established TRQ volumes for 2013.  The TRQ 
volumes for 2010-2013 are provided in Table 1 .   
Table 1:  TRQ Volumes for 2010 – 2013 
HS Code Product Name TRQ volumes for 2010 – 2013, thousand tonnes 
2010 2011 2012 2013 
0201 Beef, fresh or chilled 0.02 0.02 0.02  
15.4 
0202 Beef, frozen 10.0 10.0 13.9 
0203 Pork 7.4 7.4 9.4 9.7 
0203 29 550 2, 0203 29 900 2 Pork trimmings 
0207 Poultry 110.0 110.0 110.0 100.0 
308.  A Member expressed concern regarding delays in allocating the 2012 TRQ volumes and 
that this delay was precluding trade.  This Member reported that according to industry sources, the Government Resolution allocating the quota volu mes had not been signed.  The Member requested 
information on when the Resolution would be sign ed and requested that the situation be resolved 
quickly to allow for trade.  Further, the Member requested assurances that these types of delays 
would not occur in the future.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Government 
Resolution No. 1085 on allocated TRQs volumes for the year 2012 had already been signed on 24 August 2012.  The delay was caused due to problems related to the accuracy of customs 
statistics.  She further stated that in order to prevent such delays in the future, the amendments 
on reduction of time-frames for consideration of the draft resolution on allocation of TRQ volumes were planned to be introduced to the Rules for A llocation of Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas between 
Participants of Foreign Economic Activity. The representative of Kazakhstan recalled that the Trade 
Committee of the Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning of the Republic of Kazakhstan was the authorised body issuing import licenses for b eef, pork, or poultry under TRQs.  The Customs 
Control Committee had to report to the Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning quarterly on the 
actual volume of imported beef, pork, and poultry respectively.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 96 - 
 
  309.  A Member expressed concern regarding the imposition of TRQs for poultry products and 
stated that imposition of new trade restrictions during the course of WTO accession was contrary to the general principle of standstill with regard to trade restrictions during accession negotiations.  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan stated  that production of poultry was one of the key 
segments of agricultural sector in Kazakhstan, which provided thousands of jobs in rural areas.  Hence for Kazakhstan, it was important to preserve the right to apply TRQs on poultry.  She noted 
that Kazakhstan had been working closely with Working Party Members in order to elaborate a 
mutually acceptable solution. 
310.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the TRQ mechanism set-out in Section I-B of Part I of the Schedule of Concessions and 
Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan contained the information on in-quota tariff rates and 
quantities eligible for the in-quota tariff rates for TRQs for beef, pork and poultry.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that currently Kazakhstan did not allocate country-specific TRQs.  Therefore, TRQs were allocated on the basis of the "historical principle" 
among suppliers - residents of Kazakhstan - proportionally to the volume of the goods imported in 
the previous period.  Thus, at this time, Kazakhstan had no need for a re-allocation mechanism and did not have one in place.   
311.  One Member emphasized that the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures 
required that in the administration of quotas by means of licensing, quota allocations make 
provision for new entrants to the market and the issuing of licenses for imports in commercially 
viable quantities.  This Member stated that provision also needed to be made for the re-allocation of unused quantities of the TRQ by the original re cipients of the licenses in the cases of country 
specific allocations.  This Member stated that Kazakhstan should establish a  mechanism to allow 
for access to the TRQ by new entrants, that ensured that allocated amounts were commercially viable, and that dealt with the issue of reallocation of unused quota designations to ensure full 
utilisation of the TRQ when allocations were made on a country-specific basis.   
312.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, in implementing TRQs, Kazakhstan 
would apply WTO-consistent procedures that provide for allocations to new importers.  In case, if 
Kazakhstan decides to allocate TRQs on a country-specific basis, it would provide for a transparent, predictable, and timely reallocation mechanism that allows for full utilisation of TRQs 
by WTO Members.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that fr om the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the 
WTO, import TRQs applied in Kazakhstan would be administered, whether by the competent 
Bodies of the CU or by authorities of Kazakhstan, in a manner that was consistent with 
the GATT 1994 and other relevant WTO Agreements, including the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and the Agreement on Agriculture.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
[The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the 
WTO, import TRQs applied in Kazakhstan would be administered, whether by the competent WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 97 - 
 
  Bodies of the CU or by authorities of Kazakhstan, in a manner that was consistent with 
the GATT 1994 and other relevant WTO Agreements, including the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and the Agreement on Agriculture.  [She further confirmed that, in implementing 
TRQs, Kazakhstan would provide for allocations under the TRQs in commercially viable quantities 
and would provide opportunity for new entrants seeking access to in-quota allocations under the TRQ.]  If Kazakhstan allocated TRQs on a country-specific basis, it would provide for a transparent, 
predictable, and timely reallocation mechanism that allows for full utilisation of TRQs by 
WTO Members.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Fees and Charges for Services Rendered 
313.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that Article 72 of the Customs Union 
(CU) Customs Code left the authority for the application of customs fees to the CU Parties.  In Kazakhstan, customs fees and charges currently  were regulated by the Customs Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter:  "Customs Code of Kazakhstan") and Government Resolution 
No. 24 "On Adoption of Rates of Customs Fees Levied by Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011.  
Government Resolution No. 669 "On Adoption of Rates of Customs Fees, Charges and Payments 
Levied by Customs Bodies" of 8 July 2003 was no longer in force.   
314.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that before adoption of the new Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan, which had entered into force as of 1 July 2010, customs fees had been levied 
for (i) customs clearance; (ii) customs escort of goods; and (iii) customs warehousing of goods.  Fees also had been levied for issuing preliminary decisions on the classification of goods and the 
methodology used for identifying the origin and cu stoms value of goods.  In accordance with the 
new RK Customs Code, customs fees were levied only for (i) customs clearance at the time of 
declaration of goods; (ii) customs escort of goods; and (iii) issuing preliminary decisions 
(Article 116).   
315.  The Customs Code of Kazakhstan had abolished the old customs clearance fee levied at 
0.2% of the customs value.  Customs clearance fees and customs escort fees now applied in 
accordance with Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption of Customs Fee Rates Levied by 
Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011, which established customs clearance fees levied at the time 
of declaration in fixed amounts (euro) per declarat ion and levied customs escort fees on the basis 
of distance.  The methodology used for calculating customs escort fees included travel expenses of 
customs officials, costs of fuel for transportation, and depreciation costs of vehicles; and it did not 
cover the salaries of customs officials.  In her view, the fees were calculated on the basis of the actual cost of services rendered and therefore were in conformity with Article VIII of 
the GATT 1994.  Customs fees levied for customs declaration of goods, customs escort, and 
issuing of preliminary decisions were paid to the budget and were non-refundable. 
316.  The customs clearance of goods (and vehicles) in Kazakhstan included, (i) registration of a 
customs declaration; (ii) verification of the application of tariff and non-tariff regulations; 
(iii) verification of accuracy of the declared customs regimes (such as customs transit, customs WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 98 - 
 
  warehouse, etc.) with customs requirements; (iv) administration of customs fees; determination of 
customs value; and (v) classification of good s for the purpose of customs examination and 
customs expert evaluation.  According to para graph 3 of Article 115 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, the amount of customs clearance fees levied could not exceed the actual costs 
incurred by customs bodies during the customs cl earance process.  Customs clearance fees were 
set based on the customs declaration at €60 for the main list of goods in the customs declaration, 
and at €25 for every additional list, in case of declaring more than one type of goods at once.  
Pursuant to Article 120 of the Customs Code of Ka zakhstan, customs clearance fees had to be paid 
before or at the time of submission of the cust oms declaration.  The fee for issuing preliminary 
decisions on the classification of goods and the or igin of goods by the customs body was set at €70 
and had to be paid before the issuance of such deci sion.  In response to a specific question from a 
Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan applied a fixed fee for all 
customs clearance activities irrespective of the type of good, clearance place, time, and transportation mode.  
317.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
only transit escort fees were levied on the basis of distance.  According to Article 322 of 
the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, "customs escort" was a measure used by the customs bodies or 
other organizations stipulated by the legislation of Kazakhstan to convey goods in accordance with 
the customs procedure of the customs transit.  Th e customs bodies could authorise this procedure 
in cases (i) determined on the basis of the risk management system; (ii) when customs duties and 
taxes had not been paid or had not been paid in full; (iii) when the carrier repeatedly had failed to fulfil duties with regard to the delivery of goods in accordance with the customs procedure of 
customs transit; and (iv) as provided for in international agreements to which the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was a party.   
318.  The customs escort was initiated no later than within 24 hours of the time the customs 
bodies made the decision on the need for customs escort.  Customs escort fees were calculated on 
the basis of the distance between the customs po int of departure of the goods to the customs 
point of destination (e.g., ranging from €11 for a distance of up to 50 km to €878 for a distance of 
over 2,000 km).  The methodology for calculation of customs escort fees is provided in Annex 12.  
The fees charged covered the travel expenses of customs officials, the cost of fuel used for 
transportation, and depreciation cost of vehicles; it did not cover the salaries of customs officials.  
If customs escort was provided to the goods transported by several vehicles, the customs fee was applied proportionally depending on the number of vehicles.  Customs fees for customs escort had 
to be paid after the decision on customs escort was made, but no later than on the day that the 
customs escort began.  
319.  The following items were exempt from payment of customs fees:  (i) vehicles transporting 
passengers and baggage internationally on a regular basis as well as other property necessary during transportation; (ii) maintenance items, fuel, food and other property exported from the 
customs territory of the Customs Union in order to provide for the work of Kazakhstan's vessels or WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 99 - 
 
  vessels chartered by Kazakhstan's persons used for marine fishery, as well as products of marine 
fishery imported into Kazakhstan; (iii) national and foreign bills and coins (except for bills and coins of cultural and historical value), and securities; (iv) goods (except for excisable goods) 
imported as humanitarian aid; (v) goods except for excisable goods (except for cars for medical 
purposes) imported for charity purposes; (vi) materials imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan for the production of bills and coins; (vii) goods imported and exported for official use 
of foreign diplomatic missions and consular establishments, diplomatic, administrative and 
technical personnel of these establishments, including their family members who were not citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan; (viii) goods decl ared under the customs procedure of refusal in 
favour of the State; and (ix) goods acquired using the grants of governments and international 
organizations in accordance with the tax legislation of Kazakhstan. 
320.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would, from the date of 
accession, ensure that any fees and charges for services rendered imposed on or in connection with importation and exportation, including those listed in paragraph [314] and Annex [12], or 
introduced in the future would be applied in conformity with the relevant provisions of the 
WTO Agreement, in particular Articles VIII and X of the GATT 1994.  She further confirmed that, 
from the date of accession, all laws and regulations regarding the application and level of any such 
fees and charges would be published.  Further, upon receipt of a written request of a concerned 
Member, Kazakhstan would provide to that Member information on the revenue collected from a 
specific fee or charge and on the costs of prov iding the associated services.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
- Application of Internal Taxes to Imports 
321.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated th at, as of 1 July 2010, the legal framework 
governing the application of indirect taxation on  imports (and exports) among the Customs Union 
(CU) Parties was contained in the Agreement on the Principles of Indirect Tax Collection at Export 
and Import of Goods, Performing Works and Render ing Services in the Customs Union, signed on 
25 January 2008, as amended by the Protocol on Amending the Agreement on the Principles of 
Collection of Indirect Taxes on Exports and Im ports of Goods, Performing Works and Rendering 
Services in the CU of 11 December 2009 (herea fter:  Protocol on Amending the Agreement on 
Indirect Taxes on Exports and Imports).  Its provisions were elaborated in the Protocol on the 
Procedure of Levying Indirect Taxes upon Performing Works and Rendering Services in the 
Customs Union of 11 December 2009, and the Protocol on the Procedure of Collection of Indirect Taxes and on the Mechanism of Carrying Out the Control over their Payment while 
Exporting/Importing Goods from/to the Customs Union, signed on 11 December 2009.   
322.  The above-mentioned CU Protocols and the Agreement established that imports among 
CU Parties would be subject to excise and value-added taxes (VAT) and that exports among 
CU Parties would be exempted from excise taxes and (or) subject to VAT at a zero rate applied by 
the exporting Party, provided that documentary confirmation of the fact of the export and payment 
of indirect taxes (VAT and excise taxes) to the budget of the importing CU Party was submitted to WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 100 - 
 
  the exporting Party's tax authorities.  The Agreemen t also confirmed that the rate of duty of these 
indirect taxes applied to imports would not exceed the rate applicable to domestic goods.  The Agreement on Indirect Taxes on Exports and Imports (as amended) provided that application 
of indirect taxes on imports into Special Economic Zones (SEZs) would be established in a 
separate CU Treaty.  Article 70 of the Cust oms Code of the Customs Union, adopted on 
27 November 2009 (hereafter the CU Customs Code) and in force as of 1 July 2010, confirmed 
that CU Parties' customs services would collect VAT and excise taxes on imports into the 
Customs Union from third parties.  Articles 72, 73, and 75 stated that the levels, method of collection and taxable base for these taxes on imports were regulated by the national legislation of 
the CU Parties.  Thus, within the framework of the Customs Union, Kazakhstan's national 
legislation determining the application of indi rect taxes to imports and exports prior to 
1 January 2010 continued to apply.   
323.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
provided the legal framework for application of internal taxes (VAT and excise taxes) on imported 
goods in the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Local Government authorities did not have the right to 
introduce import taxes, as these taxes could on ly be introduced by the national Government 
through the adoption of new legislative acts or amendments to the Tax Code.  The new Tax Code 
had entered into force on 1 January 2009, and was based on the following key principles:  
(i) reduction of the tax burden of the non-extracting sectors of economy; (ii) reduction of 
administrative barriers; and (iii) increase in the effectiveness of the tax administration. 
 - Value Added Tax  
324.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that VAT was set at a general rate of 12%, which 
was levied uniformly on domestic and imported products, including those originating in CU Parties.  
VAT was levied on domestic products on the basis of the volume of taxable turnover, while for imports VAT was levied on the sum of the customs value of goods, as well as other taxes and 
mandatory payments.  In reply to a specific questi on from a Member, she specified that in case of 
excisable goods, excise taxes were included in the taxable base of both domestic and imported 
goods for the purposes of applying VAT.  In reply to a request to detail the "other taxes and 
mandatory payments", the representative of Ka zakhstan replied that her Government applied 
excise taxes, import duties and, where applicab le, customs levies for customs clearance, customs 
escort, issuing of preliminary decisions.  Kazakhstan applied the "country of destination" principle 
to imports originating from all trading partners, including CU Parties and CIS countries.  Specifically, as of 1 January 2005, all imports of oil, natural gas and gas condensate had been 
subject to the normal VAT rate, irrespective of the country of origin.  Pursuant to Article 242 of the 
new Tax Code, all exported goods were zero-rated for VAT purposes.  Specifically, since 
1 January 2005, the export of ferrous and non-ferrous scrap had been zero-rated for VAT 
purposes.   
325.  She noted that, in accordance with Article 248 of the Tax Code, the sales turnover of 
certain goods (works, services) was exempted from  the payment of VAT.  Goods (works, services) WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 101 - 
 
  with sales turnover exempt from the payment of VAT were listed in Annex 13(a).  She further said 
that the application of VAT within special economic zones and free warehouses was discussed in the section "Free Zones, Special Economic Zones". 
326.  She further explained that, pursuant to Articl e 255 of the Tax Code, VAT was not levied on 
the imports of:  (i) national and foreign currency (except for currencies of cultural and historic value), and securities; (ii) goods, imported by natural persons under duty-free regulations of the 
Customs Union and the Republic of Kazakhstan; (iii)  humanitarian aid, except for excisable goods, 
imported in accordance with procedures established by the Government; (iv) goods, except for excisable goods, imported as charitable assistance through official channels from States, national 
Governments, and international organizations, including for technical assistance purposes; 
(v) goods imported by diplomatic missions and accr edited consular offices for official use, as well 
as goods imported for personal use by the diplomatic and administrative personnel of these 
missions, by consular officers and employees, and me mbers of their families living with them, that 
were exempted in accordance with international Agreements; (vi) goods subject to declaration 
under the customs regulation of the Customs Union and/or customs regulation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan under customs regimes providing for tax exemptions - customs transit, customs warehouse, processing on the customs territory, processing for domestic production, temporary 
importation, re-importation, duty-free trade, refu sal of the good in favour of the State, free 
warehouse, destruction and free customs zone; (vii) Government-approved medicines, including 
medicinal substances; articles intended for medical (veterinary) use, including prosthetic and 
orthopaedic devices, devices for the deaf and blin d, medical and veterinary equipment; materials 
and components for the production of medicine s, including substances, medical (veterinary) 
products, including prosthetic and orthopaedic devices, and medical (veterinary) equipment; 
(viii) postage stamps (except for collectibles); (ix) raw materials for production of banknotes by the National Bank and its subordinate bodies; (x ) goods imported under the grants provided by 
States, Governments of States and international organizations; (xi) imported investment gold, 
except for investment gold imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan under certain conditions; 
and (xii) investment gold imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan.  
327.  A Member asked the representative of Kazakhstan to confirm that the general rate of VAT 
was applied equally to all goods, imported and domestic.  In particular, this Member enquired if 
Kazakhstan exempted small businesses and entrep reneurs from VAT payments based on the (low) 
level of their revenues.  Kazakhstan was also asked if there were exemptions from application of the VAT on domestic raw agricultural produce at its first point of sale from the farm.  This Member 
further stated that such exemptions for sales of domestic agricultural produce, but not for similar 
imported articles, appeared to conflict with obligations that Kazakhstan would assume under 
Article III of the GATT 1994.  This Member asked how Kazakhstan would alter or eliminate the tax 
exemption on domestic agricultural output to restore non-discriminatory treatment vis-à-vis  
similar and identical imported goods.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 102 - 
 
  328.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that VAT was applied equally to imported and 
domestic goods.  Kazakhstan maintained a simplified taxation system for small businesses, including farmers that were not required to register as VAT payers due to their small annual 
turnover (less than 30,000 MCI).  She stated th at this minimum threshold was an accepted 
international practice applied to small producers with limited technical capacity to apply complex tax methodologies.  
329.  The representative of Kazakhstan further added that producers and processors of 
agricultural products could qualify for the following tax regimes:  (i) a regime applicable to peasant farms; (ii) a regime applicable to juridical persons - producers of agricultural products, products of 
aquaculture (fish-breeding) and rural consumer  cooperatives (hereinafter – agricultural 
producers); or (iii) a regime applicable to processors of primary agricultural products.   
330.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the first regime applied to peasant 
farms
11 producing agricultural goods or processing and selling their own agricultural produce.  
This regime was based on a "single land tax" (set at 0.1 to 0.5% of the assessed value of the land) 
which replaced the individual income tax, land ta x and charges for its use, property tax, transport 
tax, and value-added tax.  To be eligible for this tax regime peasant farms had to own land plots on the basis of property rights and (or) land use rights.  Farms that chose to use this tax regime 
did not have to register as VAT payers.   
331.  The second tax regime was applied to juridical persons - producers of agricultural 
products.  To be eligible for the tax regime, juridical persons had to (i) produce agricultural 
products, products of aquaculture with the use of land, process and sell these products of own production; (ii) produce animal products and poultry products (including breeding) in a full cycle of 
production (starting from rearing), products of beekeeping, aquaculture (fish farming) and process 
and market these products of own production.  According to this regime, the VAT payable was 
determined normally, i.e., by the difference between  the VAT charged in the price of product sold 
and the VAT paid for inputs (works, services).  Th e amount of the VAT payable by the agricultural 
producer to the budget after sale of its product could be reduced by 70%, as a result, they paid to 
the budget only 30% of VAT.  The price of  these agricultural goods to the first 
purchaser/consumer, including food processing enterprises, incorporated the full 12% VAT.  
332.  Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhst an noted that based on the provisions of 
Article 267 of the Tax Code, processors of agricultural primary products could also reduce the 
amount of the VAT payable to the budget by 70%, whereas, the price of final products to the first purchaser/consumer included the full 12% VAT.  To be eligible for the preference, agricultural 
processors had to receive not less than 90% of their aggregate annual income from carrying out 
the following types of businesses:  (i) production of meat and meat products; (ii) processing and 
                                               
 
11 Peasant farm is a labour union of individuals exercising individual entrepreneurship that is inextricably 
linked with the use of agricultural land for agricultur al production and processi ng and marketing of their 
products.  The subjects of the peasant farms are ci tizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan engaged in 
entrepreneurial activities without forming a legal entity. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 103 - 
 
  canning of fruits and vegetables; (iii) production of vegetable and animal oils and fats; 
(iv) processing of milk and production of chees e; (v) production of flour and cereal industry 
products; (vi) production of ready fodder for animals;  (vii) production of bread; (viii) production of 
baby foods and dietetic nourishments; and (i x) production of starch and molasses.  
The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the preference was aimed at addressing the current 
social situation in the agricultural sector.  She explained that almost 97% of domestic agricultural 
producers that supplied their products to processors of agricultural primary products were small 
farmers and households with annual turnover of less than 30,000 MCI, i.e. they were not VAT payers.  This meant that in the absence of the preference, the processors would have to pay larger 
amounts of VAT than in the normal situation, because they had no VAT to deduct when they 
calculated VAT payable to the budget.  Thus, th e VAT preference was aimed at compensating the 
losses of the processors incurred as a result of purchase of primary agricultural products from 
small farmers and households not registered as VAT payers.   
333.  One Member expressed its concern that the scheme to provide revenue from VAT 
payments directly to the agricultural producers and processors at the time of first sale to 
consumers might allow the producer or processor to charge less for his/her goods based on the expected subsidy.  This Member maintained that, as applied, it could operate as a discriminatory 
measure against imports.  This Member held the view that VAT preferences should either be 
eliminated or brought into conformity with WTO provisions. 
334.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that around 46% of Kazakhstan's 
population lived in rural areas and almost one third of the working population was engaged in 
agricultural production.  Along with this, over 93% of agricultural producers were households and 
small farms that lacked financial and technical resources.  Thus, existing VAT preferences for 
agricultural producers and processors played an important role in addressing social challenges and ensuring food safety, and as such formed an integral part of Kazakhstan's agricultural support 
system.  At the same time the Government of Kazakhstan planned to reform the VAT preference 
for agricultural producers and processors by introducing alternative WTO compatible agricultural 
subsidy scheme.  In this regard, a three-year transitional period was required to phase-out the 
VAT preferences, and develop and gradually implement an alternative WTO compatible agricultural subsidy mechanism.  In particular, Kazakhstan planned to introduce direct subsidies for 
agricultural producers and processors.  The direct subsidies were aimed at compensating the 
losses that agricultural producers and processors would incur from the elimination of the VAT preferences.  Thus, it was envisaged at this stage that the total value of direct subsidies would 
approximate the total value of the currently provided VAT preferences.  These measures would 
ensure smooth transition that would allow Kazakhstan to minimize the negative consequences for 
domestic agricultural producers and processors benefiting from the currently applied VAT 
preferences.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 104 - 
 
   - Excise Tax  
335.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the legal framework for excise taxation in 
Kazakhstan was provided in Section 9 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  It sets the 
list of products, which were subject to excise taxes and established the tax rates 
(see Annex 13(b)).  Asked about the target date fo r unification of excise taxes (which for many 
years had been applied at higher rates on imported goods than on domestic goods), she 
responded that, according to the Tax Code, exci se taxes for domestic and imported goods had 
been fully unified as of 1 January 2012.   
336.  A Member requested more details on the taxable base for domestic and imported goods for 
the application of excise taxes.  This Member al so sought more information on the process that 
had been used to unify excise taxes and asked Kazakhstan to provide a table listing all excise 
taxes currently applied.  If necessary, an implementation table for Kazakhstan's progressive 
unification of excise taxes where the rates of such taxes now differed as applied to domestic production or imported goods should also be pr ovided.  Moreover, this Member enquired whether 
Kazakhstan's tax regime expressed (and collected) excise taxes in different currencies for 
domestically produced products and imports.  If this was the case, how did Kazakhstan ensure that exchange rate shifts did not result in different excise tax rates.  This Member also enquired 
whether the unified tax would be payable in local currency for all goods.  Finally, this Member 
considered that, to ensure their conformity with Article III of the GATT 1994, the excise tax regime 
should not impose different currency requirements for taxes on domestic goods and on imports as 
payment of taxes in euro may result in less favourable treatment in terms of the actual revenue collected.  Some Members asked the representative of Kazakhstan to confirm that there were no 
additional excise tax exemptions, namely that excise tax was applied to all similar goods imported 
from all countries in a non-discriminatory manner.  Members emphasized that Kazakhstan should eliminate any remaining differential excise taxes from the date of accession to the WTO, i.e., it 
would unify all of its excise rates in terms of their application to domestic and imported goods or 
otherwise bring their application into conformity with the provisions of Articles I and III of 
the GATT 1994. 
337.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the taxable base for domestic goods for 
application of excise taxes was defined as the amount (volume or quantity) of excisable goods 
produced or sold in physical (measurement) units (Article 283 of the Tax Code).  The taxable base 
for imported excisable goods was defined as the volume or quantity of imported excisable goods in physical (measurement) units (Article 297 of the Tax Code).  She further stated that according to 
the Tax Code - as amended by Law No. 297- IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legislative Acts on Issues of Customs Regulation and Taxation" of 30 June 2010 - excise tax rates 
on spirits and alcohol beverages had been unified since 1 January 2012.  The excise tax rates for 
automobiles and fuel had already been unified since 2009, on tobacco products - since 2011.  She added that only motor vehicles with engine capacity over 3,000 cm
3 were subject to excise 
taxes.  This was aimed primarily at addressing environmental concerns and had no discriminatory WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 105 - 
 
  effect on imports.  As of 2009, excise taxes were levied on all eligible goods, both domestically 
produced and imported, in the national currency (Tenge).  She also confirmed that excise taxes were applicable to domestic and imported goods regardless of the country of origin.  Currently 
applied excise taxes are listed in Annex 13(b). 
338.  She further noted that Kazakhstan did not apply excise tax on imports of (i) excisable 
goods imported by natural persons within the limits set by the Government; (ii) excisable goods 
required for the operation of vehicles involved in international transportation, en route and at 
intermediate locations; (iii) goods damaged prior to being transported across the customs border and rendered unusable as products and materials; (iv) goods imported for use (including personal 
use) by foreign diplomatic representative office s and offices of the same status, exempted from 
excise taxes under international Agreements to which Kazakhstan was party; (v) goods moving 
across the customs border of the Customs Un ion and placed under the following customs 
procedures established by the customs legislation of the Customs Union and customs legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan - customs transit, customs warehouse, processing on the customs 
territory, processing for domestic production, re-importation, duty-free trade, refusal of the good 
in favour of the State, destruction, free warehouse, free customs zone, except for the customs procedure "issue of goods for domestic consumption"; and (vi) products containing alcohol used in 
medicine (except for balm), registered in accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation.    
339.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to describe the customs regime of "duty-free trade" and 
explain why it allowed for the non-application of excise taxes on otherwise excisable goods citing 
the domestic or Customs Union legislation that prov ided for this treatment. The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that in accordance with paragraph 4, Article 299 of the CU Tax Code, excisable 
goods imported to the Customs Union were exempt from excise taxes if they were placed under 
customs procedures which provided for excise tax exemption in accordance with the customs legislation of the Customs Union and (or) the customs legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
except for the customs procedure for release for domestic consumption.  In accordance with 
Article 302 of the CU Customs Code, duty -free trade was the customs procedure  under which 
goods were sold at retail duty-free shops to in dividuals leaving the customs territory of the 
Customs Union or foreign diplomatic representative offices, representative offices of international organizations equivalent to them, consular establishments as well as diplomatic agents, consular 
officials and members of their families living wi th them, without payment of customs duties and 
indirect taxes (VAT and excise taxes) and without application of any non-tariff regulation measures.  Thus, all goods placed under this regime  were exempt from payment of excise taxes.  
340.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply its domestic taxes and exemptions thereof, including VAT, excise taxes, and other 
taxes, in a non-discriminatory manner in compliance with Articles I and III of the GATT 1994 
[, except for VAT preferences for agricultural producers and processors described in paragraphs 331 and 332.  The Republic of Kaza khstan would bring VAT preferences applied to 
agricultural producers and processors into confor mity with the WTO rules upon expiration of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 106 - 
 
  three-year transitional period starting from the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO.  
She added that during this period, the scope of the exemption would not be increased, either in 
terms of coverage or level of exemption].  Th e Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
- Quantitative Import Restrictions, incl uding Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing 
Systems 
341.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, as a result of the formation of the 
Customs Union (CU) with the Russian Federation  and Belarus on 1 January 2010, legal authority 
for the imposition of quantitative import restrictions in the Republic of Kazakhstan now was based on the following legal acts:  the Agreement "O n Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in 
Respect of Third Countries", signed on 25 January 2008 (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on 
Non-Tariff Regulation"), the Agreement "On the Proc edure of Introduction and Implementation of 
Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of 
Third Countries", signed on 9 June 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade"), the Agreement "On the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign 
Trade in Goods", signed on 9 June 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on Licensing"), the 
Decision No. 19 of the CU Interstate Council "On a Single Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Re public of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" 
of 27 November 2009 and Decision of the Collegium of the Eurasian Economic Commission 
No. 134 "On Normative Legal Acts in the Area of Non-Tariff Regulation" of 16 August 2012 
(hereinafter:  the Collegium Decision No. 134).  As a consequence, decisions to apply non-tariff 
measures on third-country imports into the CU were now taken by the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC).  The EEC Collegium had re-a pproved the Common List of Goods Subject to 
Bans and Restrictions on Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Customs Union of the 
Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Thir d Countries (hereinafter:  "the Common List") 
through the Collegium Decision No. 134, which had come into force on 16 September 2012 (see 
Annex 14 for the Common List).  Previously, the Common List had been approved by the 
CU Commission Decision No. 132 "On a Single Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the 
Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Ka zakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 
27 November 2009.  According to the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, non-tariff measures could include quantitative restrictions, bans, exclusive import licenses, automatic licenses 
(permits) or non-automatic licenses. 
342.  Prior to the establishment of the CU, application of non-tariff measures was governed by 
the Law No. 544 "On Regulation of Trade Activity" of 12 April 2004.  This Law had been amended 
by the Law No. 297-IV "On Amendments and Addend a to Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Issues of Customs Regulation and Taxation" of 30 June 2010 and the Law 
No. 400-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Issues of Regulation of Trade Activity" of 26 January 2011 upon enforcement of the CU Agreements regulating non-tariff measures.  Th e representative of Kazakhstan noted that the 
CU Parties did not apply non-tariff measures in mutual trade.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 107 - 
 
  343.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in addition to goods that had been 
subject to non-tariff regulation in Kazakhstan prior to the establishment of the CU, the Common List had added the following goods:  certain products with encryption capabilities (hereinafter:  
"goods containing encryption technology") and implements for catching aquatic biological 
resources and skins of Greenland seals and baby seals.  Weak and medium distillates, which had been subject to import licensing in Kazakhstan prior to establishment of the CU, were not included 
in the Common List, and hence were no longer subject to non-tariff regulation.  Finally, she noted 
that upon establishment of the CU, Kazakhstan's import ban on certain types of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and their precursors had been replaced by an import licensing regime.  
In response to a Member's question, she stated that Kazakhstan did not apply any prohibition on 
imports of second-hand clothes and tires.   
344.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the Government Resolution 
No. 681 "On Bans Imposed on Goods and Vehicles Imported to and Exported from Kazakhstan, Lists of Goods Prohibited to be Placed under Certain Customs Regimes, and Bans and Restrictions 
for Conducting Operations with Goods Placed under Certain Custom Regimes" of 10 July 2003, 
banning imports of:  (i) military weapons and ammunition, materials and equipment which could be used in the production of weapons of mass destruction; (ii) certain kinds of narcotics, 
psychotropic agents and precursors, as well as instruments for their consumption; (iii) printed and 
illustrative materials aimed at creating propaganda for war, terrorism, violence, racism, as well as 
pornographic materials; (iv) certain ozone-depleting substances; and (v) goods containing 
ozone-depleting substances, had been repealed  by the Government Resolution No. 272 of 
25 March 2011.  She added that a quota on imported grinding and forged spheres (imposed by the 
Government Resolution No. 1243 "On Introduction of Restriction for Import And Export of Certain 
Goods" of 5 December 1998), and restrictions on imports of ethyl spirit and alcoholic beverages (imposed by the Government Resolution No. 1031 "O n Import Licensing of Ethyl Spirit and Alcohol 
Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 27 June 1997) also had been abolished on 
1 January 2003 and 17 June 2004, respectively.   
- (a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas 
345.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan did not maintain any quantitative 
import restrictions, prohibitions or quotas within the meaning of Article XI of the GATT 1994, nor 
was any such measure in place in the CU.  The re presentative of Kazakhstan explained that under 
the CU legislation, import restrictions could be applied pursuant to Article 7 of the Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation and in accordance with national laws and international treaties of 
Kazakhstan, if those measures were necessary:  (i) to maintain public morals or law and order; 
(ii) to protect the life or health of citizens, environment, life or health of animals and plants; (iii) to prevent the exhaustion of irreplaceable natural resources and implemented simultaneously with 
curtailment of the domestic production or consumption associated with the utilisation of 
irreplaceable natural resources; (iv) to protect cultural valuables and heritage; (v) to limit exports 
of domestic raw materials to provide sufficient quantity of such materials for the domestic 
manufacturing industry in periods when domestic prices for such materials were kept lower than WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 108 - 
 
  world prices as the result of a stabilization plan implemented by the Government; (vi) to acquire 
or distribute goods in case of their general or local shortage; (vii) to comply with the international obligations; (viii) to ensure the defence of the co untry and security of the State; and (ix) to 
observe regulatory legal acts not contravening international commitments and related to the 
application of the customs law, preservation of the environment, protection of intellectual property 
and other legal acts; and  were related to exports or imports of gold or silver.  
346.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that pursuant to Article 3 of the 
CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, quantitati ve import restrictions could be introduced on 
agricultural or fishery products imported into the CU in accordance with Article XI:2 of 
the GATT 1994, when such measures were required:  (i) to reduce the production or sale of similar 
domestic goods; (ii) to reduce the production or sale of domestic goods that could be directly 
replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale production of similar domestic goods; 
(iii) to remove from the market a temporary surplus of similar domestic goods by providing the available surplus of such goods to some groups of  consumers either free of charge or at prices 
inferior to market prices; (iv) to remove from the market a temporary surplus of domestic goods 
that may be directly replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale production of similar domestic goods by providing the availabl e surplus of such goods to some groups of 
consumers either free of charge or at prices in ferior to market prices; and (v) to limit the 
production of products of animal origin whose production was dependent upon imported goods, 
provided the production of similar domestic goods was negligible.  In response to a question from 
a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that "domestic good" in this context meant a good produced in any CU Party.  
347.  Referring to the statement of the representative of Kazakhstan in the preceding paragraph, 
a Member enquired whether any import restrictions under Article XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 had been or were being applied.  This Member requested Kazakhstan to enter a commitment to comply 
with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, which had superseded Article XI:2(c) of 
the GATT 1994, as from the date of its accession  and to remove any measures that could be 
inconsistent with that Article.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said no import 
restrictions under Article XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 were applied under the national legislation of Kazakhstan or CU Commission Decisions.  She further stated that, from the date of accession, 
Kazakhstan would comply with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  
348.  She further stated that, pursuant to Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff 
Regulation, the Commission was authorised to apply quantitative import restrictions and 
prohibitions to fulfil the obligations of a Party under international sanctions or to protect the 
external financial situation and safeguard the bala nce of payments.  To meet these obligations, the 
Commission was authorised to apply quantitative import restrictions or grant exclusive licenses to 
import or export based on proposals from the CU Parties.  Such measures would be taken in accordance with the laws of Kazakhstan and the international agreements to which Kazakhstan 
was a Party.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 109 - 
 
  explained that the list of general exceptions stipul ated in Articles 7 and 8 of the CU Agreement on 
Non-Tariff Regulation was exhaustive and no other document within the CU provided for such exceptions.  
349.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that, as of 1 January 2010, pursuant to 
Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regu lation and Article 1 of the CU Agreement on 
Measures Concerning Foreign Trade, the authority to impose non-tariff measures on third-country 
imports in the CU was transferred from the indivi dual Parties to the Commission.  A proposal to 
apply a non-tariff measure could be filed by a CU Party or the Commission.  The Commission was required to make its determination within 30 days from the date the proposal was submitted, and 
the decision would come into force within 45 days from the date of publication.  Any non-tariff 
measure was applied to goods originating in third countries, and applied equally to imports from all 
countries.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that all changes to CU Agreements and legislative acts (including the Common List) were published on the CU website (www.tsouz.ru).   
350.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tari ff Regulation and Article 8 of the CU Agreement 
on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade, and purs uant to the procedures set forth in the latter 
Agreement, a CU Party could unilaterally impose temporarily a non-tariff measure if such a 
measure was aimed at:  (i) the observance of public morality, law and order; (ii) defence and 
security; (iii) protection of life or health of the citizens, environment, life or health of animals and 
plants; (iv) protection of cultural values and cultural heritage; (v) protection of intellectual property; (vi) prevention of the exhaustion of i rreplaceable natural resources; (vii) prevention or 
reduction of the critical shortage in the domestic market of food or other goods that were essential 
for the domestic market; or (viii) protection of th e external financial position and safeguarding the 
balance of payments.  Furthermore, Articles  6.1 and 7.1 of the Agreement on Measures 
Concerning Foreign Trade provided further grounds to introduce unilateral non-tariff measures with 
a view to protecting national interests or an external financial position and safeguarding the 
balance of payments.  Such a unilateral measure could be imposed for only six months.  The CU 
Parties not imposing the non-tariff measure were to take the necessary steps to prevent the importation of the subject goods into the Party which unilaterally applied the non-tariff measure. 
351.  Some Members stated that certain elements of Article 7 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff 
Regulation, such as paragraph 6, reached beyo nd grounds provided for under the GATT, in 
particular Articles XX and XI.  Those Members requested a commitment that Article 7 of the 
CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, whether applied by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies 
of the CU, would be in conformity with the re levant provisions of the WTO Agreement.   
352.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, Article 7 of the 
CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation was in co nformity with Article XX(j) of the GATT 1994.  
She also confirmed that measures applied on the basis of Article 7 of the CU Agreement on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 110 - 
 
  Non-Tariff Regulation would be in conformity with  the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, 
whether applied by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU.   
- (b) Import Licensing 
353.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that as  of 1 January 2010, the licensing regime in 
Kazakhstan was governed by the CU Agreements and Commission Decisions listed in the first 
paragraph of this section and by the Agreement "On the Regime and Implementation of Tariff 
Quotas" of 12 December 2008.  The purpose of the licensing regime was to monitor and control 
imports of goods which, for various reasons, were classified as sensitive by the CU Parties and/or 
by the international community.  These Agreements and Decisions did not cover the issues of 
technical regulation, application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures, or anti-dumping, 
safeguard and countervailing measures.  These issues were regulated by separate Customs Union agreements and (or) national legislation.  The procedure for importation of specific goods included 
in the Common List, such as goods containing encryption technology, ethyl spirits and alcohol 
products, etc. were set-out in CU regulations and na tional legislation.  The authorised body of each 
CU Party was responsible for issuing and monitoring implementation of non-automatic licenses 
and/or automatic licenses (permits). 
354.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at in addition to the CU Agreements and 
Commission Decisions, the national legislation of Kazakhstan continued to apply to the extent that 
it did not contradict the CU Agreements, EEC De cisions and other CU legal acts.  Kazakhstan's 
national legislation in this area included the Law No. 214 "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, as 
amended by the Law No. 400-IV "On Amendment and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Trad e Activity Regulation" of 26 January 2011 and the 
Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Improvement of the Regulatory Approval System" of 15 July 2011 (hereinafter:  
"the Law on Licensing"), and Government Resolution No. 578 "On Certain Issues on Import and 
Export Licensing of Goods" of 12 June 2008, as amended by the Resolution of the Government of 
Kazakhstan No. 1320 of 17 October 2012 (hereinafter:  Resolution No. 578). 
355.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that an import licence or permit authorised the 
licensee or permit holder to import the relevant good into only the CU Party that issued the licence 
or permit; the licence or permit did not authorise the licensee to import the relevant product into 
other CU Parties.  She further explained that the licence or permit did, however, give the 
licensee/permit holder the right to transit the product through the other CU Party's territory to the territory of the Party that issued the licence or permit.  
356.  According to Article 5 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, licensing was 
required:  (i) in the event of temporary quantitative restrictions on imports of certain types of goods; (ii) to regulate the importation of certai n goods for reasons of national security, health, 
safety or environmental protection; (iii) to grant an exclusive right to import certain goods; or 
(iv) to carry out international obligations.  Import licenses were also required to regulate the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 111 - 
 
  importation of goods subject to tariff rate quotas.  The type of non-tariff restrictions and the list of 
goods subject to these restrictions were established by the Commission.  The current list of such goods is set-out in Annex 14.  The Commission could decide to add or remove goods from this list 
upon request of a CU Party or on its own initiative. 
357.  The procedure for obtaining automatic and non-automatic import licenses (permits) was 
unified throughout the territory of the CU, including uniform licence and permit applications and 
forms, the list of documents to be submitted when applying for licence, the list of goods subject to 
import licensing, and the licensing procedures for each category of goods. 
358.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that according to the CU Licensing Agreement, the 
"authorised State bodies of executive power" (hereinafter:  "the authorised body") issued three 
types of non-automatic licenses:  one-time, genera l and exclusive, as well as permits in case of 
automatic licensing.  In Kazakhstan, the "authorised body" responsible for granting the licence 
depended on the type of licence and product su bject to licensing.  The authorised bodies 
responsible for issuing import licenses were listed in Annex 14. 
359.  One-time licenses were issued by the authoris ed body of the Government of Kazakhstan to 
foreign trade participants on the basis of a foreign trade contract related to goods subject to import licensing and granted the right to import ce rtain types of goods in the quantity determined 
by a licence.  A licence was issued for the quanti ty of goods specified in a foreign trade contract 
and was valid up to one year from the date of its entering into force.  Import licenses issued for 
goods subject to temporary quantitative restrictions were valid until the end of the calendar year 
for which a quota was established.  One-time licence holders had to submit to the authorised body a certificate of performance within 15 days after the expiration date of the licence.  
360.  General licenses were issued by the authorised body of the Government of Kazakhstan to 
participants of foreign trade and granted the right to import certain types of goods subject to licensing in the quantity determined by a licenc e.  According to the CU Commission Decision 
No. 168 "On Ensuring Functioning of the System  of Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the 
Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, Republ ic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 
27 January 2010 (hereinafter:  "the CU Commission Decision No. 168"), only products described in 
Sections 2.9 (precious metals and precious stones), 2.10 (unpolished precious metals, scrap and wastes of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals, and raw materials containing 
precious metals), 2.25 (goods subject to authorisation procedures), 2.27 (goods subject to tariff 
rate quotas) of the Common List could be imported under a general licence as amended by the Collegium Decision No. 134.  A general licence was valid up to one year from the date of its 
entering into force; for goods subject to quantitative restrictions, a general licence was valid until 
the end of the calendar year for which a quota was established.  General licence holders had to 
submit to the authorised body a certificate of perf ormance on a quarterly basis.  In response to a 
question, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that at the moment Kazakhstan did not issue any general licenses.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 112 - 
 
  361.  Exclusive licenses were issued by the author ised body of the Government of Kazakhstan 
for a period not exceeding the term established in a decision of the Commission and gave the applicant the exclusive right to import/export certain types of goods.  According to the 
CU Commission Decision No. 168, exclusive licenses could be granted only for products in 
Section 2.26 (goods subject to exclusive rights) of  the Common List, and were issued consistent 
with the laws of the relevant CU Party.  In response to a question, the representative of 
Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan had not issued any exclusive licenses.   
362.  Pursuant to Article 3.5 of the CU Licensing Agreement, all types of non-automatic import 
licenses were issued within 15 working days from the date of submission of the complete set of 
documents.  These documents consisted of an appl ication for a licence, an electronic copy of the 
application, a copy of the contract, a copy of a certificate confirming that the applicant was 
registered with a regional tax authority as a tax-pa yer, a copy of the activity licence (if applicable) 
and other documents, as required.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that other documents were sp ecified in separate Regulations adopted by the 
Decision of the Collegium No. 134,  which merely repeated in content the Regulations approved by 
the Decision No. 19 of the CU Interstate Council of 27 November 2009.  For instance, additional 
documents related to safety requirements for a limited number of specific goods were established 
in Regulations on the order of movement of goods, such as ozone-depleting destroying 
substances, hazardous wastes, plant protection chemicals, special technical devises, etc.  
Licenses had to be renewed in cases of change of the legal form of the licence holder, change of 
name or place of registration or residence, or loss of the licence.  Kazakhstan applied uniform import licensing fees for all goods.  According to  the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
licensing fee was equal to 10 Monthly Calculated Indices (hereinafter:  "MCI").  In 2013, the 
import/export licensing fee was equal to 17,310 tenge (approximately US$115). 
363.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  pursuant to Article 4 of the CU Licensing 
Agreement, permits were issued without restrictio n to all applicants within three working days 
from the date of the submission of the draft pe rmit in a format approved by the CU Commission 
Decision No. 168, and remained valid until the end of the calendar year in which they were issued.  
No other documents were required for issuance of a permit.  Application could be submitted on any working day before customs clearance.  The list of goods subject to permits was approved by 
the Commission (Section 2.25 of the Common List).  
364.  Non-automatic import licenses were issued by the Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies, except for import licenses for narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their 
precursors that were issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs; import licenses for ozone-depleting 
substances that were issued by the Ministry of Environment Protection; and import licenses for 
human organs and tissues, blood and its components that were issued by the Ministry of Public 
Health.  In accordance with the CU Commission Decision No. 747 of 16 August 2011 "On Amendments to Normative Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Non-Tariff 
Regulation in Relation to Ethyl Spirits and Alcoholic Products" (hereinafter:  "CU Commission WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 113 - 
 
  Decision No. 747"), upon accession of any CU Party to the WTO, non-automatic import licensing 
requirements to spirits and alcohol products would be eliminated and replaced by automatic licensing requirement.  At this stage, however, all import licensing requirements for ethyl spirits 
and alcohol products had been eliminated in Ka zakhstan as of 22 August 2012.  In case of 
application of the automatic import licence in the future, the "authorised body" would be the Tax Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
365.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
proprietary and/or confidential information contained in an import licence application would be protected under the applicable laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
366.  A Member expressed concern that import licenses expired at the end of each calendar year 
and that importers could submit applications for renewal only as from the 15
th January of the 
following year and would thus face an up to six-week hiatus from supply due to renewal procedure 
as opposed to domestic producers that were not required to obtain an import licence.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that be cause the CU Licensing Agreement did not provide 
a separate procedure for the renewal of licenses, a licence holder wishing to renew a licence had to 
submit a new application, along with the full se t of required documents and for the same fee of 
10 MCI.  An applicant could apply for a new licence at any time before the expiration of the current 
licence in order to avoid a disruption of supply of goods. 
367.  Article 3.6 of the CU Licensing Agreement established the grounds for refusing licenses.  
A licence could be refused on the following grounds:  (i) incomplete or inaccurate information in 
the documents submitted by the applicant to ob tain a licence; (ii) non-compliance with the 
requirements stipulated in Articles 3 and 5 of the CU Licensing Agreement; (iii) termination or 
suspension of one or more documents that served as the basis for issuance of a licence; 
(iv) violation of international obligations of a CU Party, which could occur as a result of performance of the contract which required a licence; and (v) exhaustion of quota (in the case of 
registration of a licence for goods subject to quotas).  The decision to refuse a licence had to be 
justified and presented by the authorised body to the applicant in writing.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that licenses would not be refused due to minor documentation errors.  
368.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that a decision to terminate or suspend an import 
licence was made by the authorised body of Kazakhstan based on the criteria established in the 
CU Commission Decision No. 488 "On Approval of  the Provision on the Procedure of License 
Suspension or Termination" of 8 December 2010.  Pursuant to this Decision, the authorised body 
of Kazakhstan had the right to terminate or suspend an import licence in the cases stipulated by 
paragraph 10 of Article 3 of the CU Licensing Agreement including a change in the constituent 
documents of a licensee registered as a juridical person (e.g., a change of the organizational-legal 
form, name, or its location) or a change in the passport information of a licensee registered as a 
natural person.  In such circumstances, the CU Licensing Agreement provided that the licensee could request that the authorised body terminate the existing licence, and register a new licence.  
In order to register a new licence, the licensee was required to submit a new application and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 114 - 
 
  documents confirming the above-mentioned change(s).   In case of loss of the licence, the licensee 
was entitled to a duplicate licence, which would be issued within five work ing days from the date 
of submission of the request expl aining the causes and circumstances of the loss of the licence.   
369.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in order to obtain an import licence for 
certain goods, the importer was required to have an activity licence.  The Law on Licensing provided a complete list of activities subject to licensing.  Activity licensing requirements were 
established for:  (i) national security reasons; (ii) implementation of State monopoly functions; 
(iii) strengthening the rule of law; or (iv) protec tion of the environment, property, and the life and 
health of citizens.  Goods for which an activity li cence was required in order to obtain an import 
licence were indicated in the last column of Annex 14.  
370.  A Member noted that pursuant to Article 4.9 of the Law on Licensing, certain 
"State bodies", autonomous educational organizations and related foreign entities, and the 
Kazakhstan Development Bank were not required to have an activity licence for certain activities that would otherwise require one.  This Member asked if "State bodies" included State-owned or 
State-controlled enterprises or if they were limited to official agencies of the Government of 
Kazakhstan and asked for an explanation as to why these exemptions existed, how the exempted 
potential licensees were otherwise regulated and if these exemptions provided discriminatory 
preferential treatment.  The representative of Ka zakhstan replied that these laws did not provide 
for preferential treatment for domestic entities with regard to activity licenses required for 
obtaining import licenses, nor did the exemptions cover activities involving imports or exports.   
371.  A Member asked if Article 40 of the Law on  Licensing authorised the requirement for 
import licenses for goods under international agreements (e.g., CITES, Kimberley Process) and 
what specific circumstances were contemplated for the use of import licenses "for the purposes of 
protection of home manufacturers of the goods and economic safety of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
without application of quantity restrictions".  Th e representative of Kazakhstan explained that the 
Law on Licensing had been amended in accordance with the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff 
Measures.  Specifically, Articles 39 and 40 had be en excluded from the Law on Licensing by the 
Law No. 400-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on the Issues of Regulating Trade Ac tivity" of 26 January 2011.  Goods subject to the 
international agreements (e.g., CITES, Kimberley Process) could be regulated according to 
Article 5 of the Agreement on Non-Tariff Measures.   
372.  Similarly, a Member expressed concern with Article 40 of the Law on Licensing, which 
permitted introduction of import licenses "in order to protect domestic producers of the 
commodity", and such justification did not appear consistent with Kazakhstan's WTO obligations.  
The Member asked Kazakhstan how it would bring it s import licensing regime into compliance with 
the WTO rules.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Article 40 had been eliminated by 
the Law No. 400-IV of 26 January 2011.  She reit erated that Article 5 of the CU Agreement on 
Non-Tariff Regulation set forth the only reasons for which import licenses could be required.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 115 - 
 
  373.  Some Members expressed concerns that the current application of licensing requirements 
to products such as ethyl spirits and alcohol prod ucts, goods containing encryption technology, and 
special technical devices operated to restrict imports.  A Member requested that Kazakhstan 
explain how these restrictions would be modified or eliminated to comply with the 
WTO requirements.  In response, the representative  of Kazakhstan stated that the grounds upon 
which import licensing for those goods was introduced complied with the exemptions stipulated by 
Article XX of the GATT 1994.  In her view, the import licensing procedures had been brought into 
compliance with the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.   
- (i) Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products 
374.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that since 1 January 2010, the importation 
into the Republic of Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products had been governed by the CU Agreements and Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this section, as well as Kazakhstan's 
domestic legislation, the Law No. 429 "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl 
Spirit and Alcohol Products" of 16 July 1999 (hereinafter:  "the Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl 
Spirits and Alcohol Products") and the Government Resolution No. 731 "On Approval of the 
Qualification Requirements for Storage, Wholesale and (or) Retail Sales of Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and (or) Retail Sale of Alcoholic Beverages within the Territory of 
Production" of 23 August 2007.   
375.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, pursuant to the CU Commission 
Decision No. 747, upon accession to the WTO of any CU Party, non-automatic import licensing 
requirement for ethyl spirits and alcohol produc ts (Section 2.18 of the Common List) would be 
eliminated and replaced by an automatic licensing procedure whereby licenses would be issued 
upon submission of the appropriate and complete documentation.  She further noted that pursuant 
to the Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to  Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Issues of Improvement of Pe rmissible System" of 15 July 2011 amending the 
Law on Licensing, the requirement for an activity licence for importation of ethyl spirits and alcohol 
products, which was used as a condition for obtaining an import licence for ethyl spirits and alcohol products, had been eliminated as of 30 January 2012.  She noted, however, that importers into 
Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products were still required to hold an activity licence for 
production, distribution, or storage of ethyl spir its and alcohol products, and to obtain and apply 
strip stamps for the purposes of excise tax payments, as described in the section "Application of 
Internal Taxes to Imports" of this Report.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative confirmed that the Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products 
would be amended to reflect the changes in licensing regime applied to imports of ethyl spirits and 
alcohol products [by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO].  In response to a question from another Member concerning licensing requirements for non-food products containing 
denatured alcohol, e.g., fuel mixtures, cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, 
the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that  the Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits 
and Alcohol Products and CU legal acts did not regulate importation of these products.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 116 - 
 
  - (ii) Pharmaceuticals 
376.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that since 1 January 2010, the importation of 
medicines and pharmaceutical substances ("pharmaceuticals") into Kazakhstan was regulated by the CU Agreements and Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this section, and more specifically 
by the Regulation "On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of 
Medicines and Pharmaceutical Ingredients" (herei n a f t e r :   " t h e  C U  R e g u l a t i o n  o n  I m p o r t  o f  
Pharmaceuticals"), the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193 "On People's Health and 
Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009 (hereinafter:  "the Code on Health") and the Order of the Minister of Public Health No. 710 "On Approval  of the Rules on Importation and Exportation of 
Medicines, Products of Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment" of 16 November 2009 
(hereinafter:  "the Order of the Minister on Rules on Importation and Exportation of Pharmaceuticals").   
377.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to the CU Commission Decision 
No. 748 "On Amendments to the Regulations on the Order of Importation of Medicines and 
Pharmaceutical Substances to the Customs Territory  of the Customs Union" of 16 August 2011, as 
of 1 October 2011, pharmaceuticals were no longer  subject to an import licensing requirement.  
Pharmaceuticals were, however, still subject to a registration requirement.  Pursuant to the 
CU Regulation on Import of Pharmaceuticals, only pharmaceuticals included in the national 
registries of pharmaceuticals of the CU Parties could be imported into the CU.  The national 
registry of Kazakhstan was administered in accordance with the national legislation, and only 
pharmaceuticals registered in Kazakhstan (i.e., in accordance with the Code on Health) could be 
imported into the territory of Kazakhstan; non-registered pharmaceuticals could be imported only 
with a conclusion (permit) as described in paragraph [382].  In response to a question from a 
Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that as described in sub-section (b) of the 
section "Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations" of this Report, importation 
of pharmaceuticals was restricted to juridical persons of Kazakhstan meeting the requirements of 
Article 80 of the Code on Health, which included holding an activity licence to engage in production or distribution of pharmaceuticals.   
378.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's registration process was burdensome and constituted a 
problem for its exporters.  A major concern was registration for imported products took about a 
year to renew, whereas a registration for locall y produced generic products was renewed in about 
a month.  In addition, the renewal process required the same procedures as the original registration.  This Member asked how Kazakhstan would ensure that the import licensing 
procedures for pharmaceuticals would conform to WTO requirements.   
379.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that there could be no such 
discrimination under national legislation or CU legal instruments either in the process for the 
registration or re-registration of pharmaceuticals in Kazakhstan.  In accordance with the 
Government Resolution No. 351 "On Approval of Standard of State Service 'State Registration, 
Re-registration and Introduction of Changes in Re gistration Record of Medicines, Products of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 117 - 
 
  Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment'" of 4 April 2011, (i) State registration was conducted 
within 227 days; and (ii) State re-registration took 137 days.  For the procedure of re-registration fewer documents and procedures were required.  In reply to a specific question, the representative 
of Kazakhstan said that conditions for State registration and re-registration were identical for 
locally produced and imported pharmaceuticals in Kazakhstan.  The same list of documents was required in Kazakhstan for registration of locally produced and imported pharmaceuticals.  
The term "simplified list of documents" did not exist in the legislation of Kazakhstan. 
380.  With regard to a concern raised by a Member on the renewal of registration, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, at present, the "Rules on State Registration, 
Re-registration and Introduction of Changes in Re gistration Record of Medicines, Products of 
Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment" (hereina fter:  "the Rules"), approved by the Order 
No. 735 of the Minister of the Public Health of Kazakhstan of 18 November 2009, envisaged 
simplification of one of the stages of re-registrat ion procedures – analytical expertise.  Analytical 
expertise was not required for pharmaceuticals ma rketed in Kazakhstan for over 15 years if the 
pharmaceuticals had received no complaint relating to its safety, quality and efficacy.  At the same 
time, a registration record of pharmaceuticals, produced in accordance with Good Manufacturing 
Practice (GMP), was prepared in the form of a common technical document consisting of 
5 modules.  All 5 modules (1-5) were required for the State registration and 1-3 modules were 
required for the State re-registration.  Therefore, fewer documents had to be submitted for 
re-registration.  Additionally, the State Programme "On Developments of Pharmaceutical Industry 
for the Period of 2010-2014" envisaged implementa tion of the GMP by pharmaceutical companies 
in Kazakhstan.  In addition, the State Progra mme of the Development of Public Healthcare 
"Salamatti Kazakhstan" (Healthy Kazakhstan) envisaged accession of national inspectorate into the 
Pharmaceutical Inspection Convention and Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme by 2015.  Implementation of the goals stipulated in these programmes would allow Kazakhstan to 
introduce a one-time State re-registration procedure.  
381.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that information confirming that 
pharmaceuticals intended for importation were in the State registry had to be provided in the 
customs declaration.  Registration of medici nal products for medical purpose and medical 
equipment in the State registry was permitted only  after a review conducted to evaluate safety, 
effectiveness, and quality of the medicine on the ba sis of an expertise.  The list of pharmaceuticals 
currently registered could be found on the website of the National Center for Expertise of Medicines, Products of Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment:  
http://www.dari.kz/index.php? lang=eng&uin=1282274831.  
382.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that non-registered pharmaceuticals could be 
imported only with a conclusion (permit) issued by the authorised body (the Ministry of Public 
Health in Kazakhstan) for the purpose of:  (i) State registration; (ii) exhibitions without the rights to sell them afterwards; (iii) life-saving treatmen t and rendering medical aid to patients having 
rare and (or) severe pathology; (iv) prevention and elimination consequences of emergency WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 118 - 
 
  situations; (v) equipping organizations of public health service with unique medical equipment that 
had not analogously registered in Kazakhstan; and (vi) conducting clinical research as stated in Article 80.3 of the Code on Health.  The list of documents required to obtain a conclusion (permit) 
for each of the above-stated categories of ph armaceuticals was provided in the Order of the 
Minister on Rules on Importation and Exportation of Pharmaceuticals.   
383.  She noted, however, that pharmaceuticals (including non-registered pharmaceuticals) 
could be imported without a conclusion (permit) issued by the authorised body (Ministry of Public 
Health) if they were imported for personal use by  natural persons, diplomats or representatives of 
international organizations, as part of first-aid kits of vessels, international airlines, trains and 
vehicles arriving to the CU customs territory, or for medical aid to participants of international 
expeditions, cultural and sport events.   
384.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and thei r precursors (Section 2.12 of the Common List) 
were still subject to import licensing.  Importation into the CU of narcotic drugs, psychotropic 
substances and their precursors were regulated by the separate Regulation "On the Order of 
Importation, Exportation and Transit of Narcotic Drugs, Psychotropic Substances and their Precursors across the Customs Territory of the Customs Union".  According to the Regulation, 
juridical persons could import narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors to the 
CU customs territory provided they obtained a lice nce issued by the authorised body (the Ministry 
of Internal Affairs) in coordination  with the Ministry of Public Health.  Physical persons could import 
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances as prescribed medicine for personal use in limited quantities.  The following could be imported without licenses:  (i) narcotic drugs, psychotropic 
substances and their precursors intended for first aid in emergency situations, (ii) first-aid kits of 
vessels, international airlines, and (iii) precursors used as supplies in quantity necessary for operation of equipment and technical devices of air, sea (river) and railway transport. 
- (iii) Products containing cryptographi c capabilities, including goods with  
  encryption technology an d special technical devices 
385.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that within the framework of the CU, since 
1 January 2010 imports of certain products containing cryptographic capabilities (goods containing 
encryption technology, listed in Annex 15(a)) previously not subject to import licensing were now covered by the licensing regime and included in the Common List.  Special technical devices 
designed for the clandestine interception or extraction of information (listed in Annex 15(b)) were 
included on the Common List and remained subject to import licensing.  
386.  Some Members requested information on the application by Kazakhstan of requirements 
for importation of goods containing encryption technology.  These Members noted that most countries did not limit imports of these products  and questioned the need and justification for 
licensing, in particular, non-automatic licensing of commercially traded, mass-market goods, and 
goods that were covered under the Information Technology Agreement (ITA).  Members expressed concern that such licensing requirements could nullify or impair the market access commitments WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 119 - 
 
  on a wide-range of products of undertaken by the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Members stated that to 
the extent that the Republic of Kazakhstan intended to establish or apply licensing requirements, such requirements should apply only to products that clearly presented a threat to security.  
In such cases, licensing procedures should be applied in a non-discriminatory manner and comply 
with all WTO requirements. 
387.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, prior to 1 January 2010, the importation 
of goods containing encryption technology had only been subject to an activity licence; pursuant to 
the Resolution of the Government of Kazakhst an No. 1160 "On Approval of Licensing Rules and 
Qualification Requirements for Activity in the Sphere of Development and Sale (including other 
Transfer) of Devices for Cryptographic Protection of Information" of 30 November 2007, no import 
licence had been required.  Following the formation of the Customs Union on 1 January 2010, the 
importation of goods containing encryption technology was regulated by the CU Agreements and 
Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this se ction, and by the CU Regulation "On the Order of 
Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Removal of the Customs Territory of 
the Customs Union of Encryption (Cryptographic) Means". 
388.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at any procedures or requirements relating 
to licensing imports of goods containing encryption technology, whether by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the CU , would be applied on a non-discriminatory basis 
and in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, in particular, Articles I and 
III of the GATT 1994, and that procedures related to the notification, evaluation, approval, and 
licensing of goods containing encryption techno logy, would be transparent and predictable and 
would not impose unreasonable or burdensome requ irements on such goods.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.]  
389.  In response to a concern raised by a Member that Kazakhstan's import  licensing regime for 
goods containing encryption technology was now more restrictive than prior to the formation of 
the CU, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, in order to facilitate trade, Kazakhstan 
and its CU partners had developed and applied an in terim system of regulation of goods containing 
encryption technology.  Under this interim syst em, all goods containing encryption technology 
were divided into three groups:  (i) certain goods containing encryption technology could be imported without any formalities related to encryption; (ii) other goods with encryption technology 
would be subject to a one-time notification requirement; and, (iii) a category of goods with 
encryption technology would be subject to an expe rt evaluation and require an import licence.  
The import licence was issued by the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies, based on a 
"conclusion" issued by the executive body in the field of national security of the CU Party (the 
National Security Committee in the case of Kazakhstan), following an "expert examination".  
She noted that other formalities, such as customs or those necessary to implement technical 
regulations would continue to apply in respect of imports of all these goods. 
390.  In response to a request by a Member to clarify the meaning of the wording "without any 
formalities related to encryption" in the previous paragraph, the representative of Kazakhstan said WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 120 - 
 
  that such formalities were understood as the formalities concerning the goods listed in 
Annex 15(c) and described in the second and subs equent sentences of paragraph [392], and the 
formalities listed in paragraph [395] concerning the goods which were subject to import licensing 
and expert evaluation.  She further explained that "formalities" not related to encryption that could 
be applied to goods containing encryption technology could relate to the requirements resulting from application of the legislation on customs regulation, technical regulation, intellectual property 
rights, and other legal acts, which were usually applied with respect to the imported goods or 
goods designed for internal circulation in the market.   
391.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the conditions for importation of goods 
containing encryption technology, subject to current and any future exemptions, indicated in all of 
the Notes to Category 5, Part 2 "Information Security" of the Wassenaar Arrangement Dual Use 
List, whether imposed by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the Customs Union, would not be 
more restrictive than those in effect on 1 June 2012.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
392.  [With respect to goods falling into the categories set-out in [Annex 15(c)], the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, within the framework of the interim system, any restrictions existing before 1 January 2010 would be eliminated and no new restrictions, such as 
expert evaluations, approvals, and licenses, for the importation of those goods would be adopted 
or applied, whether by Kazakhstan or the comp etent bodies of the CU.  She further informed 
Members that within the framework of the interim system, importation of goods in the categories 
set-out in [Annex 15(c)] would be permitted based on a one-time submission of a notification.  
To comply with this requirement, the manufactu rer of the good would submit a completed paper 
copy of a form containing information specified in [Annex 15(d)].  Further, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that no licenses would be required, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the CU, for imports into Kazakhstan of goods containing encryption 
technologies included in [Annex 15(c)], and the exemptions set-out in paragraph [391].  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
393.  Addressing a request from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all 
goods with encryption technology released by fu ture Wassenaar Arrangement Category 5, Part 2 
"Information Security" de-controls would be allowed to be imported "without any formalities 
related to encryption".  Goods subject to a noti fication requirement, in accordance with the 
preceding paragraph were listed in Annex 15(c).  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, consistent with Wassenaar practice, the regulating 
country (Kazakhstan) would determine which goods qualified as "mass market goods", as defined 
in Annex 15(c).  She added that the data to be submitted for a "one-time notification" application 
were listed in Annex 15(d).  She confirmed that, if a good had been imported subject to the 
"one-time notification" process, that good would not be subject to any other notifications by any 
parties importing that good.  The information on goods approved for import through the "one-time WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 121 - 
 
  notification" process would be available to the public on the websites of the National Security 
Committee of Kazakhstan and the CU. 
394.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that, if proprietary information was submitted in the notification, and the manufacturer identified 
that information as proprietary, that information would be protected.  Confirmation of notification would be automatic, unless the manufacturer or its authorised representative in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan were contacted within ten working days after submission of the notification regarding 
its compliance with the requirements, including whether the product was correctly subject to notification, set-out in paragraph [392].  In the Republic of Kazakhstan, the National Security 
Committee would maintain a public internet site where such confirmations would be posted; the 
CU would also maintain a public internet site where this list would be available to the public.  
Any importer or shipper could rely on a relevant confirmation.  Once a good was notified and 
confirmed, that good would not be subject to any other notifications by any parties importing that 
good; rather an importer/shipper would be required to indicate only that the good appeared on the 
internet site in the relevant customs declaration.  She further explained that this notification 
procedure was intended to facilitate the entry of the goods listed above and would not result in any delays or additional approval procedures. 
395.  [For goods containing encryption technology that needed an import licence, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, within the framework of an interim system, such 
goods would need to undergo expert evaluation and approval (conclusion) only once.  If an expert 
evaluator needed additional information for its evaluation, it was required to notify the manufacturer or his authorised representative in the Republic of Kazakhstan and request such 
information within ten working days of the application.  Manufacturers would not be obligated to 
submit source code and failure to submit such code alone, would not result in denial of an application.  After the good was approved, the same good, or a good used for the same purpose 
with identical encryption, could be imported into the Republic of Kazakhstan with a licence issued 
in a manner consistent with Article 2 of the WT O Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  
The time period for completing import licensing procedures, including the time required to obtain 
an experts' evaluation, to receive approval and the import licence, would not exceed three months.  Fees for experts' evaluations and licensing wo uld be transparent and based on the costs of 
services rendered.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
396.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan and its CU partners would 
engage interested Members in a review of the op eration of this interim system.  The purpose of 
this review would be to clarify and refine procedures for notification, confirmation, and licensing of 
goods with encryption technology and, where possible, to further improve and expand the 
products covered under paragraph [391] and Annex 15(c).  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
397.  To obtain an import licence, along with stan dard set of documents indicated in Article 3.3 
of the CU Agreement on Licensing, an applicant ha d to submit to the authorised body a conclusion WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 122 - 
 
  (described in paragraph [395]) issued by the Nati onal Security Committee on the permissibility of 
importing the specific encryption product.  Pursuant  to the CU Encryption Regulations, in order to 
obtain a conclusion, an applicant had to submit to the National Security Committee an application 
for a conclusion on the import of a cryptographic device, indicating the product's full name and 
identifying characteristics such as model name and serial number; a copy of the required activity licence; technical documentation on the encryption devices; and if requested, a sample of the 
encryption device.  The National Security Committee conducted a technical analysis of imported 
devices to determine only if the product cont ained cryptographic capabilities, and issued a 
document with its expert conclusion.  
398.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the procedure for technical analysis and 
obtaining the import and activity licenses for goods containing encryption technology did not 
require an applicant to disclose its confidential bu siness information, including the source code of 
the product.  The submission of a product sample was not mandatory.  In practice, most of the approvals were made on the basis of detailed description of the product's non-secret technical 
characteristics.   
399.  Members of the Working Party thanked Kazakhstan for reporting this change, but noted 
that this was a more restrictive system than had previously been in place.  They expressed 
concern about how Kazakhstan would ensure that goods not containing encryption technology 
would be excluded from any requirements relating to importation of goods containing such 
technology.  In their view, goods that did not contain encryption technology should not be subject 
to any encryption-related requirements or formalities.  Further, Kazakhstan should not require an activity licence for the importation of encryption goods subject only to notification requirements.   
400.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that goods that did not contain encryption 
technology would not be subject to any encryption-related requirements or formalities.  She further confirmed that activity licenses would not be required as a condition for importation of 
goods that were not subject to requirements or fo rmalities related to encryption and goods subject 
only to notification requirements.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
401.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the importation of STDs (Section 2.17 of the Common List) was regulated by the CU Agreements and Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this section, and in particular the Regulation "On the 
Order of Importation to the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Exportation from the 
Customs Territory of the Customs Union of the Special Technical Devices Designed for the Clandestine Interception or Extraction of Informatio n".  The list of STDs subject to import licensing 
was contained in Annex 15(b).  CU Agreements regulating the licensing of STDs superseded 
Kazakhstan's national legislation.  STDs were defined as special software and technical products 
containing hardware or software features designed only for the clandestine interception or 
extraction of audio-, video- and other information as well as devices designed to detect the technical channels of leakage of information.  In response to a Member's question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that special technical devices differed from cryptographic WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 123 - 
 
  devices by their intended purpose and use.  Cryptographic devices were designed to protect 
confidential information whereas special technical devices were designed to obtain information clandestinely.  She further confirmed that devices designed for open use, but which as a result of 
modification, unintended use, or some other way, could be used for clandestine interception of 
information, for example voice recorders or normal  surveillance cameras, were not considered to 
be special technical devices. 
402.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, quantitative 
restrictions on imports, such as quotas, bans, permits, prior authorisation requirements, licensing requirements or other requirements or restrictions having equivalent effect that could not be 
justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement would be eliminated and not introduced, 
re-introduced or applied, whether by the Republic  of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the 
CU.  From the date of accession, any such requirements or restrictions on imports, whether 
applied by the Republic of Kazakhstan or the comp etent bodies of the CU, would be in conformity 
with the provisions of the WTO Agreement.  She confirmed that the administrative procedures of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan for the operation of its import licensing regime and their application 
would, from the date of accession, be in compliance with all relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
- Customs Valuation 
403.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the basic provisions relating to customs 
valuation principles and policies in Kazakhstan were contained in the Agreement "On the Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Tr ansferred Across the Customs Border of the 
Customs Union" of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter:  "t he CU Agreement on Customs Valuation"), the 
Customs Code of the Customs Union, adopted on 27 November 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Customs Code") and the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Procedures 
in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (her einafter:  "the Customs Code of Kazakhstan").  
The CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and the CU Customs Code had entered into force in 
Kazakhstan on 1 July 2010.  Prior to 1 July 2010, customs clearance and control in Kazakhstan, 
including customs valuation, had been carried out in accordance with the national legislation, mainly the former Customs Code of Kazakhstan No. 401 of 5 April 2003.  The CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation specified those areas that were to be implemented through national legislation.  
In other cases, the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation applied directly as law.  Provisions of Code No. 155-11 "On Administrative Violations" of 30 January 2001 and Law No. 221 "On Order of 
Review of Requests of Natural and Juridical Pe rsons" of 12 January 2007 related to customs 
valuation also continued to apply after 1 July 2010.   
404.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, as provided in Article 1.3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the relevant  provisions of the CU Agreement and national 
legislation were based on the provisions of the WTO Agreement on the Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994 (hereinafter:  "the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation") and that, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 124 - 
 
  in her view, the CU Agreement on Customs Va luation was drafted to fully implement the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  All six methods of customs valuation applied were based on the provisions of Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, 
including most of the provisions of the Interpretative Notes.  The rest of the Interpretative Notes 
would be incorporated in CU legal instruments or in Kazakhstan's national legislation.  The provisions of Articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 an d 16 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation 
were also implemented in CU legal instruments and Kazakhstan's national legislation.  She noted, 
in particular, that in accordance with Article 2 of the CU Customs Code, the term "customs territory of importation", as defined in Article 15.2 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, 
was the common customs territory of the Customs Union, consisting of the territories of the 
Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, and the Russian Federation, as well as artificial 
islands, installations and other objects located beyond the territory of the CU Parties in respect of 
which those CU Parties enjoyed exclusive jurisdiction.  Article 3 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation confirmed that goods "produced" in the customs territory (including identical or similar 
goods) included those extracted, raised, or manufactured, as defined in Article 15.1 of the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  She stat ed that the term used in Article 3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, i.e., that these goods belonged to "one or the same group of 
goods or a line of commodities, including identical and similar goods, which are manufactured 
within the framework of a certain economic acti vity", was based on the meaning of the term 
"goods of the same class or kind" set-out in Article 15.3 of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation.  She further added that term s such as identical goods, similar goods, and 
related parties were used as described in Articl e 15 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, 
and their definitions could be found in Article 3 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.   
405.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the customs value of goods imported to the 
CU customs territory was declared by a declarant when submitting a customs declaration of goods 
as provided for in the Agreement "On the Decl aration Order of the Customs Value of Goods 
Transferred through the Customs Border of th e Customs Union" of 12 December 2008, and 
Article 65 and Chapter 27 of the CU Customs Code.  The importer declared the customs value of 
imported goods by providing the following informat ion:  the method chosen by the declarant for 
customs valuation of imported goods, the customs value of goods, conditions and circumstances 
surrounding the transaction related to the customs valuation of goods and documents confirming 
such information.  The representative of Kazakh stan noted that the customs value of imported 
goods was determined in accordance with six method s listed in the priority order:  (i) transaction 
value; (ii) transaction value of identical goods; (iii) transaction value of similar goods; 
(iv) deductive method; (v) computed method; an d (vi) fall-back method, as provided for in 
Articles 4 and 6 to 9 and 10 of the CU Agreemen t on Customs Valuation.  The customs value of 
imported goods was as much as possible based on the price of transaction with these goods as provided in Article 2 and Article 4 of the CU Ag reement on Customs Valuation, which established 
that the "customs valuation of imported goods shall be, as a matter of principle, based on the 
price of transaction with these goods ..." and "the customs value of goods imported to the 
common customs territory of the Customs Union was the price of the respective transaction, i.e., WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 125 - 
 
  the price actually paid or payable for these goods sold for export to the country of importation to 
the common customs territory of the Customs Union".  The customs value of goods and the information related to their valuation was based on reliable and computable data and supported by 
documentary evidence.  The procedure of customs valuation was universal, i.e. did not differ 
depending on the source of goods (country of origin , type of goods, participants of a transaction, 
etc.).  
406.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the transaction value method established the 
customs value of goods on the basis of the price actually paid or liable to be paid for these goods at their sale for importing to the CU customs territory, and had priority over other methods of 
customs valuation.  She further noted that the methods of valuation provided for in the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation other than the transaction value were contained in 
Articles 6 to 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Va luation.  She further explained that Article 10 
of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and Article 107 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
provided for the use of the fall-back method.  If  the customs value of the imported goods could 
not be determined under the provisions of Ar ticles 4 and 6 to 9 of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation (Articles 101 to 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan), the customs value would be determined using reasonable means consistent with the principles and provisions of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
407.  The methods of customs valuation used under the fall-back method were provided by 
Articles 101 to 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan and were consistent with the provisions of 
Articles 4 and 6 to 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, and Article 7 of the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  The use of the fall-back method of customs valuation of 
goods was described in Article 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and was the same as 
the other methods; however, it could be app lied with some flexibility.  For example: 
- determination of customs value could be based on the transaction value of identical or 
similar goods produced in the country other than the country of production of the goods 
being valued;  
- in determining customs value using the transaction value of identical or similar goods, a 
reasonable flexibility was allowed in respect of the interpretation of the requirement of 
Articles 6 and 7 of the CU Agreement on Cu stoms Valuation and Articles 103 and 104 of 
the Customs Code of Kazakhstan that the identical or similar goods should be exported at or about the same time as the goods being valued, as a rule, up to 90 days;  
- customs values of identical or similar im ported goods already determined under the 
provisions of Articles 8 and 9 of the CU Ag reement on Customs Valuation and Articles 105 
and 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan could be used in determining customs value; and 
- in determining customs value using the de ductive method, the "90 days" requirement 
established by paragraph 3 of Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and 
paragraph 3 of Article 105 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan could be administered flexibly (in accordance with the Interpretative Note to Article 7.3(c) of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation). 
408.  At the same time, customs valuation of goods using the fall-back method could not be 
based on the following:  (i) the price of good s in the internal market of the Customs Union 
produced on the territory of the Customs Union; (ii) the system of choosing for customs purposes WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 126 - 
 
  the higher price from two alternatives; (iii) the price of goods in the domestic market of the 
exporting country; (iv) costs other than those included in the estimated cost determined for identical or similar goods in the computed method; (v) the price of goods delivered from the 
exporting country to third countries; (vi) minimum customs value; and (vii) arbitrary or fictitious 
customs value.  
409.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that, pursuant to 
Articles 68 and 69 of the CU Customs Code, if the customs officials discovered signs suggesting 
that the information on customs value of the goods stated by the declarant could contain inaccurate details, the customs officer could perform additional measures of control, including 
inspection of the documents and/or goods.  Rele ase of the goods was permitted by customs bodies 
on condition of presentation of a guarantee of the dutiable payments and taxes.  Pursuant to 
Article 1.2 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and Article 113 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, these payments included:  (i) import customs duty; (ii) export customs duty; (iii) value-added tax levied upon importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; 
(iv) excise tax levied upon importation of good s into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; and 
(v) customs levies (fees for customs declaration, escort, or preliminary decision).  For confirmation of the stated information, the declarant, upon request of the customs body, provided additional 
documents, information and explanations.  She further added that the declarant had the right to 
prove the correctness of the selected method of determination of the customs value of the goods 
and the authenticity of the information presen ted to the customs body.  In cases when the 
transaction value was rejected, the customs body proposed to the declarant that the customs value of the goods be determined by using anothe r method.  In such situations, the customs body 
and the declarant could hold consultations with regard to the method applicable for determination 
of the customs value of the goods.  Notably, the customs value was determined by the customs 
body by proceeding sequentially through the method s of determination of the customs value of the 
goods, as confirmed in Article 2 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  She also noted that 
the current legislation of Kazakhstan did not envisa ge the adoption of any preliminary decision, i.e. 
advanced ruling regarding customs value.  The cu stoms value of the goods was determined by the 
declarant and declared to the customs body at  the instance of the goods declaration.  
410.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, where the exchange of currency was 
necessary for the determination of customs value, th e official exchange rate effective on the day of 
registration of the customs declaration by the customs body was to be used, unless otherwise provided by the Customs Code and/or international treaties of the CU Parties.  Pursuant to 
Article 78 of the CU Customs Code for the calculation of customs duties and taxes and the 
determination of customs value, the customs body of the relevant CU Party was required to use 
the exchange rate established in accordance with the national legislation of this CU Party.  
According to Article 56 of the Law "On the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995, the National Bank of Kazakhstan established and published the official exchange 
rate of foreign currencies with respect to the tenge.  This information could be accessed on the 
National Bank of Kazakhstan's website (www.nationalbank.kz).   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 127 - 
 
  411.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to Article 64 of the CU Customs 
Code, the legal framework for customs valuation of exported goods had to be conducted in accordance with the national legislation of CU Parties.  In Kazakhstan, this issue was regulated by 
Article 98 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  
412.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to amend the legislation of Kazakhstan to remove the 
provision allowing the use of reference books that  enforced minimum values for certain imports.  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the use of information reference books for the 
purposes of customs valuation of goods had been discontinued under the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, the CU Customs Code and the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
413.  Asked about the existing procedures for judicial review of customs measures, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that Code No. 155-11 "On Administrative Violations" had been 
adopted on 30 January 2001.  This Code governed procedures for disputes related to customs 
valuation, as well as cases involving deliberate evasion of customs duties and taxes.  Bodies authorised to address cases of administrative violation and the imposition of sanctions were 
appointed according to this Code. 
414.  Concerning the right of appeal, she said th at Article 9 of the CU Customs Code and 
Article 17 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan provid ed for the right of appeal and stated that any 
person had the right to appeal against decisions made by the customs bodies, actions (inaction) of 
the customs body or its officials in accordance with procedures and time-frames established by the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Article 12 of Law No. 221 "On Order 
of Review of Requests of Natural and Juridical Persons" of 12 January 2007, the decisions of 
authorities (State and local Government bodies), an d the actions (inaction) of officials, could be 
appealed to a senior official.  In cases where there was no senior official, or where the appellant 
did not agree with the decision of the senior official, the appellant could appeal directly to the court without exhausting all avenues of administrative appeal.  This principle was also confirmed in 
Article 278 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Kaza khstan of 13 July 1999.  The general time-frame 
for processing appeals to a senior official was described in paragraph [416] of this Report.  In this 
case, appeals had to be resolved in the court within one month, as stipulated in Article 174 of the 
Code of Civil Procedure of Kazakhstan of 13 July 1999.  Thus, importers could appeal against decisions made by the customs body to a senior customs official or to the court.  No penalty was 
attached to the choice to appeal.  
415.  Confidentiality requirements (Article 10 of  the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation) 
were provided in Article 8 of the CU Customs Code.  According to Article 8, any information 
received by the relevant customs body in accordance with the customs legislation of the Customs 
Union and/or legislation of a CU Party was to be used by the customs bodies solely for customs 
purposes, including prevention of administrative of fences and violations of laws.  Customs bodies, 
their officials and other persons granted access to such information had no right to disclose, use for personal purposes, or pass to third parties, including State bodies, information which 
constituted State, commercial, bank, tax or ot her secret information protected by law, and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 128 - 
 
  confidential information, except for the cases prov ided by the Customs Code and/or the legislation 
of the relevant CU Party.  Pursuant to Article 16 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, information received by the customs body in accordance with  CU Agreements and the national legislation of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan was used by customs officials exclusively for customs purposes, and 
would not be disclosed or disseminated, even to State bodies, except when the transfer of such 
information to other State authorities was necessary for law enforcement and for juridical 
proceedings in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
416.  Concerning the transparency and publicatio n requirements of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Article 10 of the CU Customs Code 
provided for dissemination of information on CU Customs Agreements and other legal acts by 
publishing all CU acts on customs legislation in official and other periodicals and by means of 
television and radio, with the use of information technologies and other means of information 
dissemination.  The Eurasian Economic Commission and each CU Party's customs body had to provide free access to information on CU legal acts relating to customs matters, including 
publication on their official websites – www.tsou z.ru and www.customs.kz.  Relevant information 
had to be also disseminated at various border check-points; airports, railway and car terminals, as well as seaports; on the board of vehicles, as well as aircraft and marine vessels involved in 
international traffic; and in customs control zones.  The Customs Control Committee of Kazakhstan 
provided information on relevant customs-related legislation and foreign trade statistics on its 
website, www.customs.kz and in the periodicals "Official Gazette", "Zan", "Keden" and "Customs 
Bulletin".  All documents that had a binding character were published on the official website of the Customs Control Committee.  Pursuant to Article 11 of the CU Customs Code, customs officials 
were available to provide explanations ("consulting") on the provisions of the customs legislation 
and other issues within the competence of the customs body, both in person and in writing.  Upon written request from an interested party, the customs body provided information in writing in 
the shortest term possible, but no later than the te rm established by the legislation of the relevant 
CU Party.  Consultations on how to complete the documents to be submitted to the customs bodies 
had to be given by customs officers orally, wi thout reviewing the information provided by the 
interested person.  According to Article 8 of Law No. 221 "On Procedure of Review of Natural and Juridical Persons' Requests" of 12 January 2007, re quests of natural and juridical persons, which 
did not need the customs official to obtain information from other State bodies or their officials, 
had to be reviewed within 15 calendar days.  Requ ests that required a customs official to obtain 
information from other State bodies and their officials had to be reviewed within 30 calendar days.  
The term could be prolonged for no more than 30 calendar days.  
417.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  pursuant to Article 11 of the CU Agreement 
on Customs Valuation, if there was a need to postpone the decision with regard to customs 
valuation of certain evaluated (imported) goods, the declarant was permitted to take the goods, when necessary, by providing sufficient guarante e of payment of the applicable customs duties 
and taxes on such goods in accordance with the legislation of the Customs Union.  Surety bond 
(warranty) provisions were covered by Chapter 12 of the CU Customs Code and Chapter 16 of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 129 - 
 
  Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  Customs bodies had the right to release the goods conditionally, as 
long as customs duties, taxes and fees were secured in the amount of the customs payment determined by the customs body on the basis of available price information.  Guarantees could 
take the form of (i) cash; (ii) bank guarantees; (iii) surety; (iv) mortgage; or (v) insurance 
contracts.  The payer had the right to choose any of the above-mentioned means of ensuring the customs payment (taxes and duties).  Pursuant to  Article 113 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, 
these payments included import customs duty; ex port customs duty; value-added tax levied upon 
importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; excise tax levied upon importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; and customs levies (fees for customs 
declaration, escort, or preliminary decision).  In 2011, 0.2% of customs entries into Kazakhstan 
had made use of this provision.  The term of th e guarantee had to be sufficient to allow for the 
timely submission by the customs body of a requ est to the declarant to fulfil the obligation owned 
to the customs body, to which such guarantee had been granted.  Pursuant to Article 156 of the 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan, a deposit would be refunded, within 10 working days of receipt of 
the request, when the commitments of the declarant before customs bodies were fulfilled.  
The request could be submitted no later than five years after the commitment had been fulfilled.  She further added that guarantees of payments of customs duties and taxes were required in 
certain cases prescribed by the CU Customs Code and by other customs legislation of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, including the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  In particular, this included the 
following cases: 
- transportation of goods in accordance with the procedure of customs transit; 
- if goods were put under the customs procedur e of processing of goods beyond the customs 
territory; 
- conditional release of goods; and 
- change of time-frames for payment of customs du ties and taxes, if international treaties or 
legislation of the CU Parties provided for that.  
418.  Members expressed concern regarding the treatment of related parties and noted in this 
regard that Article 4.4 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, requiring the imported good in 
such cases to meet certain price benchmarks.  These Members did not appear to be consistent 
with either Interpretative Note 1 to Article 1.2(a) and (b) of the WTO Agreement on Customs 
Valuation or with Article 4.3 of the CU  Agreement on Customs Valuation.   
419.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 4.3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the fact that  the buyer and the seller were related should 
not in itself be grounds for regarding the transaction value as unacceptable.  In such case, the circumstances surrounding the sale should be examined.  If on the basis of (this) information, 
presented by the declarant or received by the cu stoms bodies by other means, signs that such 
relationship had influenced the price were discovered, the customs bodies should inform the 
declarant in written form about such signs.  The declarant was then entitled to demonstrate to the 
customs bodies that the relationship did not influence the price.  She also noted that, in a sale between related persons, the transaction value al so should be accepted whenever the declarant WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 130 - 
 
  demonstrated that such value closely approximated one of the following occurring at or about the 
same time: 
- the transaction value in sales to unrelated buyers of identical or similar goods for export to 
the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods as determined under the provisions of 
Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation; or 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods as determined under the provisions of 
Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation. 
420.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Articles 4.3 and 4.4 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation would be mo dified prior to the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO to ensure their consistency with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation.  Declarants would be provided an opportunity to demonstrate two different 
means of establishing the acceptability of a transaction value:  examination of the circumstances 
surrounding the sale and demonstration by the declarant that the transaction value closely 
approximated a "test value" previously accepted by  the customs body.  She also noted that at the 
moment the CU Parties were in the process of amen ding and drafting the CU legislation in order to 
align the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation wi th the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
421.  Members also expressed concern that the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the 
CU Protocols, and national implementing legislation all appeared to lack a provision for the 
acceptance of paragraph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation, 
which provided that the "Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software, for Data Processing 
Equipment" should be based on the value of the media, and Decision No. 3.1 "On the Treatment of 
Interest Charges in the Customs Value of Imported Goods".  Moreover, a Member noted that 
Kazakhstan had not fully implemented the Interpretative Notes in domestic legislation.  
Members sought information from Kazakhstan on how these issues would be addressed in CU legal instruments or Kazakhstan's national legislation.   
422.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Article 4.7 of the CU Agreement on Customs 
Valuation corresponded to the provisions of Decision No. 3.1 of the Technical Committee on 
Customs Valuation "On the Treatment of Interest Charges in the Customs Value of Imported 
Goods", which provided that the amount of interest charges would not be included in the customs value.  She added that the provisions of para graph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Technical 
Committee on Customs Valuation "On the Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software, for Data 
Processing Equipment" were included in para graph 8 of Article 101 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan.   
423.  [With respect to Article 14 of the WTO Agreemen t on Customs Valuation, which stated that 
the Interpretative Notes in Annex I formed an integral part of the WTO Agreement on Customs 
Valuation, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the provisions of most of the 
Interpretative Notes were already reflected in  the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and 
implemented along with other provisions of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation in the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 131 - 
 
  Customs Code of Kazakhstan, and the CU Customs Code.  The remaining provisions of the 
Interpretative Notes would be implemented in a decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission, a successor of the CU Commission, or in national legislation upon Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.]  
424.  Asked to provide further information on the process of implementation of the 
Interpretative Notes in CU and national legal acts, the representative of Kazakhstan responded 
that the Protocol on Amendments of the CU Agre ement on Customs Valuation had been signed in 
April 2012 and submitted to the Parliaments for rati fication.  The Protocol aimed at bringing the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation into compliance with the WTO Agreement on Customs 
Valuation.  Certain provisions of the Interpretative Notes were illustrative and did not represent 
legal norms, therefore, had not been included into the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
For instance, such provisions as illustrative examples of the Interpretative Notes to Article 5 
provided for deductive value method, illustrative examples of the Interpretative Notes to Article 2 applied in the transaction value method of identical goods, etc.  Currently, the Commission jointly 
with CU Parties was in the process of drafting documents that would incorporate the remaining 
provisions of the Interpretative Notes.  These documents would be adopted by decisions of the Commission.  The Collegium of the Commission had approved "The Rules on Application of 
Transaction Value of Identical (Method 2) and Similar Goods (Method 3)" on 30 October 2012, 
which incorporated illustrative examples of the Interpretative Notes to Article 2 and 3 of the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  Furthermore, the Collegium of the Commission had 
approved "The Rules on Application of Method  on Determination of Customs Value of Goods 
According to the Deductive Value Method (Method 4)" on 13 November 2012, "The Rules on 
Application of Method on Determination of Cust oms Value of Goods According to the Computed 
Value Method (Method 5)" on 12 December 2012 and "The Rules on Application of Method on Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to Transaction Value Method (Method 1)" on 
20 December 2012, which incorporated the remaining relevant provisions of the Interpretative 
Notes.  
425.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply its customs valuation laws, regulations and practices, including those to prevent under-valuation of goods, in conformity with  the WTO Agreement, including Article I of 
the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Implementa tion of Article VII of the GATT 1994.  
Accordingly, Kazakhstan would not use any form of minimum value, such as reference prices, or fixed valuation schedule for customs valuation of goods.  In addition, Kazakhstan would ensure 
that in the event that its customs service could not determine the proper customs value or 
disputed the transaction value offered, it would release the goods subject to the posting sufficient 
guarantee for the maximum amount of the customs payments that could be owed as defined by 
the customs body of Kazakhstan.  She further conf irmed that, in determining the value of imports, 
Kazakhstan would apply the provisions of para graph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Committee 
"On Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipment" and Decision WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 132 - 
 
  No. 3.1 "On the Treatment of Interested Charges in Customs Value of Imported Goods".  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Rules of Origin 
426.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as  of 1 July 2010, Kazakhstan applied rules of 
origin to imports in accordance with Chapter 7 of the Customs Code of the Customs Union (hereinafter:  the CU Customs Code).  Non-preferen tial rules of origin and their application were 
governed by the provisions of the Agreement "On Common Rules for Determining the Country of 
Origin of Goods" of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter :  "the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin"), 
including the Rules of Determination of the Country of Origin (hereinafter:  "the CU Rules of 
Origin").  These instruments closely followed th e work of the World Customs Organization (WCO) 
and the WTO regarding the application and harmonization of non-preferential rules of origin.  
The principles for determination of the country of origin of goods were based on international 
practices and implemented the recommendations of the revised Kyoto Convention, which had 
come into force in 2009.  Article 58.3 of the CU Customs Code provided that the determination of 
the country of origin had to be carried out in accordance with international treaties of the 
CU Parties that defined the procedure of determining the country of origin of goods.  She further stated that the determination of the origin of goods originating from developing and 
least-developed countries and eligible for the syst em of preferences maintained by the CU Parties 
was governed by the Agreement "On Rules of Origin of Goods, Originating from Developing and 
Least-developed countries" of 12 December 2008, including the Rules Determining the Origin of 
Goods from Developing and Least-developed Countries (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin for Developing and Least-developed Countries (LDCs)").  The customs procedures for 
determination of the country of origin of goods provided in the CU Customs Code replaced the 
customs procedures contained in the Customs Code of Kazakhstan No. 401 of 5 April 2003, and these procedures were no longer in force.  Addition al provisions on rules of origin could be found in 
Chapter 10 of Kazakhstan's new Customs Code No. 296-IV of 30 June 2010 that had replaced the 
Customs Code No. 401 of 5 April 2003.  She stressed that the country of origin of goods was 
determined in all cases when application of measures of customs tariff and non-tariff regulation 
depended on the country of origin of goods.  
427.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, pursuant to Article 58 of the CU Customs 
Code, goods were recognised as originating from a specific country if they were wholly made in 
that country or substantially transformed in accordance with criteria set forth in the CU customs acts.  The basic criterion for substantial transformation for non-preferential goods was the shift in 
the tariff classification of the goods on the level of at least one of the first four digits, as 
established by paragraph 4 of the CU Rules of Or igin annexed to the CU Agreement on Rules of 
Origin.  Paragraph 2 of the Rules of Origin provided a complete list of the kinds of goods which 
could be produced wholly in a country.  Paragraph 5 included an illustrative list of operations which did not satisfy the criteria for production of goods within a country.  Other criteria of sufficient 
transformation could be established exclusively by the CU Commission as set-out in paragraph 6.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 133 - 
 
  428.  In response to a specific question from a Member, she confirmed that the tariff 
nomenclature referred to in Article 244 of the CU Customs Code corresponded to the subheadings and headings of the tariff nomenclature mentioned in Article 2(a)(i) of the Agreement on Rules of 
Origin, adding that Kazakhstan had adopted the 2012 Harmonized System Nomenclature.  As of 
1 January 2010, classification of goods was based on the Common Tariff Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs Union, established by Decision of the CU Commission 
No. 130 of 27 November 2009.  The Common Tariff Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity 
of the Customs Union had been modified in accordance with the 2012 Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System. 
429.  Members requested further information on the CU Agreements, CU Decisions, and 
CU Customs Code provisions that governed the application of rules of origin to imports into 
Kazakhstan, as well as Kazakhstan's domestic legislation containing such regulations.  They sought 
assurances that Kazakhstan's rules of origin complied with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, including information on how these measures established preferential and 
non-preferential rules of origin.  Members also sought elimination of Kazakhstan's requirement 
that imports where MFN origin could not be initially proven were subject to twice the MFN tariff rate, as this requirement was unduly burdensome given that after the accession of Kazakhstan to 
the WTO, goods originating in only a small number of countries could possibly originate from 
non-MFN trading partners.  These Members sought a commitment that Kazakhstan would assess 
the MFN rate on all goods originating from countries  enjoying MFN duty rate from the date of the 
accession to the WTO.  They also asked Kazakhstan to clarify whether - for goods whose origin could not be clearly established and which could be  cleared through customs only after payment of 
customs duties at double the MFN rate - it was possible to submit a certificate of origin or other 
proof subsequent to customs clearance and, if orig in was subsequently satisfactorily established, 
whether excess duties could then be refunded.  
430.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that, pursuant to Article 58 of the 
CU Customs Code, goods were recognised as originating from a specific country if they were 
wholly made in that country or substantially transformed in accordance with the criteria set forth 
in the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin and CU Commission Decisions.  Furthermore, Article 59 of the CU Customs Code established that the country of  origin of goods could be certified by either a 
declaration of origin or a certificate of origin.  Article 60 of the Code stipulated that the declaration 
of origin of goods constituted a statement on the country of origin of goods made by the 
manufacturer, seller or sender in connection with exportation of the goods, provided that the 
statement specified information allowing to determine the country of origin of goods.  Commercial 
or any other documents related to the goods could also be used as such a declaration.  Pursuant to 
Article 61 of the CU Customs Code, the certificate of origin of goods constituted documentary proof 
of the country of origin of goods, if issued by the competent body or an organization of a given 
country, or of the country of exportation of the said goods in cases where the country of 
exportation issued such certificates, based on the information obtained from the country of origin WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 134 - 
 
  of such goods.  The certificate of origin had to be submitted with the customs declaration and 
other documents presented for customs clearance.  
431.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to Article 61.4 of the CU Customs 
Code, if the certificate of origin of goods was not properly completed e.g., there were violations of 
the Customs Union certificate form requirements, the customs bodies independently took a decision concerning denial to consider the certificate as a basis for granting tariff preferences.  
According to Article 61.5 of the CU Customs Code, the customs bodies could also request 
additional documentary proofs or clarifications when conducting customs control.  Such requests, however, did not impede the release of goods based on the information of the country of origin 
declared when placing the goods under the customs procedure.   
432.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that a certificate of origin had to contain an 
indication of the country of origin; a written declaration that the goods conformed to the 
corresponding criteria of origin; and a written certification regarding the accuracy of the supplied information, issued by the competent body of the country of exportation.  Certificates of origin 
were not obligatory for non-preferential trade, except if the customs bodies found that the 
information on the country of origin of goods that influenced application of rates of customs duties, 
taxes and (or) non-tariff regulation measures, was inaccurate; or if a certificate of origin was 
required by international agreements to which Kazakhstan was a Party.  Failure to provide a 
correctly drafted certificate or information on the origin of the goods was not a sufficient reason for 
denial of customs clearance, except for cases stipulated in paragraph 2 of Article 62 of the 
CU Customs Code (i.e. if the goods originated in countries from which imports to the customs territory of the Customs Union or transit through its territory were prohibited in accordance with 
the customs legislation of the Customs Union or the legislation of the CU Parties).  Goods imported 
without a correctly completed certificate of origin would be subject to MFN duty rates.   
433.  The representative of Kazakhstan also explaine d that in the event goods were delivered in 
a dismantled or unassembled state over several shipments - when it was impossible to deliver the 
whole lot at one time due to production or transp ortation problems or when the lot of goods had, 
by mistake, been divided into parts - paragraphs 8 and 9 of the CU Rules of Origin established a 
number of specific rules to assist in determining the country of origin of goods (e.g., the indicated goods could, at the discretion of the importer, be considered as one shipment).  
434.  She added that in accordance with Article 62 of the CU Customs Code, when goods were 
brought into the CU customs territory, a document confirming the country of origin of the goods 
had to be shown if Kazakhstan (or other CU Partie s) granted preferential tariffs to the country of 
origin of the goods pursuant to Kazakhstan's customs legislation and (or) international agreements 
of the CU Parties.  Currently, a certificate of origin (either the "A" Document attached to the Annex 
to the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin for Developing and Least-developed Countries or, for 
CIS preferences, the ST-1 document) was required.  Goods were considered as originating from a developing or least-developed country subject to pr eferential tariff treatment when they were fully 
produced in such country.  She added that Part III of Annex I of the CU Agreement on Rules of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 135 - 
 
  Origin for Developing and Least-developed Countries provided that the CU Parties could establish a 
procedure for application of criteria of substantial transformation for countries eligible for tariff preferences based on the determination that the va lue of inputs used in the production process 
and originating from countries not covered by pref erential treatment or of unknown origin did not 
exceed 50% of the total declared value.  She also noted that Part VI of Annex I provided the terms for application of the rules of direct purchase an d direct shipping for granting such preferential 
tariffs.  Pursuant to Section VIII of the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin for Developing and 
Least-developed Countries, in cases where there were reasonable doubts regarding the authenticity of the certificate or information cont ained in the certificate, the customs bodies could 
request the competent bodies of the developing or least-developed country that had issued the 
certificate of origin to provide additional documentary proof. 
435.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that with respect to goods traded within the 
CU and/or goods covered by free trade agreements between Kazakhstan and other CIS member-States, Kazakhstan applied the Agreement "On the Rules of Origin in the CIS" of 
20 November 2009, and the Agreement of the CIS States "On Rules of Origin of Goods Originating 
from Developing Countries when Granting Tariff Preferences under the General Preferences System" of 12 April 1996.  These rules had been developed in accordance with the international 
practice for determination of origin of goods.  Additional criteria of direct purchase were used, 
along with the requirement that the exporter be established legally in a Party to the CIS Free 
Trade Agreement (as originally provided for in th e Decision of the Heads of Government of other 
CIS Countries of 18 October 1996).  Currently, there were no other arrangements for the determination of the country of origin of goods within the framework of the Customs Union, the 
Eurasian Economic Community, or the CIS.  For any free trade arrangements with countries not 
members of the CIS, she noted that the rules of origin for these preferential arrangements were contained in the free trade agreements themselves. 
436.  Members sought clarification of the requirement that, in order for imported goods to be 
eligible for preferential tariff rates under CIS free trade agreements, the exporter had to be legally 
established resident in a Party to a CIS Free Trade Agreement, and asked if corporate registration 
would satisfy that requirement, or whether there we re other criteria that had to be satisfied.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as for the requirement that the 
exporter be legally established in a Party to the CIS Agreement there were not any other criteria, 
apart from registration, to qualify.  In addition, to obtain a preferential tariff, goods had to be purchased directly from the other CIS States, i.e., pursuant to Article 5.1 of the Agreement 
"On the Rules of Origin in the CIS States" of 20 November 2009, only CIS goods that did not leave 
the CIS territory, except for transit of goods under customs control through third countries, were 
eligible for preferential ta riff rates under CIS FTA.   
437.  Some Members also asked for further explanation about the possibility, under CU legal 
instruments, that "the country of origin could also be understood to mean a group of countries, 
region or part of a country, if this was necessary to identify them, with a view to determining the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 136 - 
 
  origin of goods".  They noted that the WTO Agr eement lacked such provisions, and they requested 
a clarification of how and under what circumstances the origin of a good could be ascribed to a region or part of a country.  These Members requ ested confirmation from Kazakhstan that these 
provisions would be applied in full conformity with the WTO Agreement.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that pa ragraph 1 of Article 58 of the CU Customs Code 
stated that the country of origin of goods could be a group of countries and customs unions as well 
as a region or a part of a country, if it was difficult to determine the exact country of origin within 
the group of countries.  Under those circumstances, the relevant group of countries, customs union, or if necessary in order to identify origin, a region or part of a country could be considered 
as the country of origin.  The representative fo r Kazakhstan noted that a region or part of a 
country was considered as the country of origin in cases where it was necessary to define the 
origin of the goods as such, and to date had only been used in trade remedy cases.   
438.  A Member noted that the right to seek a determination of origin prior to importation was 
contained in Article 2(h) and Annex II, paragraph 3(d), of the Agreement on Rules of Origin.  
Some Members stated that Kazakhstan should implement this and other aspects of the Agreement 
(e.g. right of appeal) prior to WTO accession.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that the CU Parties could make preliminary decisions with regards to determination of the country 
of origin of goods in the order stipulated by its national legislation, as determined by Article 58 of 
the CU Customs Code.  According to Article 91 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, the authorised 
customs body or territorial customs bodies could make preliminary decisions on the country of 
origin of goods.  The authorised customs body or its territorial branches, on request of an 
applicant, made preliminary decisions with regard to determination of the country of origin of 
goods when the information on the goods was avai lable.  Preliminary decisions with regard to 
determination of the country of origin of goods were made by the authorised body with the application of preferential and non-preferential regimes and in the form approved by Government 
Resolution No. 912 "On Form Approval for Classifica tion of Goods, on Classification of Goods in 
Unassembled State and Adoption of Preliminary Decision Concerning the Determination of the 
Country of Origin of Goods for Preferential and Non-preferential Regimes" of 8 September 2010.  
She also noted that, as of 1 July 2010, Order No. 210 of the Chairman of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan Customs Control Agency "On Approval of the Rules for Taking Preliminary Decisions 
and their Form" of 15 May 2003 was no longer in force.  
439.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, measures on 
rules of origin, whether adopted by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU, would be 
applied in Kazakhstan in conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, 
and would reflect the interim rules in Annex II to that Agreement, including the provisions for 
transparency, right of appeal, and notifications to the Committee on Rules of Origin.  She further 
confirmed that, consistent with the requirements of  Article 2(h) and of Annex II, paragraph 3(d) of 
the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, both for no n-preferential and preferential rules of origin, 
customs bodies would provide an assessment of th e origin of goods subject to import upon the 
request of an exporter, importer or any person with a justifiable cause and issue the assessment WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 137 - 
 
  no later than 150 days after a request provided that all necessary elements had been submitted.  
According to the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, any request for such an assessment would be accepted before trade in the goods concerned had begun, and any such 
assessment would be valid for three years provided that the facts and conditions, including the 
rules of origin, under which they had been made remained comparable.  She further confirmed that the previous practice of using "double MFN" rates as the default tariff rates for imports of 
undeterminable origin had been eliminated.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Other Customs Formalities 
440.  Some Members stated that the requirement to obtain an import "transaction passport", in 
addition to registration and licensing for currency control was duplicative and an unnecessary 
burden on trade.  These Members of the Work ing Party were concerned that the transaction 
passport constituted an unacceptable universal licensing system and currency control incompatible 
with Articles XI and XV of the GATT 1994.  These Members asked Kazakhstan to remove the 
transaction passport requirement prior to WTO accession.   
441.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  the Customs Code of the Customs Union or 
other CU legal acts did not regulate the transaction passport requirement.  This issue was left to the national competence of the CU Parties.  Sh e further explained that, within the framework of 
reduction of administrative barriers to trade, the transaction passport had been cancelled in 
accordance with Law No. 530-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Currency Control and Regulation" of 6 January 2012, which had 
amended Law No. 57 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005.  
The transaction passport had been replaced by a procedure for registration of foreign trade 
contracts exceeding the equivalent of US$50,000.  Th e exporter or importer had to register their 
foreign trade contract prior to any money payments under the contract and/or movement of goods across the border of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  To this end, the exporter or importer had to 
submit to the bank an application form and an original or a copy of the contract.  The bank had to 
register the contract and assign the registration number within one working day.  The registration 
procedure for foreign trade contracts was required only for the purposes of statistical data 
gathering and for monitoring foreign trade payments.   
442.  Some Members expressed concerns regarding the requirement to provide an electronic 
copy of the import and export declaration as part of the required customs documentation, as well 
as the granting of an exclusive licence for the provis ion of electronic copies of these declarations to 
"Accept Corporation".  The cost to the importer of obtaining such an electronic copy, and the 
requirement that importers still had to present a paper copy of the import declaration also 
represented a concern.   
443.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, to facilitate control at the border, her 
Government was in the process of implementing a Unified Automated Information System (UAIS).  
As a first step, the Government of Kazakhstan had introduced an electronic customs declaration WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 138 - 
 
  system.  Paper customs declarations continued to be used in parallel.  At the moment, test 
application of an electronic customs declaration system was being conducted in several regions of Kazakhstan.  The system would be applied across the country when all necessary test applications 
were completed.  The planned date of introduction of the system was 1 January 2014.  Concerning 
the protection of confidential information under  the UAIS, she said that the Customs Control 
Committee used standard software to ensure the security of information in the system.  
She pointed to Article 16 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, pursuant to which 
customs bodies, customs officials as well as other persons who had access to information in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan had no right to disclose, use for 
personal purposes, or transfer to third parties (i ncluding Government bodies) information regarded 
as State, commercial, bank, or tax secret, or other secrets protected by laws as well as other 
confidential information (exceptions were contained in paragraph 3 of this Article).   
444.  Asked about the results of the review of the temporary customs warehouse storage 
regime, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the temporary storage regime was regulated 
by Chapter 30 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Articles 259-270).  According 
to Article 260, temporary storage of goods was not limited or restricted to the use of temporary warehouses, but could also involve the importer's own warehouses, customs and free warehouses; 
as well as premises, open-air and other locations belonging to the authorised economic operator.  
In addition, pursuant to Article 265, upon written request and provision of guarantee for the 
payment of customs duties and taxes, imported goods could be temporarily stored in an 
unauthorised warehouse belonging to the recipient of goods, in automobile vehicles located on the territory owned or leased by the recipient of good s, or railway vehicles located on the territory 
owned or leased by the owner of the goods.  According to paragraph 2 of Article 259 of the 
Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, te mporary storage of goods was not required for 
goods transported by pipeline and by electricity transmission line.   
445.  Asked about any regulations mandating specific customs entry points for specific goods, 
the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, according to Article 248 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, customs clearance took place at the point of placement of goods under a customs 
procedure.  These provisions were the same within the framework of the Customs Union.  According to Article 156 of the Customs Code of the CU, customs operations regarding the 
placement of goods under customs procedure took pl ace at the customs points during their office 
hours.  Article 248 of the Customs Code of Kazakh stan authorised the Government of Kazakhstan 
to designate customs entry checkpoints for certain categories of goods.  Pursuant to the 
Regulation to items 2.9 and 2.10 of the Common List  of Goods Subject to Bans and Restrictions for 
Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Cu stoms Union of the Eurasian Economic Community 
in Trade with Third Countries approved by Collegium Decision No. 134, State control had to be 
established over the exportation of natural diamonds, in accordance with the requirements of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme.  In addition, the importation of the following categories of 
goods had to take place at designated customs checkpoints - natural diamonds (HS Code WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 139 - 
 
  7102 21 000 0), raw precious stones (HS Code 7106, 7108, 7110); ores, and concentrates of 
precious metals (HS Code 2616); scrap and wastes from precious metals (HS Code 7112). 
- Preshipment Inspection 
446.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that preshipment inspection currently did not 
exist in Kazakhstan.  Preshipment inspection had been applied in accordance with Government 
Resolution No. 1301 "On the Implementation of Inde pendent System for Preshipment Inspection of 
Goods Imported into the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 4 October 1995 (hereinafter:  Government 
Resolution No. 1301) for three years from 1996 to 1999.  Pursuant to Government Resolution No. 1301, preshipment inspection had been carried out by "Société Générale de Surveillance S.A.".  
The preshipment inspection procedure had applied to all imported goods, except for:  (i) goods 
imported from CIS countries; (ii) goods of customs value lower than US$3,000; (iii) goods of strategic importance; (iv) dual-purpose goods; (v) and printing materials.  Government Resolution 
No. 1301 had been repealed by Government Resolution No. 1778 of 24 November 1999.   
447.  She also noted that in 2001-2005, an inde pendent expert examination of the customs 
value of imported goods had been conducted by the private company "ICS Inspection and Control 
Services Kazakhstan".  This procedure had not represented a preshipment inspection as the decision had been taken within 30 days of the sampling of imported goods.  The independent 
expert examination had applied to all imported go ods, except for goods included in the List of 
Goods not Subject to Independent Examination, such as goods of strategic importance and medicines.  This system was also no longer in place. 
448.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that there were currently no plans to 
re-establish preshipment inspection requirements for imports, but that Kazakhstan reserved the 
right to have recourse to such measures in the future, should it be deemed necessary by the 
Government.  The authority to establish preshipment inspection existed in CU legal instruments.  Article 7 of the CU Agreement on Common Measures for Non-Tariff Regulation with Regard to Third 
Counties, signed on 25 January 2008 (hereinafter:  the Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation), 
authorised the imposition of non-tariff regulatory measures on the basis of national interests, inter alia , to implement national laws not in conflict with international agreements.  The CU 
Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods on a 
Common Customs Territory to Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter:  the Agreement on 
Measures Concerning Foreign Trade) implemented the Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation and 
authorised the CU Commission to introduce non-economic measures affecting goods in foreign trade from third countries on the basis of proposals from the CU Parties.  Pursuant to Article 6 of 
the latter Agreement, Kazakhstan could propose to introduce preshipment inspection.  Even if the 
CU Commission rejected the proposal, such meas ures could be imposed unilaterally for up to 
six months, as provided for in Article 8 of the Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade. 
449.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, if a 
preshipment inspection scheme were to be introduced in the future, whether by Kazakhstan or by WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 140 - 
 
  the competent bodies of the CU, its operation would be in conformity with the relevant provisions 
of the WTO Agreement, including the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection, and the Agreement 
on the Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994, inter alia , in respect of the due process 
and transparency requirements of the WTO Agreem ents, in particular Article X of the GATT 1994 
and the Agreement on the Implementation of Ar ticle VII of the GATT 1994 and confidentiality of 
data received would be ensured.  In addition, it would be ensured by Kazakhstan or by the 
competent bodies of the CU that charges and fees  for preshipment inspection would comply with 
Article VIII of the GATT 1994, that preshipment entities would establish and maintain appeals 
procedures as foreseen by Article 2.21 of the Ag reement on Preshipment Inspection, and that that 
scheme would not constitute an undue and addition al burden on exporters to or importers of 
goods into Kazakhstan.  Further, she confirmed that the duration of any such scheme would be 
limited to three years and that importers and ex porters would not be precluded from challenging 
facts found and findings made by preshipment inspection entities as part of administrative appeals against decisions of Kazakhstan or the competen t bodies of the CU where such decisions were 
based on those facts or findings.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duty and Safeguard Regimes 
450.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the application of anti-dumping, 
countervailing and safeguard measures was regulated by the following legal acts:  (i) the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 on Application of Safeguard, Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries between the Repub lic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian Federation (hereinafter – the Ag reement of 25 January 2008) as amended by the 
Protocol of 18 October 2011 on Amendments and Addenda to the Agreement of 25 January 2008; 
(ii) the Decision of the Interstate Council of EurAsEC No. 37 "On Entering into Force of the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 on Application of Safeguard, Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries" of 21 May 2010; (iii) the Decision of the Board of the Eurasian 
Economic Commission No. 1 of 7 March 2012; (iv) the Decision of the Commission of the Customs 
Union No. 339 "On Application of Safeguard, An ti-dumping and Countervailing Measures on the 
Common Customs Territory of the Customs Union within the framework of EurAsEC" of 
17 August 2010; (v) the Decision of the Interstate Council of EurAsEC No. 59 "On International 
Treaties in the Field of Application of Safeguard,  Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures in the 
Customs Union" of 19 November 2010; (vi) the Prot ocol on the Order on Submission to Authority 
Conducting the Investigation the Information including Confidential Information for the Purposes of Safeguards, Anti-dumping and Countervailing Inve stigations, signed on 19 November 2010; as 
well as the following national legislation:  Law No. 421-1 "On Anti-Dumping Measures" of 
13 July 1999; Law No. 441-1 "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" of 16 July 1999, as amended by Law No. 114-III "On Amendments and Adde nda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Subsidies, Countervailing and Anti-dumping Measures" of 9 January 2006; Law 
No. 337-1 of "On Safeguard Measures for Domestic Market upon Importation of Goods" of 
28 December 1998, as amended by Law No. 53-III of "On Amendments and Addenda to the Law 
'On Safeguard Measures for Domestic Market upon Importation of Goods'" of 16 June 2005; and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 141 - 
 
  Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1374 "On Approval of the Rules for Conducting 
Investigations prior to Introduction of Safeguard, Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Measures" of 9 September 2000 (hereinafter – the "Rules for Conducting Investigations").  
451.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that  the Agreement of 25 January 2008 would be 
fully applicable in the territory of Kazakhstan afte r the expiration of the transitional arrangements 
that were set-out in the additional Agreement "On Application of Safeguard, Anti-dumping and 
Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries in the Transitional Period" of 19 November 2010 
(hereinafter – the Transitional Period Agreement).  Upon the expiration of the transitional period, 
the provisions of the national laws and regulations would apply to the extent they did not 
contradict the Agreement of 25 January 2008.  The in vestigations ongoing on the date of the entry 
into force of the Agreement of 25 January 2008 were to be continued in accordance with the new 
rules and the national regulations to the exte nt those regulations did not contradict that 
Agreement.  Therefore, if the national industry met the criteria of the domestic industry of the 
Customs Union as stipulated by the Agreement, the investigation would be continued, otherwise it 
would be terminated.  The representative of Kazakhstan provided additional information on trade 
remedy measures currently applied in Kazakhstan and the Customs Union in Annex 16. 
452.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that starting from 17 April 2012 the 
Department for Domestic Market Protection of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – 
Department or investigating body of the CU) was authorised to carry out new safeguard, 
anti-dumping and countervailing investigations on the common customs territory of the 
Customs Union by the Decision of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – Commission) No. 1 of 7 March 2012.   
- (a) Transitional regime 
453.  The Transitional Period Agreement stipulat ed that all safeguard, anti-dumping and 
countervailing measures that had been in force prior to 19 November 2010 had to be reviewed by 
the national authorised body in accordance with the criteria used to define the domestic industry of 
the Customs Union.  If the domestic producers, which had filed applications for the national measures, met the criteria of the domestic industry of the Customs Union promulgated in the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008, the measures would be extended to the customs territory of the 
Customs Union by a Decision of the CU Commission for the period it had been determined initially.  
In case the domestic industry definitional criteria were not met, the measure would continue to be 
applied at the national level.  The representati ve of Kazakhstan added that in case national 
investigations on application of safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing measures had been 
finished by the time the Transitional Period Ag reement was signed, but the measure had not been 
taken, safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing measures were applied at the national level by 
a decision of the national authorised body and had to be reviewed in accordance with the 
provisions of the Transitional Period Agreement.  If safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing 
investigations had not been finished by the time the Transitional Period Agreement was signed and 
investigations were still being conducted, safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing measures WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 142 - 
 
  were applied in accordance with the Agreement of 25 January 2008.  During the transitional period 
provided for in the Transitional Period Agreemen t, the national authority of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan continued ongoing investigations and conducted new trade remedies investigations in 
the Republic of Kazakhstan upon the request of the domestic industry of the CU.  However, all 
decisions to impose, extend, review or terminate trade remedy measures had to be taken by the 
Commission on the basis of a proposal from the Government of the CU Party that carried out the 
investigation. 
454.  According to the Commission Decision No. 44 of 16 March 2012, all the ongoing 
investigations should be transferred to the Department by 31 July 2012.  Accordingly, from 
1 August 2012, the Department would be the single authorised body to conduct safeguard, 
anti-dumping and countervailing investigations on a common customs territory of the CU. 
- (b) Regime established under the Agreement of 25 January 2008 
455.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the provisions of the Agreement of 
25 January 2008 that had entered into force on 1 July 2010 provided the principles for application 
of trade remedies by the Customs Union Pa rties – the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus – with regard to third countries.  The provisions of the Agreement of 25 January 2008, in her view, complied with the principles of the 
WTO Agreements. 
456.  According to the Agreement of 25 January 2008, all decisions with respect to common 
trade remedies in the Customs Union Parties had to  be taken by the Commission.  The decisions of 
the Commission would be collectively applied by  all the CU Parties within the common customs 
territory of the CU against the imports of relevant third countries.   
457.  According to the Agreement of 25 January 2008 (i) anti-dumping investigations could be 
initiated provided there was evidence of dumped imports and material injury, threat of such injury or material retardation of the establishment ("material injury") of the domestic industry of the 
CU Parties as a result of such imports; (ii) investigations regarding safeguard measure application 
could be initiated provided that there was evidence of imports of products into the CU territory in 
such increased quantities, absolute or relative to domestic production, and under such conditions 
as to cause or threaten to cause serious injury to the domestic industry that produces like or 
directly competitive products; and (iii) countervailing investigations could be initiated provided 
there was evidence of a specific subsidy and subs idized imports into the customs territory of the 
CU Parties that caused material injury to the domestic industry of the CU Parties. 
458.  Upon entry into force of the Agreement of  25 January 2008, the domestic industry was 
defined as:  (i) all producers of a like product - for the purposes of anti-dumping and 
countervailing investigations; (ii) all producers of a like product or a directly competitive product - for the purposes of safeguard investigations; or ( iii) producers of a like product – for the purposes 
of anti-dumping and countervailing investigations, and producers of a like or a directly competitive 
product – for the purposes of safeguard investigations, whose share in the total production volume WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 143 - 
 
  in the CU Parties constituted at least 25% of total production.  Similarly, the relevant import was 
measured as the import inflow into the entire CU common customs territory. 
459.  A Member asked a question regarding the initiation of investigations under the national 
legislation.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, from the date of entry into force of the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008, all investigations on the common customs territory of the Customs Union were initiated and conducted in accordance with the CU legislation.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that pursuant to the Agreement of 
25 January 2008, application for initiation of investigations with respect to anti-dumping and countervailing measures was considered to have been made "by or on behalf of the domestic 
industry" if it was supported by those domestic producers whose collective output in the CU Parties 
constituted more than 50% of the total production of the like product produced by that portion of 
the domestic industry of the CU Parties expres sing either support for or opposition to the 
application; and investigation could only be initiated provided that domestic producers in the CU Parties expressly supporting the application accounted for no less than 25% of the total 
production of the like product produc ed by the domestic industry of the CU Parties.  Application for 
initiation of investigations with respect to safeguard measures was considered to have been made "by or on behalf of the domestic industry" if domestic producers in the CU Parties supporting the 
application accounted for no less than 25% of the total production of the like or directly 
competitive product produced by the domestic industry of the CU Parties.  
460.  A Member questioned Kazakhstan regarding a deadline to accept or reject a request for 
safeguard investigation made by the domestic industry mentioned in the Rules.  In particular, this Member asked if the authorised body had 45 days  from the date of submission to decide on 
acceptance or rejection and to publish a notice of initiation of investigation in the official 
mass-media, and also if it was required, within these 45 days, to notify the applicant within 10 days from submission of the application in case some information was missing and if a decision 
not to initiate an investigation was made.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that according 
to the provisions established by the Agreement of  25 January 2008, the investigating body of the 
CU had 30 calendar days from the date of a safeguard, as well as anti-dumping and countervailing 
application, to verify the accuracy and completeness of the information stated in the application.  Such period could be extended but could not exceed  60 calendar days in total.  An application was 
refused if an applicant failed to submit all the necessary documents.  The 30-day period did not 
include the notification procedure in the mass-media and official publications about initiation of investigation.  In cases when initiation of an investigation was refused, the investigating body of 
the CU informed the applicant of the refusal and its reason within 10 working days from the date 
of taking such decision.  If the decision on initiation of the investigation was taken, the 
investigating body of the CU notified the author ised body of the exporting foreign country and 
other interested parties and published the notifica tion on the official website of the Commission 
within 10 working days from the date of taking such decision.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 144 - 
 
  461.  A Member asked if the period of 30 calendar da ys to notify stakeholders started from the 
date when the authorised body took the decision to initiate an investigation and without any relation to 45 days for publishing the notice of initiation in the media.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, in accordance with the provisions established by the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008, stakeholders would be notified within 10 working days from the date when a decision to initiate the investigation was taken.  The investigating body of the CU had 
to notify the CU Parties concerned and announce via the official website of the Commission the 
initiation of the investigation in order to involve all interested parties.  This period did not relate to the 30-day period during which the CU investig ating body reviewed the application and took a 
decision about initiating an investigation or rejecting an application.  The CU investigating body 
notified interested parties and published the notification on the official website of the Commission 
about initiating an investigation within 10 working days from the date when a decision to initiate 
the investigation was taken. 
462.  Further, a Member pointed out that neither Kazakhstan's Anti-dumping Law nor its 
Countervailing Duty Law appeared to address how the investigating authority would treat an 
interested party who refused access to, or otherwise did not provide necessary information within a reasonable period or significantly impeded an in vestigation, as provided under Article 6.8 of the 
WTO Anti-dumping Agreement (ADA).  This Me mber also asked Kazakhstan to explain how 
Annex II of the ADA was reflected in Kazakhstan's legislation.  
463.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to the 
Law "On Anti-dumping Measures" and the Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures", if an interested party did not provide necessary information within the time periods established by the 
authorised body, or otherwise significantly impeded an investigation, the authorised body could 
conduct an investigation on the basis of the facts available.  The Agreement of 25 January 2008 also stipulated that in cases when an interested party refused access to, or failed to submit 
necessary information to the CU investigating body  within the time periods established by the CU 
investigating body, or otherwise significantly impeded an investigation, such party was considered 
as uncooperative and the CU investigating body would make preliminary and final determinations 
on the basis of the facts available.  As regards to  the provisions of Annex II of the ADA, they were 
reflected in Article 35 of the Agreement of 25 January 2008, which provided for data collection 
within the course of investigation.  Article 35 provided that after a decision on the initiation of the 
investigation was made, the CU investigating body would issue questionnaires to certain interested parties.  Within the course of the investigation, the CU investigating body would verify the 
accuracy and reliability of the information provided by the interested parties.  
464.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that during the 
investigation, the CU investigating body had the right to request additional information from the 
interested parties.  A request was considered to be received after seven calendar days from the 
date of posting or handing it over to a represen tative of an interested party.  She added that 
pursuant to the Agreement of 25 January 20 08 responses had to be submitted to the CU WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 145 - 
 
  investigating body within 30 calendar days from the date of receipt.  In case the responses were 
submitted after the deadline, the CU investigat ing body had the right not to consider such 
information. 
465.  In response to the request by a Member to  clarify the legal authority that provided 
protection of confidential information in trade remedy investigations, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that confidential information provided by the interested parties to the 
investigating authority was protected by internal regulations of the Eurasian Economic 
Commission, Article 37 of the Agreement of 25 January 2008 and the Protocol "On the Order on 
Submission to Authority Conducting the Investigation the Information including Confidential 
Information for the Purposes of Safeguards, Anti-dumping and Countervailing Investigations" of 
19 November 2010.  In particular, Article 37 of th e Agreement of 25 January 2008 stipulated that 
confidential information could not be disclosed without permission of the interested party which 
submitted the information.  Interested parties providing confidential information also had to provide a non-confidential summary of the information.  She further added that in accordance with 
Article 37 of the CU Agreement of 25 January 2008,  a person responsible for the disclosure of the 
confidential information provided to the Commission was legally responsible in accordance with the legislation of the country hosting the Commission (currently hosted by the Russian Federation).   
466.  Another Member asked Kazakhstan to describe the very limited situations provided for by 
the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan where confidential information could be disclosed.  
The representative of Kazakhstan responded that such cases were set-out in the Criminal 
Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Persons requested by a relevant competent body 
carrying out a criminal investigation to provide confidential information could not refuse to provide 
information because it needed to be kept secret.  However, the results of the preliminary criminal 
investigation, including commercial secrets, were confidential.  The evidence containing commercial secrets, upon request of the persons concerned, could be reviewed at a closed 
proceeding.  After the proceeding, the legal documents of the case containing commercial and 
other secrets were confidentially retained with the case records.   
467.  A Member asked if provisions on retroactivity, duration, review of anti-dumping duties, 
consultation and dispute settlement were foreseen in the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures".  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the Law on Anti-Dumping Measures and the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 did not provide for use of anti-dumping measures retroactively in 
the cases envisaged by Articles 10.2 and 10.6 of the ADA.  As for the duration and review of 
anti-dumping duties, Article 35 of the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" and Article 17 of the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 provided that the e ffective period of anti-dumping duty would not 
exceed the period necessary to counteract the dumping which was causing injury.  This period 
would not exceed five years from the date of its in troduction or the last sunset review.  The period 
of an application of anti-dumping measures could be extended if a sunset review of the measures showed that the expiry of the measure was likely to lead to a recurrence of dumping and injury.  
The Agreement of 25 January 2008 stipulated that the sunset review procedures of anti-dumping WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 146 - 
 
  measures were carried out by the CU investigating body on its own initiative or on the basis of the 
interested parties' application submitted not later than six months prior to anti-dumping duty termination.  
468.  In reply to a question on procedural fairness, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
Article 29 of the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" and Article 30 of the Agreement of 25 January 2008 established that all interested parties had a right to defend their interests during 
an anti-dumping investigation.  For this purpos e and upon request of an interested party, the 
CU investigating body had to provide an opportuni ty for the parties with opposing interests to 
discuss the investigation documentation and provide for additional information within the 
time-frame that did not disrupt the course of invest igation.  The CU investigating body had to duly 
provide all interested parties with the possibility of acquainting themselves with public information 
used by the authorised body in anti-dumping investigation in order to allow them prepare 
arguments for their cases. 
469.  As for dispute resolution, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that provisions 
regulating appeals to decisions and actions of the CU Commission were stipulated in the Statute of 
the EurAsEC Court, which had been adopted by the EurAsEC Interstate Council Decision No. 502 of 5 July 2010.  In particular, the Statute provided for the right of economic entities in the CU Parties 
and all other interested parties, including foreign economic entities, to bring a case against the 
decisions of the CU Commission to the EurAsEC Court (paragraph 2, Article 14).  In accordance 
with the Statute, appeals to the Court by the domestic and foreign economic entities and 
peculiarities of the legal proceedings were dete rmined by the Agreement on Appeals to EurAsEC 
Court by Economic Entities with Disputes Arising within the Customs Union, which was approved 
by the Decision of the Interstate Council of  the EurAsEC No. 534 of 9 December 2010.  
470.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to indicate whether and how Article 13 of the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (hereinafter – ASCM) concerning 
consultations before initiation was reflected in the Section 3 of the Agreement of 25 January 2008 
on countervailing measures.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that Article 38 of the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 provided for consultation procedures.  In particular, before 
initiating an investigation, the authorised body had to send invitations for consultations to the foreign countries concerned in order to clarify the situation and seek to reach a mutually agreeable 
solution.  In the course of investigation, the foreign countries were allowed to continue the 
consultations with the authorised body.  Conducting consultations did not prevent the initiation of an investigation and application of provisional or final countervailing measures. 
471.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that pursuant to Article 15 of the Agreement of 
25 January 2008, investigation proceedings could be suspended or terminated by the CU 
investigating body without the imposition of anti-dumping duties upon receipt, in writing, of 
satisfactory voluntary undertakings from any exporter of the product under investigation to revise its prices or to cease exports to the common customs territory of the CU Parties at prices lower 
than its normal value, if such exporter's underta kings were supported by its affiliated persons in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 147 - 
 
  the CU Parties and the CU investigating body came to a conclusion that accepting such 
undertakings eliminated the injurious effects of  dumped imports and decided to approve these 
undertakings.  Thus, the exporters could choose between two options:  (i) pay anti-dumping duties 
and continue supplying the goods to the common customs territory of the CU; or (ii) agree to a 
price undertaking for the purposes of eliminating the injurious effects of dumping.  A price undertaking was not mandatory.  The CU investigating body could not require a price undertaking 
which increased prices higher than the dumping margin.  Price increases could be less than 
dumping margin if the CU investigating body established that the price increase resulting from the undertaking was enough to remove the injury to the domestic industry.  Investigation proceedings 
regarding subsidized goods could be suspended or terminated by the CU investigating body 
without imposition of countervailing duties upon receipt in writing of satisfactory voluntary 
undertakings from (i) an exporting foreign country to terminate or reduce the subsidies being 
provided or take measures to eliminate the injury caused to the domestic industry; or (ii) an exporter of the goods concerned increased the pric e for these goods in such a way that it would 
eliminate the injury caused to the domestic industry.  
472.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that in anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases 
the amount of the duty had to be sufficient to eliminate injury to the domestic industry; an 
anti-dumping duty could not exceed the calcul ated dumping margin, and a countervailing duty 
could not exceed the amount of the subsidy of the exporting foreign country calculated for a 
product unit.  If a safeguard measure was applied by establishing an import quota, the import 
quota could not be lower than the annual average level (in relation to quantity or value) of the import volume of the product under investigation for three years preceding the date of submitting 
an application for investigation, for which the statistical data was available, except for cases when 
clear justification is given that a lower import quota to prevent or remedy serious injury or a threat of such injury to the domestic industry was necessary.  
473.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's Anti-dumping law did not appear to address whether 
an individual anti-dumping rate could or would be calculated for a company who was not chosen as 
a mandatory respondent because the authority limited the examination of interested parties to a 
"reasonable number" of respondents, such as that  contemplated in Article 6.10.2 of the ADA.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" did not cover 
this specific situation.  However, this situation is provided for in the Agreement of 
25 January 2008.  Pursuant to Article 10.9 of the Agreement of 25 January 2008, if a company was not chosen as a mandatory respondent, the amount of the margin of dumping calculated in 
respect of every foreign exporter or foreign producer that was not selected but submitted the 
necessary information within a period established for such submission during the investigation, 
could not exceed the weighted average dumping margin established in respect of the selected 
foreign exporters or foreign producers of the alle gedly dumped imports.  As noted above, should 
there be any discrepancies between the national  law and the Agreement of 25 January 2008, the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 would prevail.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 148 - 
 
  474.  A Member noted that paragraph 11 of Article 10 and paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 stated that the "all others" rate or duty would be based on the highest margin of dumping determined during th e investigation and asked the representative of 
the Kazakhstan to explain why the CU chose to make an adverse inference (i.e. the highest margin 
of dumping) in setting the "all others" rate, as opposed to choosing a more neutral method (e.g., the weighted-average margin of all participating respondents).  Furthermore, this Member asked 
the representative of Kazakhstan to explain how this methodology was consistent with Article 9.4 
of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994.  
475.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that , if the competent authority found that an 
interested party had failed to cooperate for th e purpose of the investigation, the competent 
authority could use an inference that was adverse to the interests of that interested party.  
The competent authority could also determine the dumping margin on the basis of any other 
information at its disposal, including the weighted-average margin of all participants.  
476.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, if an interested party cooperated, but 
was not selected for the calculation of an individual dumping margin, the anti-dumping duty 
applied would be applied in accordance with Arti cle 9.4 of the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VI of the GATT 1994.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
477.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that an anti-dumping investigation would 
be terminated in cases when the CU investigating body determined that the dumping margin was 
considered to be less or equal to de minimis (i.e., 2%), or that the volume of dumped imports was 
negligible.  The volume of dumped imports would be normally regarded as negligible if the volume of dumped imports from a particular country was found to account for less than 3% of imports of 
the like product to the CU customs territory, unless countries which individually accounted for less 
than 3% of the imports of the like product to the CU customs territory collectively accounted for 
more than 7% of imports of the like product to th e CU customs territory.  This provision was, in 
her view, in line with Article 5.8 of the ADA. 
478.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" had 
been amended in line with the provisions of the ADA.  The term "normal price" had been replaced 
by "normal value" and the concept of ordinary cour se of trade had been modified in line with the 
ADA.  The de minimis dumping margin had been reduced from 5 to 2%, in accordance with the 
ADA.  To ensure transparency and confidentiality,  the authorised body would be required to make 
written evidence, presented by one interested party, promptly available to other interested parties participating in the investigation, with the exception of confidential information.  
479.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures" had been amended to introduce new definitions of the terms "domestic producers", "like 
products" and "specific subsidy".  In her view, the provisions of the Law had been brought in 
conformity with the provisions of Article 8 of the ASCM with regard to non-actionable subsidies.  
The new amendments had introduced provisions for holding consultations aimed at reaching a WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 149 - 
 
  mutually acceptable solution, prior to conducting an investigation, as provided under Article 13 of 
the ASCM.  Throughout the investigation, foreign states would be given a reasonable opportunity to continue such consultations.  In reply to a specific question, she said that the concept of 
"benefit" was contained in Article 1 (paragraph 16) of the Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures".  The definition of a subsidy in this Law conformed to the definition provided in Article 1 of the ASCM.  
480.  Several important changes had been introduced to the Law No. 337-1 "On Safeguard 
Measures for Domestic Market upon Importation of  Goods".  Namely, the definitions of key terms 
used in the law – such as domestic industry, seriou s injury and threat of serious injury – had been 
modified in accordance with the definitions of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards.  The procedure 
for the imposition of provisional safeguard measures  and, in particular, refund procedures had also 
been adjusted.  Opportunities would be provided to  all interested parties to present evidence and 
express their views.  A provision that envisaged progressive liberalisation of safeguard measures after their first year of application had been ad ded.  The representative of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan noted that provisions of the national laws and regulations on trade remedy measures 
applied in Kazakhstan to the extent that they  did not contradict to the CU Agreement of 
25 January 2008. 
481.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, compliance 
with the provisions of the Agreement on Impl ementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994, 
the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, and the Agreement on Safeguards, 
whether by the competent authorities of Kazakhstan  or the competent bodies of the CU, would be 
ensured.  She further confirmed that Kazakhstan would notify and implement, upon accession, all 
appropriate laws and regulations applicable in Ka zakhstan in conformity with the provisions of 
these Agreements.  She confirmed that, from the date of accession, WTO requirements would be 
met in applying anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures in Kazakhstan, whether by 
the competent authority of Kazakhstan or by the co mpetent body of the CU.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan further confirmed that any trad e remedy measure applied on the date of 
WTO accession of Kazakhstan and any trade reme dy measure procedure launched before the date 
of accession as well as any trade remedy measur e resulting therefrom, whether by the competent 
authority of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU, would be consistent with the relevant 
WTO Agreement, as of the date of accession.  She also confirmed that all interested parties, as 
defined in the relevant WTO Agreement, would have access to any non-confidential information that was relevant to any trade remedy measure applied on the date of WTO accession of 
Kazakhstan, or adopted subsequently, on the basis of an investigation or review launched before 
its accession.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that, from the date of 
WTO accession of the Kazakhstan, any interested party could request the initiation of a review of 
any trade remedy measure, applied on the date of accession or adopted subsequently, on the basis of an investigation or review launched before the WTO accession of Kazakhstan, identifying 
the elements of that measure, which were, in th eir view, not consistent with the above-mentioned 
WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 150 - 
 
  B. EXPORT REGULATIONS 
- Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Services Rendered, Application of Internal 
Taxes to Exports 
482.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that export duties were levied pursuant to the 
Government of Kazakhstan Resolution No. 520 "On Customs Duty Rates" of 7 June 2010 and 
Resolution No. 1036 "On Export Duties on Cr ude Oil and Goods Produced from Oil" of 
15 October 2005.  According to these Resolutions, export duties were applied to the following list 
of goods:  livestock raw skin and wool, ferrous and non-ferrous metal scrap and waste, and oil 
products.  The export duties for these goods varied from 10% (uncombed wool) to 30% (copper waste and scrap).  Export duties were subject to publication after approval by the Government and 
had to enter into force within thirty calendar days after the first official publication.  Export duties 
currently applied in Kazakhstan are listed in Annex 23(a). 
483.  She added that within the framework of the CU  formation, the CU parties elaborated the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 "On Export Duties with regard to Third Countries" (hereinafter – the CU Agreement on Export Duties) and agreed that it would form the legal basis for levying 
export duties on goods exported from the CU Partie s to third countries after it entered into force, 
which was not yet the case.  The CU Agreement on export duties was a framework agreement which established general terms on which export duti es within the CU had to be applied.  However, 
it did not provide unified regulations and unified rates of export duties.  Thus, upon the CU 
establishment on 1 January 2010, export duties re mained subject to regulation at the national 
level.  Article 1 of the CU Agreement on Export duties called for the eventual development of a 
Common List of Goods Subject to Export Duties (CU Common List), to be established by the CU Parties within 60 days of its entry into force.  Accordingly, each CU Party was in the process of 
developing a list of goods subject to export du ties with the rates of the duties established 
according to the national legislation.  Once de veloped, the list would be submitted to the EEC.  
The EEC on the basis of information provided by th e CU parties would create the CU Common List.  
She also added that pursuant to Article 3 of the Agreement, if a product made on the territory of a 
Party levying export duties on this product was ex ported to a third country from the territory of 
another Party that was not levying export duties on this product or was applying lower rates, such 
Party had to ensure that export duties were:  (i) levied at the rates applied by the producing 
Party; and (ii) included into the Common List of Goods Subject to Export Duties. 
484.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan applied export duties on an MFN 
basis.  However, exports under the free trade regime between members of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) and under the bilateral free trade agreements in force with all other 
CIS countries were exempt from the payment of ex port duties, except for Moldova.  At the same 
time, in accordance with a multilateral FTA si gned by the CIS countries (Armenia, Belarus, 
Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, the Ru ssian Federation, Tajikistan and Ukraine) on 
18 October 2011, Kazakhstan had reserved the right to apply export duties for exports of certain goods to other parties of the Agreement, except for the CU member-States.  Upon its entry into 
force, the new Agreement would replace bilateral FTAs of the CIS countries with Kazakhstan (for WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 151 - 
 
  more details please see the section "Trade Agreements").  She further noted that the Agreement 
between Kazakhstan and the European Union on Tr ade in Certain Steel Products approved by the 
Government Resolution No. 738 of 19 July 2005, had abolished customs duties, charges or any 
similar measures on exports of ferrous scrap and waste to the EU falling under heading 7204 of 
the EU Combined Nomenclature (paragraph 3, Article 2).   
485.  Some Members noted that export duties appeared to be introduced to displace foreign 
products, which would otherwise be imported, with domestic products or otherwise distort trade.  
These Members considered that this application of export duties was unacceptable and inconsistent with Articles II and XXIII of the GATT 1994.  Thes e Members also stated that, in their view, the 
discriminatory export duty exemptions granted to CU Parties were inconsistent with Article I of 
the GATT 1994.  In addition, a Member expressed particular concerns regarding the export duty 
imposed on iron and steel scrap, considering the pressure that it placed on countries not applying 
such restrictions in the current market.  This Member also noted the non-MFN treatment of ferrous scrap in Kazakhstan's exports to the European Union, and stated that this practice had to be 
eliminated prior to WTO accession.  Finally, this Member enquired as to whether, as was the case 
with one other CU Party, only exports to the Customs Union were exempt from the payment of 
export duties.  Given that Kazakhstan had free trade area relations with other CIS countries, 
discrimination in the elimination of duties and charges among preferential trading partners would 
have implications for the consistency of such  a measure with Article XXIV of the GATT 1994. 
486.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  export duties were applied on a limited 
number of goods mainly for fiscal and regulatory purposes as well as environmental reasons and, as such, did not violate the provisions of the GATT 1994.  She added that her Government was 
undertaking steps to narrow down the list of good s subject to export duties.  To this end, the 
export duty on aluminium and beryllium ligatu re (out of HS Code 7601 20 100 0) had been 
eliminated.   
487.  Kazakhstan was also planning to reduce the export duty on ferrous scrap (HS Code 7204).  
The representative of Kazakhstan noted that thes e reductions in export duties on ferrous waste 
and scrap contained in HS heading 7204 and others had come about through bilateral negotiations 
and the results of these negotiations would be duly reflected.  A Member indicated that it had accepted Kazakhstan's invitation to engage in bila teral negotiations to reduce its export duties on 
the above-mentioned products in the context of Ka zakhstan's accession to the WTO.  The results 
of these negotiations are provided in Annex [23(b) ].  In the view of this Member, these results 
formed part of the balance of commitments and concessions in the terms of accession of 
Kazakhstan.  This Member emphasized that, if Kazakhstan subsequently increased these export 
duties above the commitment level, it would distur b the balance of concessions established in the 
bilateral and multilateral negotiations for WTO accession, and this Member would have the right to 
take appropriate action to rebalance the concessions.  Some other Members stated that this was without prejudice to their views in respect of the status and legality of export duties in the 
framework of the WTO Agreement. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 152 - 
 
  488.  With respect to application of export duties to CIS countries, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that export duty exemptions applied to CIS countries were applied in accordance with Article XXIV of the GATT 1994.  In  particular, the volume of Kazakhstan's exports 
to CIS countries subject to export duties was less than 1% of the total volume of goods exported 
to CIS countries.  She held the view that Kazakhst an's participation in FTAs was in compliance with 
Article XXIV:8(b) since the duties were eliminated on substantially all the trade between the FTA's 
participants.  With regard to exports of ferrous scrap to the European Union, she noted that the 
bilateral Agreement between the Republic of Ka zakhstan and the European Union on Trade in 
Certain Steel Products had expired, without replacement, on 31 December 2006; and the 
preferential treatment granted thereunder had ceased at that time. 
489.  Asked to explain how Kazakhstan would schedule its export levies so as to avoid distortion 
of domestic or international trade, the representative of Kazakhstan said that export duties for 
goods continued to play an important fiscal role in  Kazakhstan.  She noted that export duties did 
not affect the price at which an exported commodity  (i.e. oil, oil products, and non-ferrous metals) 
was purchased abroad.  Therefore, they were not used by Kazakhstan in a way that distorted 
domestic or international trade. 
490.  Some Members asked Kazakhstan to describe the new tax regime for oil operations.  
In addition, a Member asked Kazakhstan specifically to provide further information on how the 
world price of crude oil was determined for the purposes of revising the export duty on this 
product. 
491.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan had introduced a new tax 
regime for oil operations designed to increase oil revenue from the export of crude oil.  The new 
tax regime for oil operations applied for all contractual obligations, except for Production Sharing 
Agreements (PSAs) concluded between the Government and subsurface user prior to 1 January 2009 and which had passed the obligatory tax expertise.  Subsurface users operating 
under PSAs were bound by the tax conditions st ipulated in the PSA in accordance with the 
provisions of the tax legislation which applied on the date the contract had been signed.  
The conditions of the PSA were fixed and coul d not be changed with subsequent changes in 
legislation without the prior agreement of both parties (see also the section on "Monetary and Fiscal Policy"). 
492.  Natural persons and juridical persons (subsurface users), operating under the new tax 
regime were subject to taxes affecting ordinary tax payers, as well as specific taxes, including a rent tax on the export of crude oil and gas condensate, excess profits tax, minerals extraction tax, 
corporate income tax and bonuses.  The rent tax had been established by Article 303 of the Tax 
Code.  It was calculated based on the value of exported crude oil and gas condensate, which was 
set on the basis of the actual volume exported an d its market (world) price.  The market (world) 
price of crude oil was determined by multiplyin g the average of daily price quotations by the 
average exchange rates of KZT (tenge) to a related foreign currency.  Most particularly, price 
quotations of crude oil in foreign currency of each standard type of crude oil of Brent DTD or Urals WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 153 - 
 
  MED for the tax period published by "Platts Crude Oil Marketwire" or "Argus Crude" were used for 
calculation of the rent tax.  Rent tax rates ranged from 0% when the world price was US$20 per barrel to 32% when the world price exceeded US$200 per barrel.  The rent tax applied to all 
juridical and natural persons engaged in the export  of crude oil and gas condensate.  The export 
rent tax was aimed at recovering excess profits from subsurface users.  
493.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would implement, from the 
date of accession, its tariff concessions and commitments contained in Part V of the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan.  Accordingly, products described in Part V of that Schedule would, subject to the terms, conditions or qualifications set-forth in that Part of 
the Schedule, be exempt from export duties in excess of those set-forth and provided therein, 
except as justified by the relevant WTO Agreements, including Articles XX and XXI of the 
GATT 1994.  The representative of Kazakhstan fu rther confirmed that Kazakhstan would not apply 
other measures having an equivalent effect to export duties on those products.  She confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would apply export duties in conformity with the 
WTO Agreement, including with Article I of the GATT 1994.  Accordingly, with respect to export 
duties and charges of any kind imposed on, or in connection with exportation, any advantage, favour, privilege or immunity granted by Kazakhstan to any product destined for any other country 
shall be accorded immediately and unconditionally to the like product destined for the territories of 
all other WTO Members.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would, from 
the date of accession to the WTO, administer export tariff rate quotas (TRQs) in a manner that is 
consistent with the WTO Agreement and in particular the GATT 1994 and the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.]  
- Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas  
494.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that as of 1 January 2010, the legal basis for the 
application of export restrictions on goods export ed to third countries from the CU could be found 
in the following Agreements:  (i) EurAsEC Board of Heads of States Decision No. 19 of 
27 November 2009 and the Agreement on Common Measures of Non-tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries of 25 January 2008; (ii) "on th e Procedure of Introduction and Implementation 
of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of 
Third Countries" of 9 June 2009; and (iii) "on Licensing Procedures in the Sphere of Foreign Trade 
in Goods" of 9 June 2009.  According to these Agreements, decisions to apply non-tariff measures 
on exports from the CU Parties to third countries would be taken by the CU Commission.  By its Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009, the CU Commission approved the Common List of Goods 
Subject to Non-Tariff Measures, which had entered into force on 1 January 2010.  Among the 
goods subject to export prohibition were:  (i) printed information or information on audio-visual and other devices containing information, which might cause damage to the political or economic 
interests of the Republic, to its State security, to th e health and morality of its citizens; (ii) timber, 
recovered paper, paperboard and wastepaper; and ( iii) service or civil weapons, their main parts 
and cartridges.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, according to Articles 3 
and 7 of the Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, and in accordance with the national legislation, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 154 - 
 
  non-tariff measures could be introduced on exports from the CU if those measures:  (i) were 
necessary to prevent or reduce a critical shortage of foodstuffs or other goods considered essential for the domestic market; (ii) were necessary to maintain public morals or law and order; (iii) were 
necessary to protect the life or health of citizens, environment, animal and plant life or health; 
(iv) were related to the import or export of gold or silver; (v) were applied to protect cultural valuables and heritage; (vi) were required to prevent the exhaustion of exhaustible natural 
resources and implemented simultaneously with reduction/restriction of the domestic production or 
consumption associated with the conservation of exhaustible natural resources; (vii) were linked to an export limitation of domestic raw materials to provide sufficient quantity of such materials for 
the domestic processing industry in periods when domestic prices for such materials were lower 
than the world prices as a result of a stabilisation plan implemented by the Government; 
(viii) were essential to acquire or distribute goods in case of their general or local shortage; 
(ix) were essential to comply with international obligations; (x) were essential to ensure the defence and security of the State; and (xi) were  necessary to ensure observance of regulatory 
legal acts consistent with international commitments and related to the application of the customs 
law, preservation of the environment, protection  of intellectual property, and other legal acts. 
495.  Furthermore, pursuant to Article 8 of the Agreement, the CU Commission was authorised 
to apply quantitative export restrictions and prohibitions to fulfil a CU Party's obligations under 
international sanctions regimes, or to protect the external financial situation and safeguard the 
balance of payments.  For this reason, the CU Commission was authorised to apply quantitative 
export restrictions or grant exclusive licenses to import or export based on proposals from a CU Party.   
496.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that as of 1 January 2010, pursuant to 
Article 9 of the Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulati on and Article 1 of the Agreement on Measures 
Concerning Foreign Trade, the authority to impose non-tariff measures on exports from a CU Party 
to third countries had been transferred from the individual Parties to the CU Commission.  
A proposal to apply a non-tariff measure could be filed by a CU Party or by the CU Commission.  
The CU Commission had to take its decision within 30 days from the date the proposal had been 
submitted.  The decision, if positive, would co me into force 45 days after the date of its 
publication.  Such non-tariff measures would be applied to goods destined for third countries, and 
applied equally to exports to all countries.   
497.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under Article 9 of the Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation and Article 8 of the Agreement on 
Measures Concerning Foreign Trade, and pursuant to the procedures set forth in the latter 
Agreement, a CU Party could unilaterally impose a temporary non-tariff measure, if such a 
measure was aimed at:  (i) the observance of public morality, law and order; (ii) defence and 
security; (iii) protection of life or health of the citizens, the environment, life or health of animals 
and plants; (iv) protection of cultural values and cultural heritage; (v) protection of intellectual 
property; (vi) prevention of the exhaustion of i rreplaceable natural resources; or (vii) prevention WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 155 - 
 
  or reduction of the critical shortage in the domestic market of food or other goods essential for the 
domestic market.  Furthermore, based on its "national interest" a CU Party could, pursuant to Article 6.1 of the Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade, request the CU Commission 
to impose non-tariff measures on exports.  If the CU Commission rejected the proposal, the 
CU Party could, under Article 6.7 of that Agreement, impose such measures unilaterally, in conformity with Articles 8 through 10 of the Agre ement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade.  
Under these Agreements, unilateral measures could be imposed for only six months.  The CU 
Parties, not imposing the non-tariff measure, we re to take the necessary steps to prevent the 
exportation of the subject good(s) from the CU Party applying the non-tariff measures to third 
countries.  CU Parties, not applying the measure, were to require licenses and/or permits for 
exportation of the subject goods from their respective territories.   
498.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that Kazakhstan currently imposed 
prohibitions on the export of lumber, saw timber, certain wood products, reusable paper, cardboard, raw paper materials and paper waste that were included into the Common list of Goods 
Subject to Non-Tariff Measures.  Asked to confirm whether the prohibition on the export of lumber 
and saw timber was only applied by Kazakhstan or by all CU Parties, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that this export prohibition was only applied by Kazakhstan.  The measure 
was applied in conjunction with the ban on cutting forest trees in "specially protected natural 
territories" (SPNT).  The SPNT included geograph ical territories of special interest which had 
environmental, scientific, cultural and recreational value placed under special protection regime 
(Law No. 175 "On Specially Protected Natural Territories" of 7 July 2006).  The restrictions were related to conservation of exhaustible natural resources and had been introduced to maintain the 
ecological balance and prevent deforestation, given Kazakhstan's highly limited reserves of wood.  
The representative of Kazakhstan considered that this export prohibition was applied in compliance with paragraphs (b) and (g) of Article XX of the GATT 1994, on a non-discriminatory basis, and in 
a manner which did not constitute a means of disguised restriction on international trade.  Goods 
subject to export restrictions were listed in Annex 14. 
499.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Kazakhstan currently did not apply any 
quantitative or other restrictions on the export of grain or any other agricultural products.   
500.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan had implemented export restrictions on sunflower seeds 
and wheat until September 2008.  This Member enquired as to whether export restrictions on 
s u n f l o w e r  s e e d s  a n d  w h e a t  w e r e  s t i l l  i n  p l a c e .   I n  t h i s  r e s p e c t ,  t h i s  M e m b e r  a s k e d  t h e  representative of Kazakhstan to explain the justification behind these actions.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, due to the critical shortage of food made from wheat on 
the domestic market, her Government had applied export restrictions on certain types of wheat 
in 2008.  In particular, the Government had adopted Resolutions "On Export Restrictions of Wheat" 
No. 343 of 15 April 2008 and No. 777 of 28 August 2008.  These Resolutions had remained in effect until 1 September 2008.  Government Resolution No. 930 of 8 October 2008 had applied 
export restrictions on sunflower seeds, which were intended to be in effect until 1 April 2009.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 156 - 
 
  However, in February 2009 export prohibitions on sunflower seeds had been repealed.  
The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan ha d adopted a Resolution "On Export Restrictions 
of Certain Types of Oilseeds, Vegetable Oil, and Buckwheat" in October 2010 in order to avoid 
supply shortages and mitigate price volatility in the domestic market.  The Resolution had 
remained in effect until 18 April 2011.  At the moment, export restrictions on agricultural products were not applied in Kazakhstan.  Furthermore, she added that Kazakhstan did not require any kind 
of sanctions/permits/licenses applicable to grain exports.  
501.  A Member noted that export bans and quantitative restrictions on commercial products 
were prohibited under the GATT 1994, unless justified under WTO provisions.  This Member sought 
a commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan's export restrictions 
would be in conformity with WTO provisions, including Article XI of the GATT 1994.   
502.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, upon accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan 
would apply such quantitative export restrictions only in accordance with Article XI of the GATT 1994 and Article 12 of the Agreement on Agriculture, and would amend its existing 
legislation to bring its legislation on export restrictions into compliance with the provisions of 
Article XI of the GATT 1994.  To this end, her Government had adopted Resolution No. 1404 of 27 December 2004, which had eliminated the export ban on aluminium and nickel waste and 
scrap. 
503.  In response to concerns raised by some  Members who noted that, although minimum 
export prices had previously been eliminated, it a ppeared that the authorities were still operating a 
system with a similar effect, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Government Resolution No. 994 of 19 July 1997 had eliminated contract re gistration at the commodity exchange, and that 
Kazakhstan had no provisions stipulating minimum ex port prices on grain and, in general, did not 
apply minimum export prices. 
- Export Licensing Procedures 
504.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as with import licensing, as of 
1 January 2010, the legal basis for the export licensing system in Kazakhstan was established in (i) the Agreement on Common Measures of Non-tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries, 
signed on 25 January 2008 ("Agreement on Non-Ta riff Regulation"); (ii) the Agreement on the 
Introduction and Application of Measures Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common 
Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries ("Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign 
Trade"), signed on 9 June 2009; and (iii) the Agreement on Licensing in the Area of Foreign 
Merchandise Trade of 9 July 2009 (the "Licensing Agreement").  By its Decision No. 132 of 
27 November 2009, the CU Commission had approved the Common List of Goods Subject to 
Non-Tariff Measures, including those subject to export licensing, which had also come into force on 1 January 2010 (Annex 14).  Kazakhstan confir med that Annex 14 was exhaustive and that 
currently there were no other exports subject to licensing requirements. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 157 - 
 
  505.  Among the goods subject to export licensing were:  (i) hazardous waste; (ii) collectible 
materials in mineralogy and paleontology; (iii) wild-growing crude drugs (plants, parts of plants, seeds, fruits); (iv) wild live animals and certain wild growing plants; (v) rare and endangered 
species of wild animals and wild growing plants an d plants thereof and/or derivatives inscribed in 
the "Red Books" of CU member-States; (vi) precious metals and gems; (vii) unprocessed precious metals, waste and scrap of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals and 
commodities containing precious metals; (viii) mineral raw materials (only untreated stones); 
(ix) drugs substances with psychotropic effects and their precursors; (x) toxic substances, except for precursors of the drugs and substances with psychotropic effect; (xi) special devices for 
unauthorised obtaining of information; (xii) encryption devices; (xiii) cultural valuables, documents 
of the national archive funds, originals of the archive documents; (xiv) human organs and tissues, 
blood and its components; and (xv) service and civil weapons, their main parts and cartridges.  
Currently, no goods were subject to automatic export  licensing in Kazakhstan.  All goods listed in 
Annex 14 with a note "export licensing" were subject to non-automatic licensing.   
506.  The representative of Kazakhstan explai ned that, according to the CU Licensing 
Agreement, the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies (Ministry responsible for administration of licenses in Kazakhstan) issued three types of licenses:  one-time, general, and exclusive.  
One-time licenses were issued on the basis of a foreign trade contract related to goods subject to 
export licensing.  General licenses had to be issued upon decision of the CU Commission.  
Both types of licenses granted the right to export certain types of goods subject to licensing, in the 
quantity determined by the licence, and were valid for one year or, for goods with respect to which 
provisional quantitative restrictions had been introduced, until 1 January of the following calendar 
year.  Exclusive licenses gave the applicant the exclusive right to export certain types of goods.  
The goods subject to exclusive licensing and the ho lders of exclusive licenses were to be decided 
by the CU Commission.  At the moment, Kazakhstan had not issued any exclusive licenses. 
507.  One-time licenses were issued by the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies, with the 
exception of licenses for the exportation of milita ry products and goods that could be used to 
create weapons of mass destruction, means of transportation of such weapons, and other 
armament and defence technology.  Licenses were issued upon receipt of:  (i) an application for 
the licence; (ii) an electronic version of the application; (iii) a copy of the contract; (iv) a copy of a 
certificate confirming that the applicant was regist ered by a regional tax authority as a tax-payer; 
(v) a copy of the activity licence, if applicable ; and (vi) other documents, if so decided by the 
Commission, pursuant to which a licensing of this product had been introduced.  
508.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at in addition to the CU Agreements and 
Commission Decisions, the national legislation of Kazakhstan, including Law No. 214 
"On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, continued to regu late the application of the licensing regime in 
Kazakhstan.  At the moment Kazakhstan was in the process of bringing its national legislation in compliance with the relevant CU Agreements and Decisions (also see section on "Import 
Licensing"). WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 158 - 
 
  509.  A Member also requested more information regarding the procedures of issuance export 
licensing and the applied fees related to these procedures.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that procedure used to export licensing was identical to the procedure used for 
import licensing (for further details, see section "Import Licensing" of this Report).  With regards 
to export licensing fees, Kazakhstan applied uniform import/export licensing fees in relation to all goods.  According to the Tax Code of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan, the import/export licensing fee 
was equal to 10 Monthly Calculated Indices.  In 2012, the import/export licensing fee was equal to 
KZT 16,180 (approximately US$110), the fee for re-i ssuance of licence was equal to KZT 1,680 
(approximately US$11). 
510.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that the export of certain flora and fauna species 
under threat of extinction, listed in Appendices I, II and III of the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, (CITES) was subject to export permits 
issued in Kazakhstan.   
511.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confir med, that, from the date of accession, 
quantitative restrictions on exports or restrictions on the sale for export of goods, such as quotas, 
bans, permits, prior authorisation requirements, licensing requirements (including the requirements listed in Annex [14]), domestic market supply requirements or measures having 
equivalent effect that could not be justified under  the provisions of the WTO Agreement, would be 
eliminated and not introduced, re-introduced or applied, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent 
bodies of the Customs Union (CU).  She further confirmed that discretionary authority to 
temporarily ban exports or otherwise restrict exports, whether exercised by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU, would be applied from  the date of accession in conformity with the 
provisions of the WTO Agreement.  She also co nfirmed that, if Kazakhstan took recourse to 
Article XX(i) of the GATT 1994, with respect to any measures, whether applied by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU, restricting exports of domestic materials necessary to ensure 
essential quantities of such materials to a domestic or CU processing industry, such measures 
would not operate to increase the exports of or the protection of such industry.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECT ING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS 
- Industrial Policy, including Subsidies 512.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Agreement on Common Rules for 
Granting Industrial Subsidies between the Republic  of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Belarus and the 
Russian Federation, singed on 9 December 2010 and enacted as of 1 January 2012, established 
basic rules for granting industrial subsidies with in the framework of the Single Economic Space 
(hereinafter – the SES).  The Agreement was aimed at ensuring a level playing field for companies operating within the SES in the absence of trade barriers.  The Agreement incorporated the main 
principles of the WTO Agreement on Subsidie s and Countervailing Measures, and stipulated 
procedures for notification of specific subsidie s, monitoring, dispute-settlement, and conducting 
investigations by national authorities.  From 1 January 2017, provision of specific subsidies by the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 159 - 
 
  SES Parties would be subject to the approval of the Eurasian Economic Commission.  She further 
added that provision of subsidies in Kazakhstan  was regulated by budget, tax, customs, and 
investment legislation.  State support to the industrial sector of Kazakhstan's economy was mainly 
provided from the republican (central) budget.  In  response to the questions of some Members of 
the Working Party about the objective, criteria and guidelines that governed the availability of regional subsidies and their use by regional bodi es, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that, in accordance with the Budget Code of th e Republic of Kazakhstan No. 548 of 24 April 2004, 
regional subventions were official transfers from  higher-level to lower-level budgets, received 
within the limits of approved amounts in the repu blican or regional budgets, for the purpose of 
carrying out public services, such as development and maintenance of local infrastructure, running 
schools, and making social income support payments unrelated to the production of goods. 
513.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that State support to the industrial sector was 
aimed mainly at attracting investment into priority sectors of the economy, development of innovative industries, support of small and medium enterprises, and development of regions.  
The main instruments of State support included:  (i) investment preferences in the form of tax and 
customs duty exemptions on imports; (ii) in-kin d State grants; (iii) preferences on land tax and 
property tax for juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects; (iv) subsidization of 
interest rates on commercial loans and providing partial guarantees of loans; (v) leasing on 
preferential terms; (vi) development of industrial  infrastructure; (vii) industrial preferences for 
juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects in socially and economically 
disadvantaged regions; (viii) service support of businesses; (ix) tax deferral; and (x) innovation grants.   
514.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more details on corporate income tax preferences 
provided to industries investing in the petrochemical sector, and on special tax treatment for companies primarily engaged in information technology research and development, which 
operated in special economic zones (SEZs).  This Member also requested more information on the 
benefits provided for investment and industrial activity in Kazakhstan's Tax Code.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that applic ation of a preferential tax regime for industries 
engaged in the petrochemical sector was aimed at diversification of the national economy through development of processing industries.  She acknow ledged that previously a preferential corporate 
income tax regime had been provided to companies in the petrochemical sector, in cases where 
90% of the company's income had been generated from refining oil and gas resources produced in Kazakhstan.  However, this provision had been eliminated by the Law "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Legislative Acts of Kazakhstan on Taxation Issues" of 22 November 2005.  She further 
stated that tax and customs duty exemptions granted to companies registered in SEZs were 
discussed in the "Special Economic Zones" section of this Report. 
515.  With respect to "soft loans", i.e., loans with subsidized interest rates, from Kazakhstan's 
ExImBank, some Members of the Working Party expr essed specific concerns that, to the extent 
that these loans were contingent upon export or import substitution, they could constitute a WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 160 - 
 
  prohibited subsidy under Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures (SCM Agreement).  Kazakhstan was asked to confirm that the financing provided by the ExImBank conformed to the rules set-out in items (j) and (k) of Annex I of the SCM Agreement.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, pursuant to the Decree of the 
President of Kazakhstan No. 1815 "On Establishmen t of the State Export - Import Bank of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1994, the ma in functions of the ExImBank consisted of 
borrowing on international capital markets under State guarantee and providing loans on the 
domestic market.  Uniform terms and conditions were applied by the ExImbank in financing enterprises engaged in priority sectors of the ec onomy.  For example, companies received loans 
from the ExImBank for the following purposes:  (i) importation of agricultural equipment and 
machinery for the production of sugar beet; (ii) importation of equipment for construction projects 
and production of construction materials; (iii) importation of fertilizers; (iv) construction of electric 
power plants and pump producing plants; and (v) f ood processing.  The ExImBank financed three- 
to five-year investment projects, at a 6% interest rate, and with a grace period of two to 
three years.  She stated that the provision of loans was not contingent upon export performance 
or import substitution requirements.  Since 2004, the ExImBank had been privatized and no longer 
operated on behalf of the Government, nor re ceived any Government guarantees for loans 
extended to the ExImBank.  It now provided general banking services in the market as any other 
commercial bank of Kazakhstan. 
516.  Referring to a statement made by the representative of Kazakhstan regarding "soft loans" 
granted to support extraction and exportatio n of non-ferrous products and gold by the 
Development Bank of Kazakhstan, some Members of the Working Party requested further 
information on the nature of the financing (e.g., benefits to exports) provided by this Bank.  
Kazakhstan was asked to confirm that the financing provided by the Development Bank conformed to the rules set-out in item (k) of Annex I of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures (WTO SCM Agreement).  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the terms for 
financing export operations by the Development Bank were regulated by Law No. 178-II "On the 
Development Bank of Kazakhstan" of 25 April 2001 (the Development Bank Law).  She stated that 
for the provision of financial services, the Development Bank used funds borrowed on domestic and international capital markets on commercial terms.  Moreover, pursuant to Article 12 of the 
Development Bank Law, the interest rates charge d for loans were based on the average cost of 
borrowing and operating costs of the Bank.  Thus, on legal grounds, the Bank was prevented from 
subsidizing the interest rates charged on its loans.  She stated that the Bank's financing of 
companies, including its loans for export operatio ns, could not, in her view, be considered as 
export subsidies within the scope of Article 3.1 and Annex I of the WTO SCM Agreement.   
517.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan applied a system of decreasing (discount) coefficients on 
tariffs for railway transportation, which appeared to provide tariff reductions to producers of sulphuric acid and iron ore products, was only available for export transportation.  This Member 
stated that, to the extent that these incentives were contingent upon export (even if this was not 
necessarily the specific goal of the legislation), they could constitute prohibited export subsidies WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 161 - 
 
  under Article 3.1 of the SCM Agreement.  This Member asked Kazakhstan to explain how it 
planned to bring this programme into compliance with WTO provisions.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the use of decreasing coe fficients on tariffs for railway transportation of 
sulphuric acid, which was a by-product of the refining process and not demanded domestically, 
and iron ore had not been implemented to suppo rt exports of domestic goods.  A temporary 
decreasing coefficient had been applied for transpor tation of sulphuric acid on export routes, to 
address a potential negative environmental impact in Kazakhstan.  However, since 2003 no 
decreasing coefficients had been applied for transportation of sulphuric acid.  A decreasing coefficient on the transportation of iron ore was applied due to the high volume of iron ore 
transported by railway.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that a temporary 
0.25 decreasing coefficient had been applied from 22 February to 31 December 2004 for 
transportation of iron ore on export routes.  Since then decreasing (discount) coefficients had not 
been applied on the transportation of iron ore in Kazakhstan. 
518.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that in 2004, in accordance with Order 
No. 375-OD of the Chairman of the Agency "On Regulation of Natural Monopolies" of 
8 September 2004, new rules governing application and discontinuation of temporary decreasing 
coefficients on tariffs for main-line railway transportation had been adopted.  These new rules 
affected only the services provided using the main-line railway network, which qualified as a 
natural monopoly.  Temporary decreasing coefficients only applied under any of the following 
conditions:  (i) the volume of transportation of the good by railway exceeded, or was equal to the 
actual volume of transportation of this good during a similar period in the preceding year; (ii) idle/under-utilised segments of the main-line railway network would be used; (iii) the good was 
a by-product of industrial production and presente d an environmental hazard; (iv) to provide equal 
tariff conditions for access to regulated services of the main-line railway network and railway transportation facilities under concession agreements; and (v) transportation of passengers was 
socially important.  Once established, decreasing coefficients for railway transportation of a 
particular type of goods applied on a temporary basis to all entities (consignors) transporting these 
goods and were valid for all destinations, including domestic, export and import routes.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the criteria used for the application of decreasing 
coefficients on tariffs charged for the main-line railway transportation services were not 
contingent, in law or in fact, upon exportation or the use of domestic over imported goods.  In her 
view, as such, these measures could not be viewed as providing a prohibited subsidy within the meaning of Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement and Article XVI of the GATT 1994.  She added 
that other aspects of railway tariffs were addressed in the section "Pricing Policies" of this Report.  
519.  Some Members of the Working Party noted that Kazakhstan provided tax exemptions for 
exporters of yellow phosphorus, ground phosphat e rock and phosphate fertilizer, and expressed 
concern that these tax exemptions were contingent upon export and thus prohibited under Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
"Kazphosphat" Ltd. was engaged in a priority sector of the economy and had received investment 
preferences in the form of 50% reduction of corporate income tax until 31 August 2008, and 50% WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 162 - 
 
  reduction of property and land taxes until 2007, in accordance with investment contracts 
concluded in 1999-2000.  No such preferences had been provided since 2008.  She confirmed that 
the criteria used for granting these tax preferences were not contingent, in law or in fact, upon 
export performance or the use of domestic over imported goods, rather on the strategic 
importance of the industry for diversification of the national economy.  
520.  In response to concerns raised by some Memb ers of the Working Party, who noted that tax 
exemptions had been granted under the Law No. 75-I "On State Support to Direct Investments" of 
28 February 1997, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 75-I and Law No. 266-XIII "On Foreign Investments" of 27 December 1994 had been abolished and replaced by Law No. 373 
"On Investments" of 8 January 2003.  She acknowle dged that tax preferences granted prior to the 
adoption of the new Law "On Investments" were in effect until the expiration of the terms of the 
contracts signed between the authorised body and investors (i.e. by early 2009 for the last 
remaining contracts).  The new Law did not contain requirements concerning the minimum volume of investments to be made in order to be eligible for investment preferences.  She added that the 
detailed information on the investment preferences granted under the Law "On Investment" was 
contained in the section "Investment Regime" of this Report.   
521.  Some Members of the Working Party requested Kazakhstan to provide comprehensive 
information on subsidies that would have to be notified under Article 25 of the 
WTO SCM Agreement.  In particular, Kazakhstan was asked whether there had been any 
administered programmes, other than the ones described in the preceding paragraphs, which 
provided industrial incentives or met the definition of a specific subsidy.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that there were a number of  other investment and industrial incentives 
provided for in Kazakhstan's National Programme of Accelerated Industrial and Innovative 
Development (2010-2014), including tax incentives, grants, research and development funding and concessional lending through the Bank of Development and second-tier banks in priority 
sectors aimed at diversification of the national economy.  More specifically, Law No. 534-IV 
"On State Support of Industrial Innovative Ac tivity" of 9 January 2012 defined state measures 
aimed at supporting industrial-innovative projects, i.e. projects aimed at transfer of technologies, 
creation of new and improved productions, technologies, goods and services.  
522.  A Member expressed the view that some of  the sectoral plans under the National 
Programme of Accelerated Industrial and Innovative Development (2010-2014) - and more 
specifically, the plan of "granting of financial stimulation for improvement of export of Kazakhstan mechanic engineering products" - might contain export contingent elements.  This Member added 
that to the extent that incentives under the programme were export contingent, they would 
appear to be prohibited, as provided under Article 3 of the SCM Agreement.  This Member asked 
how Kazakhstan planned to bring this programme into compliance with the SCM Agreement prior 
to accession. 
523.  The Representative of Kazakhstan replied th at the National Programme on Accelerated 
Industrial and Innovative Development for 2010-2014 was a framework document that established WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 163 - 
 
  the main directions and objectives of industrial  and innovative development of Kazakhstan for 
2010-2014.  The Programme outlined priority sectors for development, established objectives and targets in each of these sectors and outlined instruments that could be used to achieve these 
objectives and targets.  Concrete mechanisms ai med at implementing the objectives set in the 
National Programme were provided in separate legal acts and programmes such as the Programme "Business Road Map - 2020", "Productivity - 2020", and the Programme on Investment Attraction, 
Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 
2010-2014.  In this regard, "financial stimulation for improving exports of Kazakhstan's mechanic engineering products" described a general target that  had to be followed, but it did not prescribe a 
precise subsidy mechanism.  Financial stimulation, in this case, meant that producers of machinery 
products in Kazakhstan would receive subsidies that would allow producers to enlarge their 
production and improve the quality of their products  so they could sell their products not only on 
the domestic market, but could also export these products.  Specific subsidy schemes for mechanical engineering products were envisaged under "Productivity - 2020", "Business Road Map 
- 2020", as well as preferences within Special Economic Zones and the Free Warehouse customs 
regime.  She stressed that these programmes did not provide for prohibited export subsidies.  
524.  The Programme "Business Road Map - 2020" provided a set of measures aimed at the 
development of new processing industries and the modernisation of existing ones.  
The Programme envisaged Government support in the form of partial guarantees for and 
subsidization of interest rates on commercial loans, development of industrial infrastructure, 
service support of businesses.  The Programme "P roductivity - 2020" was aimed at increasing the 
competitiveness of industrial enterprises in priority sectors of the economy through increasing 
labour productivity.  The main mechanisms envisaged in this programme included innovation 
grants, financial leasing, grants for introduction of modern administrative and industrial technologies, grants for financing the development and expertise of comprehensive investment 
project plans.  Business entities and entreprene urs that had been implementing or planned to 
implement investment projects in non-extracting and priority sectors of the economy were eligible 
to receive preferences under these programmes.  
525.  To implement these programmes, Kazakhstan had established special development 
institutions and funds, including the Kazakhstan Investment Fund; the National Innovation Fund; 
and the "Damu" Entrepreneurship Development Fund.  The representative of Kazakhstan added 
that Kazakhstan was preparing to notify all of its subsidies under Article 25 of the SCM Agreement 
and that this document would be made available to the Working Party. 
526.  A Member stated that, according to the programme "Productivity-2020", it appeared that 
participants of the Programme could be enterprises operating in a priority sector of the economy 
and performing activities aimed inter alia  at being "export oriented".  To the extent that incentives 
under this programme were export contingent, they would appear to be prohibited, as provided under Article 3 of the SCM Agreement.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 164 - 
 
  527.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that entrepreneurs that met the 
following criteria could be eligible to receive subsidies under the Programme "Productivity - 2020": 
- implementing and (or) planning to implement in vestment projects in priority sectors of the 
economy listed in Annex 1 to the Programme; 
- implementing and (or) planning to implement production of goods listed in Annex 2 to the 
Programme, excluding entrepreneurs implementing investment projects in the sphere of rendering services on maintenance and installation of machines and equipment; 
- financially stable (no overdue debt on all kinds of obligations to the bank(s) or bank 
affiliates(s) and absence of tax debts, etc.)    
- presenting a comprehensive project implementation plan containing the following 
information: 
1. financial return on investment project; 
2. increase in productivity; and 
3. competitiveness of the product. 
528.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that eligibility criteria under the Programme 
"Productivity-2020" did not include local content or export performance requirements.  Thus, the 
subsidies provided under this Programme did not fall under the category of prohibited subsidies. 
529.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the programmes aimed at 
export promotion, including trade financing and insurance, and service support of exports.  
This Member also enquired whether the terms of trade financing and insurance for export were coordinated with international norms for this kind of support.   
530.  The Representative of Kazakhstan responded that Government Resolution No. 1017 of 
2 August 2012 provided for partial reimbursement (50%) of expenses borne by companies 
engaged in industrial and innovative activity for promoting their goods and services abroad.  
The following expenses could be partially compensated:  marketing research, advertising costs, participation in foreign exhibitions, maintenance of overseas representatives, training of 
specialists, and registration of products and trademarks abroad.  The aim of the subsidy was to 
promote Kazakhstan's products in global markets.  At the same time, there was no requirement for these companies to export a certain amount of their products.  Thus, the conditions for 
receiving the subsidy were not contingent upon export performance and, correspondingly, the 
subsidy did not fall under the category of prohibited export subsidies in accordance with Article 3 
of the SCM Agreement. 
531.  Regarding the service support for exporters, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that it included a number of services aimed at supporting medium and small businesses in their 
ongoing and potential foreign trade activities.  The services included inter alia  marketing and 
analytical assistance, provision of information on demand in foreign markets, organization of launch events for promoting trademarks of Kazakhstan's producers.  In her view, the service 
support could not be considered as a prohibited subsidy because the scheme did not involve a 
financial contribution by the Government to specific enterprises or industries that was contingent 
upon export performance.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 165 - 
 
  532.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that state support for financing export operations 
was provided through the Export Credit Insurance Corporation "KazExpoGarant" JSC and included the following instruments:  (i) export credit insurance against commercial and political risks arising 
during implementation of export contracts with foreign importers; and (ii) provision of post-export 
financing (export credits).  These financing instruments were provided based on international practices, including the OECD Arrangement on Offi cially Supported Export Credits.  Thus, in her 
view, they were compliant with the rules and norms of the SCM Agreement. 
533.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the "Programme on 
Investment Attraction, Special Economic Zone De velopment and Export Promotion in the Republic 
of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014", including information on the eligibility criteria for companies to 
receive incentives under this programme, focusing on export promotion programmes.  
The Member also expressed concern that the Prog ramme listed as one of its tasks the "financial 
backing of exporters" and two of its target indica tors set to be reached by 2015 as:  (i) ensuring 
the export of at least 50% of the increased outp ut of the SEZs and (ii) increasing non-primary 
exports by at least 40%.  The Member sought specific assurances that none of the financial 
backing of exporters in this or Kazakhstan's other development programmes was intended to ensure or support the attainment of specific export performance targets of the recipient firms.  
534.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  most of the measures aimed at promoting 
investments and exports envisaged in the Programme did not represent a subsidy in accordance 
with the definition provided in the SCM Agreement.  These measures included:  (i) activities to 
assess the effectiveness of measures undertaken by the Government to improve the business climate; (ii) improvement of customs and border se rvice activities; (iii) improvement of conditions 
of stay of foreign labour on the territory of Kazakhstan; monitoring the relevant government 
authorities' work with investors; (iv) development of legal acts; (v) service support for exporters; (vi) organization of trade missions and fairs abroad; (vii) publishing brochures and books on 
Kazakhstan's producers and their products.  She further explained that "financial backing of 
exporters" in the Programme referred to the state support of financing export operations through 
the Export Credit Insurance Corporation "KazExpoGarant" described in paragraph [532].  
The target indicators:  "to ensure the export of at least 50% of the increased output of the SEZs" 
and "to increase non-primary exports by at least 40%", set to be reached by 2015, did not involve 
export subsidies.  These were general targets fo r implementation of the programme, and as such, 
they were not used as a condition for a particular subsidy measure.  She added that the main purpose for establishing SEZs was the diversification of the economy through facilitating 
production of high value-added goods.  Therefore, state support measures provided within SEZs 
included tax and customs duty preferences aimed at attracting investments and stimulating 
production that were not contingent upon export  performance. Detailed description of preferences 
applied in SEZs was provided in the section "Free Zones, Special Economic Zones".  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirme d that preferences stipulated in Kazakhstan's 
development programmes, including the "Programme on Investment Attraction, Special Economic 
Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014", were not WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 166 - 
 
  contingent upon export performance, therefore, in her view, they did not represent prohibited 
export subsidies.  
535.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that it would eliminate all prohibited subsidies 
within the meaning of Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement and Article XVI of the GATT 1994, at 
all levels of Government, which were contingent upon export performance or the use of domestic 
over imported goods as of the date of accession.  Kazakhstan was also asked to confirm that it 
would administer any subsidy programmes in place or established after accession at all levels of 
Government in conformity with the WTO SCM Agreement.  This Member requested Kazakhstan to provide a draft of its subsidies notification f under Article 25 of the WTO SCM Agreement to the 
Working Party for review, noting that it would be difficult to conclude discussions on this section 
without it. 
536.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, except as otherwise provided in the 
Working Party Report, upon accession, Kazakhstan would eliminate all subsidies programmes[, including development programmes providing benefits for exporting firms,] administered within its 
territory falling within the scope of Articl e 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures or modify these programmes so that any subsidy provided would not be contingent, de jure or de facto , upon [exportation] [export performance], or on the use of 
domestic over imported goods.  She also confirmed that any subsidy programme in place or 
established after accession within the territory of Kazakhstan would be administered in conformity 
with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Counterva iling Measures.  In addition, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan would provide a subsidies notification prepared in accordance with Article 25 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures to the Committee on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures upon entry into force of Kazakhstan's Protocol of Accession.  She also 
confirmed that Kazakhstan would not invoke any of  the provisions of Articles 27 and 28 of the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
- Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification 
(a) Legal Framework 
537.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that her country's legal framework for technical 
regulations, standards and conformity assessmen t systems had been governed by international 
agreements of the Customs Union (CU)
12, other CU legal instruments, and relevant national 
legislation of Kazakhstan.  She noted that the le gal framework outlined in these Agreements and 
legal instruments required certain products circulating in the territories of the CU Parties to meet 
established technical regulations, as well as sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) requirements 
established as technical regulations.  In particular, trade (including both importation and 
circulation in the domestic market) in products on the territory of Kazakhstan could be restricted 
or banned if the products in question did not meet  these requirements.  The CU Parties had agreed WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 167 - 
 
  to harmonize their policies and regulatory system s in the area of technical regulation and to 
intensify their cooperation in this area within the framework of the CU.  The goal of this harmonization was to ensure uniform requirements for the circulation of goods within the 
territories of the CU Parties in the area of technical regulation, through common CU technical 
regulations.  These technical regulations were applied directly in the territory of Kazakhstan, and no separate national legislation was necessary.  The provisions of the CU Agreements and other 
CU Acts were based on the WTO Agreement on Te chnical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), and 
technical regulations were applied with the purpos e of protecting the life and (or) health of 
humans, property, environment, animal and plant lif e and (or) health, and preventing actions that 
might mislead consumers, as well as for the purpose of ensuring energy efficiency and saving 
resources.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that technical regulations adopted and 
applied within the CU were not adopted for any other purposes. 
538.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal basis for the common policy was 
the Agreement on Uniform Principles and Rules of Technical Regulation in the Republic of Belarus, 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 18 November 2010 (hereafter – 
CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation Pr inciples); the CU Agreement on the Circulation 
of Goods Subject to Mandatory Conformity Assessm ent on the Customs Territory of Customs Union 
of 11 December 2009 (hereafter – the CU Agreem ent on Mandatory Conformity Assessment), and 
Regulation on Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of 
the Customs Union adopted by the Decision of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission 
No. 48 of 20 June 2012 (hereafter:  EEC Council Decision No. 48).  The Agreements and Decision established the main instruments of the common policy applied in Kazakhstan in the following 
areas: 
- harmonization of national legislation in the area of technical regulation; 
- development and adoption of technical regulations of the CU stipulating mandatory and 
binding requirements for the goods subject to technical regulation; 
- implementation of common procedure on development of technical regulations in the 
territory of each CU Party; 
- harmonization of standards and the implementation of relevant international standards as 
a basis for the elaboration of technical regulations; 
- implementation of common forms and rules for conformity assessment; 
- conducting conformity assessment (confirmation) of products or product-related 
production processes, installation, setup, operation (use), storage, carrying 
(transportation), sale and disposal, including testing and certification; and  
- accreditation of certification (conformity confirmation) bodies and test laboratories 
(centres) participating in the process of mandatory confirmation of conformity.  
539.  She added that the CU Agreement on Mandat ory Conformity Assessment provided for the 
development of a unified list of goods subject to mandatory conformity assessment within the 
Customs Union for which it was possible to issue a certificate and to register a declaration of conformity assessment using a common form during the transition period, until the adoption of 
CU technical regulations.  The unified list had been established by CU Commission Decision 
No. 319 of 18 June 2010 "On Technical Regulation in the Customs Union" (hereafter:  
                                                                                                                                               
12 Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, and Belarus. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 168 - 
 
  CU Commission Decision No. 319) and later replaced by the CU Commission Decision No. 620 of 
7 April 2011 "On the Unified List's Update with Regard to Products Subjected to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) within the Framework of the CU with Issuance of Single 
Documents, approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" (hereinafter – the 
Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620).  The Unified List included products for which the CU countries:  (i) established similar mandatory requirements; (ii) used similar 
conformity assessment schemes; (iii) used similar or comparable testing and measurement 
methods.  In accordance with paragraph 2 of Expl anatory Note 1 to the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620, a declaration of conformity based on the CU common form could 
not be used for goods produced by foreign manufac turers located outside the territory of the CU.  
However, CU Commission Decision No. 620 still provided for the possibility of using a certificate of 
conformity for such goods based on the CU common form.  In Kazakhstan, a declaration of 
conformity for goods manufactured outside of Kazakhstan could be done under Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004 (hereafter - Law "On Technical Regulation"). 
540.  Some Members expressed their concern that under CU Commission Decision No. 620 
foreign manufacturers not located on the territory of the CU, in contrast to manufacturers located within the territory of the CU, did not have the op tion to use declarations of conformity based on 
the CU common form.  For these Members, this constituted discrimination in breach of the 
TBT Agreement.  These Members sought a commi tment that Kazakhstan, by the date of its 
accession, would eliminate this discriminatory treatment. 
541.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in order to comply with the WTO TBT 
Agreement, and in particular Article 2.1 thereo f, discriminatory treatment had been eliminated 
through the amendment of CU Commission Decision  No. 620 of 7 April 2011 "On the Unified List's 
Update with Regard to Products Subjected to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) within the Framework of the CU with Issuan ce of Single Documents, approved by the 
CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010", to ensure that foreign manufacturers not 
located within the territory of the CU would be ab le to demonstrate the conformity of the products 
imported into the territory of the CU through use of declarations of conformity using the CU 
common form.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.]  
542.  The Representative of Kazakhstan further explained that CU Commission Decision No. 319 
also determined the criteria for inclusion of conformity assessment bodies and testing laboratories 
into the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and Testing Laboratories of the CU (hereinafter – 
the Unified Register) and established the rules for development and maintenance of the Unified 
List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 and Unified Register by national authorised 
bodies.  CU Commission Decision No. 319 also established the regulations for importation of 
products listed on the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620.  Currently, the 
new Regulation on the Procedures for Importatio n to the CU Territory of Goods (Products) in 
Respect of which Mandatory Requirements are Established within the Customs Union had been 
adopted by the EEC Collegium Decision No. 294 of 25 December 2012 (hereinafter - Regulation on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 169 - 
 
  Procedures for Importation of Goods).  The Agreem ent on Mutual Recognition of Accreditation of 
Certification Bodies and Testing Laboratories Performing Conformity Assessment of 11 December 2009 (hereinafter – the CU Agreemen t on Mutual Recognition of Accreditation 
Bodies) stipulated the principles for a common CU system of mutual recognition of accreditation, 
the responsibilities of the accreditation bodies of the CU Parties, and general principles of 
accreditation, pending gradual replacement of this mutual recognition system by adoption and 
application of common CU technical regulations by the CU Parties. 
543.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the provisions of the new 
regulation governing importation of products to the CU territory.  In response, the representative 
of Kazakhstan said that the Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods established unified 
procedures for importation of products, included into (i) the Unified List of Products in Respect of 
which Mandatory Requirements Could be Established within the Framework of the Customs Union, 
approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526 of 28  January 2011 (hereafter:  the Unified List of 
Products approved by CU Commission Decision  No. 526); (ii) the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620; and (iii) the lists of products for which a customs declaration 
had to be submitted to customs authority along with a document confirming compliance with mandatory requirements.  The Regulation on Proc edures for Importation of Goods elaborated in 
detail the provisions of the currently applied regulation adopted by CU Commission Decision 
No. 319.  The Regulation on Procedures for Impo rtation of Goods stipulated the list of customs 
procedures, under which customs authorities required submission of documents confirming 
compliance of products (goods) with mandatory requirements or information about such documents (production for domestic consumption, temporary importation, free customs zone, free 
warehouse, re-import).  Moreover, the Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods 
specified categories of products (goods), for which submission of documents confirming the compliance of products (goods) with mandatory requirements or information concerning such 
documents was not required.  These categories, for example, included used goods, and goods 
imported in limited quantities for personal use or for scientific research purposes. 
544.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify the difference between the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620 and the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  The Representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620 was provisionally applied in order to ensure free movement of 
goods on the CU territory until adoption of relevant  CU technical regulations.  It included products 
for which CU countries:  
- established similar mandatory requirements;  
- used similar conformity assessment schemes; and - used similar or comparable testing and measurement methods.  
545.  In accordance with the Explanatory Notes to the Unified List approved by CU Commission 
Decision No. 620, for products included in the list, at the applicant's choice, certificates of conformity and declarations of conformity of a common CU form, or certificates of conformity and 
declaration of conformity issued according to the national legislation of the CU Parties, could be WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 170 - 
 
  used.  Products included into the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 could 
move freely within the entire CU territory if they had undergone conformity assessment procedures in one of the CU Parties and the following conditions were met: 
- certificates of conformity or declarations of conformity of a common CU form were issued;  
- the certifying body was included into the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and  Testing Laboratories of the CU; and - the testing laboratory was included into the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and 
 Testing Laboratories of the CU.  
546.  Products not included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 
were subject to mandatory conformity assessment (confirmation of conformity) according to the 
national legislation of the Customs Union Parties.  Products for which Customs Union technical 
regulations were adopted had to be excluded fr om the Unified List approved by CU Commission 
Decision No. 620.  She further explained that the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 526 included product groups for which CU technical regulations had to be developed.  
For products included into the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526, for which no relevant CU technical regulations had been yet enforced, CU Parties applied national technical 
regulations.  However, the CU Parties could not apply national technical regulations to products not 
included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526. 
547.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that in accordance with Article 4 of the 
CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation Principles, CU technical regulations could only be developed for goods included into the Unified List  of Products adopted by CU Commission Decision 
No. 526.  The list included 61 product groups, including:  (i) machinery and equipment; (ii) low 
voltage equipment, (iii) high-voltage equipment; (iv) devices operating on gaseous fuels; (v) equipment operating under excess pressure; (vi) agricultural machinery; (vii) products of light 
industry; (viii) toys; (ix) tobacco products; (x) furniture; (xi) packaging; (xii) animal feedstuff; 
(xiii) personal protection equipment; (xiv) detergents; (xv) food products; and (xvi) coal and its 
products, etc.  The list could be expanded by de cisions of the Eurasian Economic Commission if 
new risks were identified.  She further explained that for products included into the Unified List approved by Decision No. 526, for which no releva nt CU technical regulations had been enforced, 
national technical regulations were applied.  The CU Parties could not at the national level maintain 
mandatory requirement to products not included in  the Unified List approved by Decision No. 526. 
The Unified List adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 526 was provided in Annex 17.  Of these 
61 products, 47 had been identified as priority products for development and adoption of 
CU technical regulations.  The schedule for development of priority CU technical regulations was 
provided in CU Commission Decision No. 492 of  8 December 2010 "On Schedule for Development 
of First-Priority Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" (hereafter:  CU Commission Decision No. 492).  To date, of 47 CU technical regulation stipulated in CU Commission Decision No. 492, 
31 CU technical regulations had been adopted.  Eight technical regulations had entered into force 
in 2012.  The remaining 23 technical regulations would enter into force not later than on 15 February 2015:  13 technical regulations in 2013, 7 technical regulations in 2014, and 
3 technical regulations in 2015.  Sixteen CU technical regulations (out of 47 CU technical WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 171 - 
 
  regulations) that had not yet been develope d were included into the new Schedule for 
Development of Technical Regulations of the Cu stoms Union for 2012-2013 adopted by the EEC 
Council Decision No. 103 of 23 November 2012 (hereinafter - EEC Council Decision No. 103).  
The new schedule envisaged the development of 29 CU technical regulations.  Kazakhstan was 
responsible for the development of 7 draft technical regulations.   
548.  A Member enquired about the criteria that were used to place 61 products on the Unified 
List adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  The Representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
the unified list of products for which mandatory requirements were established within the Customs Union was formed on the basis of proposals from CU Parties, including stakeholders and 
the business community, as well as proposals of the Eurasian Economic Commission.  Initially, 
national lists of products subject to mandatory conformity assessment of the CU Parties were used 
as a basis for development of the Unified List of Products in Respect of which Mandatory 
Requirements could be Established within the Framework of the Customs Union.  For determining products to be included into the list, the CU Parties assessed the risk (potential hazard) that these 
products posed to human live and (or) health, environment, animal and plant live and/or health.  
New products could be added into the list if new risks were identified.  In forming the unified list, the CU Parties mainly focused on mutually traded products.  A draft consolidated list of goods in 
respect of which mandatory requirements would be  established within the CU, prepared by the 
Department of Technical Regulation and Accreditation of the EEC on the basis of proposals from 
the CU Parties, was circulated to the Parties for review.  When approved by the CU Parties, the 
draft list was considered by the Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures.  Upon endorsement of the Committee, the draft 
list had to be submitted to the EEC Collegiu m and then to the EEC Council for approval.  
Similar procedures were used to introduce amendments into the Unified List (inclusion and exclusion of products into/from the Unified List).  She further noted that the Unified List adopted 
by the CU Commission Decision No. 526, had been amended by the EE С Council Decision No. 102 
of 23 November 2012.  In particular, six product groups have been added into the Unified List 
adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 526: (i) liquefied petroleum gas used as fuel; 
(ii) materials contacting human skin; (iii) products intended for civil defence and protection of natural and man-made disasters; (iv) oil, prepared for transportation and use; (v) combustible 
natural gas, prepared for transportation and use; and (vi) mainline pipelines for transportation of 
liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons.  One product grou p – alternative fuels – had been excluded from 
the Unified List adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  Thus, at present, the Unified List 
included 66 product groups. 
549.  Once CU technical regulations came into effect, they applied with direct effect, and 
relevant national requirements, established by laws of the CU Parties, could no longer be applied 
on the territories of those Parties.  In order to implement this provision, national technical regulations for products towards which relevant CU technical regulations were adopted, were 
repealed by a resolution of the Government of  the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The CU Parties 
ensured release of products that conformed to CU technical regulations into circulation without WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 172 - 
 
  laying out additional requirements other than th ose contained in the CU technical regulations and 
without carrying out additional conformity assessment procedures.  In order to ensure the comparability of conformity assessment results with CU technical regulations, the CU Parties 
carried out coordinated policy aimed at ensuring measurements uniformity.  
By 31 December 2012, the Eurasian Economic Co mmission had adopted 31 priority CU technical 
regulations which would enter into force no later than 15 February 2015, after a transitional period 
which allowed producers, importers, and exporters to become acquainted with the new technical 
regulations prior to application of the relevant CU technical regulation.  By that date, all other national mandatory technical requirements applied on the territory of CU Parties would be replaced 
by CU technical regulations or would no longer be applied. 
550.  The domestic legislative framework for technical regulation, standardization, certification 
and accreditation in Kazakhstan was based on the Law "On Technical Regulation", which had 
replaced Laws No. 433-1 "On Standardization" of 16 July 1999 and No. 434-1 "On Certification" of 16 July 1999.  In her view, the new Law took into account the main principles of the 
WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), including inter alia  national 
treatment, transparency, and priority consideration given to international standards in drawing up domestic technical regulations and standards.  This Law was the basis for the development of 
technical regulations, standards, procedures for recognition of conformity assessment and 
accreditation; it was aimed at setting a balance between the degree of government intervention 
and the goal of protecting the public.  The two main  objectives of the Law were:  (i) to ensure the 
safety of products through application of mandat ory technical regulations; and (ii) to enhance 
product competitiveness through application of voluntary standards.  The Law also ensured that 
ratified international agreements had priority over the national legislation.  Existing legislation in 
the area was being brought into conformity with the Law "On Technical Regulation" and provisions of the TBT Agreement.  To this end, Law No . 209 "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Technical Regulation" of 
29 December 2006 had introduced amendments to 33 Laws.  In addition, four new laws had been 
adopted –"On Toys Safety", "On Safety of Chem ical Products", "On Safety of Machinery and 
Equipment" and "On Food Safety".  In the area of  accreditation, two Laws had been adopted – Law 
No. 61-IV "On Accreditation in the Field of Conformity Assessment" of 5 July 2008 and Law 
No. 62-IV "On Amendments and Addenda in Certain Legislative Acts on the Issues of 
Accreditation" of 5 July 2008.  These Laws were aimed at building the legal framework for accreditation and harmonizing accreditation requirements with international standards, including 
those of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) and the International Laboratory Accreditation 
Cooperation (ILAC).  In addition, new regulatory acts on technical regulation were being developed 
and existing ones were being revised.  She held  the view that the provisions of the national 
legislation in this area could not constitute a barrier to trade. 
551.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that with the establishment of the CU regime on 
1 January 2010, the CU Agreement, and the CU Acts implementing the CU policy on technical 
regulation substantially had replaced Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 173 - 
 
  as the overall legal framework for technical regu lations, standards, and conformity assessment 
systems in Kazakhstan.  However, certain provisions of the Law "On Technical Regulation" remained in effect to the extent they did not conflict with CU Agreements and other CU Acts, 
including CU Commission Decisions.  Development and application of standards, conformity 
assessment, State control and supervision, metrological control, and liability issues in Kazakhstan would continue to be administered at the national level under the CU regime, with regard to the 
following issues: 
- national standards within the meaning of the TBT Agreement (development, adoption) and 
standards organizations;  
- State control and supervision (inspection) to ensure compliance with the requirements of 
technical regulations; 
- assurance of uniformity of measurements; 
- violations of technical regulations and withdr awal of products from the domestic market;  
- operation of the national aspects of developing and maintaining the system of certificates 
of conformity assessment and declarations of conformity, including national part of the 
Unified Register of certificates and declarations; 
- operation of the national aspects of developing and maintaining the system of certification 
bodies and testing laboratories (centres) of the CU, including accreditation and national 
part of the Unified Register of certification bodies and testing laboratories; 
- voluntary conformity assessment;  
- rights and obligations of applicants in the field of mandatory conformity assessment;  
- coordination of activities, positions and procedures of the Government in the field of 
technical regulation; 
- procedures for determination of liability in the case of violation of technical regulations and 
sanctions therefore until the decision to transfer these issues to the CU was made; 
- providing required transparency; and  
- financing in the field of technical regulation. 
552.  Asked to elaborate on the status of Kazakhstan's other legislation after 1 January 2010, 
the Representative of Kazakhstan noted that the national legislation in the field of technical 
regulation was being brought into compliance with the Customs Union legislation.  In particular, in 
order to bring national legislation into compliance with the Customs Union legislation, the Law of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Amendments an d Additions to Some Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Technical Regula tion and Metrology" had been adopted on 
10 July 2012.  This Law had introduced amendments and addenda to eight Codes and 22 Laws of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The Law had excluded the Government's competence to adopt 
technical regulations due to the development of common technical regulations of the Customs Union and transfer of the authority to adopt CU technical regulations to the Eurasian 
Economic Commission.  The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan now only reviewed and 
approved draft technical regulations of the Customs Union prior to their adoption by the Eurasian 
Economic Commission.  The Law also provided for the harmonization of terms in the field of 
technical regulation with the Customs Union legislation. 
(b) Institutions 
553.  The CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulati on Principles provided for the transfer of 
a substantial share of competences in the field of technical regulation from the national level to the Customs Union level.  In particular, according to this Agreement, each Party of the Customs Union 
delegated the authority to establish mandatory State requirements for products to the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 174 - 
 
  Customs Union Commission, i.e. sovereign rule-making in this area was excluded.  None of the 
Parties was eligible to establish additional mandatory requirements at the national level other than those established in the technical regulations of the Customs Union. 
554.  As of 2 February, when the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter - 
EEC) signed on 18 November 2011 was enacted, the competences of the CU Commission were 
transferred to the EEC.  According to the Treaty on EEC of 18 November 2011, the competences in 
the field of technical regulation were divided be tween the EEC Council, responsible for the overall 
regulation of integration processes in the CU and the Single Economic Space, and the EEC Collegium, the executive body of the EEC that  made proposals for further integration within 
the CU and the Single Economic Space.  The EEC Council exercised the following functions: 
- approval of the unified list of products in respect of which mandatory requirements were 
established within the framework of the Cu stoms Union, and of the procedure of its 
maintenance; 
- approval of the plans for  development of technical regulations of the Customs Union; 
- adoption, amendment and cancellation of technical regulations of the Customs Union; 
- approval of the common forms of conformity assessment (confirmation) documents  
(declaration of conformity with the technical regulations of the Customs Union, certificate 
of conformity with the technical regulations of the Customs Union); 
- establishment of the procedure for developmen t, adoption, amendment and cancellation of 
technical regulations of the Customs Union; 
- approval of the Common Mark of Circulation of Products on the Markets of the 
member States of the Customs Union; and 
- approval of the regulation on the Common Mark of Circulation of Products on the 
Markets of the member States of the Customs Union and the procedure for its use. 
The EEC Council adopted its decisions by consensu s.  The EEC Collegium approved, by qualified 
majority: 
- the List of international and regional standa rds, and in case of their absence – national 
(State) standards, application of which, on a voluntary basis, ensured compliance with the 
technical regulations of the Customs Union; 
- procedures for development of the List of inte rnational and regional standards, and in case 
of their absence – national (State) standards, the application of which, on a voluntary 
basis, ensured compliance with the technical regulations of the Customs Union; 
- standard schemes of conformity assessment (confirmation); and 
- approval of the regulation on procedure of importation into the customs territory of the 
Customs Union of products in respect of wh ich mandatory requirements were established 
within the framework of the Customs Union. 
555.  The EEC Collegium was responsible for implementation of the EEC Council Decisions.  
In the field of technical regulation its work was conducted by the Department on Technical 
Regulation and Accreditation.  In addition, the EEC Collegium Decision No. 11 of 7 March 2012 
established the Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (hereafter:  the Consultative Committee).  The Consultative Committee 
was an advisory body that developed proposals fo r the EEC Collegium on technical regulations and 
the application of sanitary, veterinary and phytosan itary measures on the basis of agreed positions 
of the authorised bodies of the CU member-States.  Sub-committees were established under the 
Consultative Committee, including the Sub-committee on Standardization and Uniformity of Measurements.  According to the Treaty until 1 July 2012, the Secretariat of the CU Commission WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 175 - 
 
  continued to maintain the work on technical regulation and provide informational and technical 
support for the EEC.  
556.  In response to a specific question from a Member, the Representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that the change of the CU Commissi on to the EEC did not lead to changes in 
Kazakhstan's legal basis in the field of technical regulations.  The creation of the EEC involved only changes in the structure of the Commission and its decision-making process.  
557.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that draft technical regulations were developed in 
member-States using internal procedures before be ing proposed by the authorised national bodies 
in the field of technical regulation to the designated CU Bodies for harmonization, further review, 
and adoption as provided for in the relevant international agreements or CU decisions.  In the 
CU framework, the coordination and transparency functions were fulfilled by the CU Consultative 
Committee, which received draft technical regu lations from the authorised bodies of the 
CU Parties, coordinated the development of the draft text and resolved disputes concerning it among the CU Parties' authorities.  The Consultative Committee, with the assistance of the 
Eurasian Economic Commission, then circulated the draft technical regulation for public review and 
comments, and prepared analysis and recommendations on the draft technical regulations before forwarding the proposals for adoption by the Eurasian Economic Commission. 
558.  At the national level, the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry 
of Industry and New Technologies of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter – the Committee) 
was the competent authority in the field of technical regulation.  Its competences were stipulated 
in Article 7 of the Law "On Technical Regulation", and among others included:  (i) participation in development of the State system of technical regula tion; (ii) implementation of the state policy in 
the field of technical regulation; (iii) cross-sectoral coordination of activities of public authorities, 
individuals and legal entities in th e field of technical regulation; (iv) representation of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan in international and regional organizations for standardization, conformity 
assessment and accreditation; (v) organization and coordination of work on state control over 
compliance with requirements established by technical regulations; (vi) establishment of 
procedures for the development, approval, regi stration, approval, verification, amendment, 
termination and enactment of national standards; (vii) establishment of national forms of certificates of conformity and declarations of conformity.  The Committee had three subordinate 
organizations:  the Institute of Metrology, the Institute for Standardization and Certification, and 
the National Center for Accreditation.  The Institute of Metrology was a national institution with the primary task of improving the technical (etalon) base and harmonization of normative documents 
in the field of metrology to ensure uniformity of  measurements with international requirements.  
The Institute for Standardization and Certification was created for development and enhancement 
the legal and normative basis in the field of technical regulation in order to ensure safety and 
quality of products, works and services, and its harmonization with international requirements.  The National Center for Accreditation was a national accreditation body that carried out its 
activities under the Law "On Accreditation in the Field of Conformity Assessment".  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 176 - 
 
  (c) Technical Regulations, International and National Standards, and Conformity 
Assessment Procedures 
- (i) Technical Regulations 559.  The CU technical regulations were adopted on ly with the purpose of:  protecting human, 
animal and plant life or health, property, and th e environment; ensuring energy efficiency and 
resource saving; preventing practices that might mislead consumers (Article 4.2 of the 
CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation Principles).  The CU Parties were not allowed to 
adopt CU technical regulations for any other pu rposes.  CU technical regulations established 
requirements for products and product-related processes, in particular:  maintenance, operation, storage, transportation, realisation and utilisation, as well as identification rules and conformity 
assessment forms and schemes, and could also cont ain requirements for terminology, packaging, 
labelling and SPS requirements.  CU technical regulations had to be developed in accordance with 
recommendations on a model structure laid down in Resolution of the Interstate Council of the 
EurAsEC No. 321 of 21 October 2006, which was still used even though technical regulations were 
not developed through the EurAsEC institutions, because no recommendation on the model 
structure of the technical regulations had been adopted within the CU.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan affirmed that Article 4.4 of the CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation 
Principles established that the relevant international standards and other documents (i.e., rules, 
directives and recommendations or any other documents accepted by international standardizing 
organizations) would be used as the basis for elaboration of CU technical regulations, except in 
cases where such documents were absent, or did not conform to the purposes of the technical 
regulations of the Customs Union, in particular, due to climatic and geographical factors or technological and other particularities.  CU Commission Decision No. 527, which stipulated 
regulations for development, adoption, amendment an d cancellation of technical regulations on the 
territories of the CU Parties, had been replaced by a new regulation adopted by EEC Council Decision No. 48.  The new Regulation stipulated in more detailed way provisions on development 
of draft technical regulations, including public  consultation procedures, preparation of draft 
technical regulations with due account of comments and proposals provided during public 
consultations.  She further noted that currently the EurAsEC did not play any role in technical 
regulation for the Customs Union.  Development of EurAsEC technical regulations had been suspended by the Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 575 of 19 October 2011.  
Currently, only CU technical regulations were being developed. 
560.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 48, CU technical regulations were developed in accordance with the plan on development of 
technical regulations.  The plan was prepared on the basis of proposals from the CU Parties or the 
EEC, agreed by the Parties and approved by th e EEC Council.  The Party (or the Commission) 
responsible for the development of a draft techni cal regulation was determined in the plan.  
The Party responsible for the development of the draft technical regulation designated a state body responsible for the development of the draft techni cal regulation (hereinafter – the Developer of 
draft technical regulation).  All CU Parties determined the state bodies participating in the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 177 - 
 
  development of the draft technical regulation.  The state body was selected taking into account the 
relevant competence of the state body in the sphere where the technical regulation was planned to be developed.  In Kazakhstan, the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology under the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies of the Republic of Kazakhstan developed a draft 
document On Designation of State Bodies Responsible for Development of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union.  The draft document was sent  to State bodies for approval and was adopted 
by the Protocol of the Commission on the Issues of Technical Regulation and Metrology established 
by the Government Resolution No. 558 of 12 June  2010.  To date, Kazakhstan had developed 
seven CU technical regulations with the following state bodies designated as the Developer of the 
draft technical regulation: 
- On Safety of Grain – the Ministry of Agriculture; 
- On Safety of Elevators – the Ministry on Emergency Situations;  
- On Requirements to Automotive and Aviation Petrol, Diesel Fuel, Fuel for Jet Engines and 
Fuel Oil – the Ministry of Oil and Gas; 
- On Safety of Products of Light Industry – the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies; 
- On Safety of Products of Dietary, Special and Medicinal and Prophylactic Nutrition; and 
- On Safety of Food Additives, Flavourings and Processing Aids; On Safety of Explosives and 
Products on their Basis – the Ministry of Health. 
561.  The Developer of the draft technical regulati on prepared the first draft and, based on 
proposals from the competent authorities of th e CU Parties, formed a working group for the 
development of the draft technical regulation.  The working group included representatives of 
standardization bodies, industry and business re presentatives.  The Developer of the draft 
technical regulation informed the EEC and other Parties about the creation and composition of the 
working group. 
562.  In reply to a specific question, the Representative of Kazakhstan explained that under 
official CU procedures, natural and legal person s of CU Parties could propose draft technical 
regulations and supporting materials for their deve lopment, but they could not act as an official 
Developer of draft CU technical regulation.  In accordance with Article 25 of the Law "On Technical 
Regulation" natural and legal persons could participate in the working groups and could submit proposals on draft technical regulations, as well as their own draft technical regulations, to the 
national body responsible for development of the draft technical regulation.  Moreover, natural and 
legal persons could also submit proposals on deve lopment, amendment, cancellation of technical 
regulations and standards, and draft normative acts  in the field of technical regulation to the 
Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Upon their 
review the Committee would submit the consolidated proposal from Kazakhstan to the EEC.  
563.  Upon completion of the first draft technical regulation, the Developer of draft technical 
regulation sent the draft, an explanatory note, and the notification on development of the technical regulation to the EEC (electronic and hard copy).   The explanatory note to the draft technical 
regulation had to include: 
- the purpose of the technical regulation; 
- structure and general characteristics of the objects of the technical regulation; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 178 - 
 
  - main groups of business or other activities, other interested persons whose interests would 
be affected by technical regulations; 
- a list of international, regional and nation al (State) standards, requirements of other 
documents (regulations, directives and reco mmendations and other documents adopted by 
international organizations), and in case of their absence - regional documents 
(regulations, directives, decisions, regulations, and other documents), national technical 
regulations, on the basis of which the draft technical regulation was developed; 
- requirements that differed from provisions of international, regional standards or 
mandatory requirements in force on the territory of the Parties with a brief rationale for 
their introduction; 
- information on the compliance of the draft technical regulation with the requirements 
ensuring the uniformity of measurements; and 
- the expected date of implementation of th e requirements established by the technical 
regulation. 
Notification on the development of the draft tec hnical regulation had to be made in accordance 
with the prescribed form and include the following information: 
- the party responsible for the development of the draft; 
- the authorised body of the Party that was responsible for the development of the draft 
(developer of the technical regulation); 
- draft title of the technical regulation; 
- object of the technical regulation; 
- purpose of the development of the technical regulation; 
- reason for the development of the technical regulation; 
- mailing address, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address for comments and 
proposals (review) on the draft; and 
- expected date of completion of public cons ultations (final date for providing comments and 
proposals (reviews) on the draft). 
The EEC sent these documents to the Parties within five working days from the date of receipt of 
the mentioned materials. 
564.  The EEC ensured the consideration of the first version of the draft technical regulation and 
related set of documents at the meeting of the Consultative Committee.  Following the 
consideration by the Consultative Committee, the decision on possibility, starting date and period of public consultations on the draft technical regulation was made, which was formalised by a 
Protocol.  If necessary, the Developer of the draft technical regulation within the period established 
by the Consultative Committee revised the draft technical regulation and the set of related document.  
565.  The notification on the draft technical regulation was published on the official website of 
the Customs Union (http://www.tsouz.ru/db/techreglam/Pages/Publichnoeobs.aspx), the 
Committee for Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and New 
Technologies of the Republic of Kazakhstan  (www.memst.kz), the TBT/SPS Enquiry Point 
(www.wto.memst.kz), as well as in the official publication "Bulletin of the Enquiry Point on 
TBT/SPS". 
566.  The period of public consultations of the dr aft technical regulation (from the moment of 
publication of notification on the development up to the moment of publication of notification on 
the completion of public consultation) had to be no less than 60 calendar days.  The public 
consultations period was closed by publishing a notification about the closure of public WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 179 - 
 
  consultations on the draft technical regulation on the official website of the EEC.  The EEC 
processed comments and proposals received from interested parties during public consultations and sent them to the Developer of draft technical regulation. 
567.  The Developer of the draft technical regulation  within 30 working days from the date it 
received consolidated comments from the EEC, re vised the draft technical regulation and the 
related documents taking into account comments and proposals received during the public 
consultations.  The revised draft technical regulati on, the protocol of the meetings of the working 
group, and the consolidated comments were sent to the EEC.  The EEC sent the draft technical 
regulation and related documents to the Parties fo r their internal approval and published them on 
the official website.  Upon completion of the inte rnal approval of the draft technical regulations by 
the Parties, the draft technical regulation was sent to the Consultative Committee that submitted it 
to the EEC Collegium for approval.  The draft technical regulation and related documents, and 
disagreements that could not be solved during the negotiations were considered by the EEC Collegium.  After the consideration the EEC Collegium submitted the draft technical regulation 
and related documents either to the EEC Council fo r approval, or to the developer for revision.  
The EEC Council adopted the final draft technical regulation at its meeting.  
568.  The Decision of the EEC Council on adoption of the technical regulation, the Decision of the 
EEC Collegium on approval of the draft technical regulation and Decision of the EEC Collegium on 
the order of entering into force of the technical regulation were published at the official website of 
the EEC.  The EEC maintained the Regi ster of technical regulations.  
569.  In response to the request of a Member to explain the full role that Law No. 603 "On 
Technical Regulation" played in laying out the responsibilities of the developer of technical 
regulation, the representative of Kazakhstan ex plained that Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation" 
contained general provisions on the development of technical regulations.  In accordance with the 
Law, state bodies authorised to establish mandatory rules and norms had to prepare proposals on 
development, amendment or cancellation of technical regulations taking into account proposals of 
interested parties, and had to submit them to the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The Law stipulated the following obligations of the 
developer of technical regulation: 
- to publish notifications about the developmen t of draft technical regulations, amendments 
 and (or) addenda, or cancellation of technical regulations, in the official publications and 
 public information system no later than a month after the beginning of development of  draft technical regulations, amendments and ( o r )  a d d e n d a ,  o r  c a n c e l l a t i o n  o f  t e c h n i c a l  
 regulations; 
- to organize public discussions of draft technical regulations; 
- to revise draft technical regulations taking into account received comments;  - to publish technical regulations in the official publication of the authorised body and public  information system; and 
- to provide answers to comments received during the public consultation to the interested 
 parties at their request. 
570.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that CU Parties could not establish 
additional mandatory requirements at the national level other than those established in the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 180 - 
 
  technical regulations of the Customs Union.  Thus, no national technical regulations were 
developed in Kazakhstan at the moment.  Provisions of the Law "On Technical Regulation" were applied to the extent they did not contradict the provisions of the Agreements and regulations of 
the CU and the Single Economic Space.  The Law "On Technical Regulation" envisaged mandatory 
requirements for (i) products – aimed at ensuring  the protection of human life and health, the 
environment, national security, as well as the prevention of deceptive practices; and (ii) related 
processes – aimed at ensuring product safety.  Technical regulations set forth mandatory 
requirements for products (and processes), contained an exhaustive list of such requirements, and had the status of direct application.  These requirements were applied in an equal and uniform 
manner regardless of the product's country or place of origin.  Development of technical 
regulations was based on international and regional standards.  Technical regulations were also 
aimed at eliminating technical barriers to trade and increasing product competitiveness. 
571.  In response to the enquiry of a Member whether any of Kazakhstan's laws referred to "sets 
of rules" as a form of mandatory requirement, th e representative of Kazakhstan stated that there 
was no reference to "sets of rules" in the national legislation of Kazakhstan.  The EEC Collegium 
Decision No. 245 of 4 December 2012 had approved  the Protocol on introduction of amendments 
into the Agreement on Uniform Principles of Technical Regulation that underlined the specificity of 
technical regulation in the field of construction.  In particular, the amendment stipulated approval 
of the list of international construction norms used on a mandatory basis; international sets of 
rules and international standards applied on a voluntary basis, the application of which ensured 
compliance with the technical regulations of the Customs Union concerning the safety of buildings and structures.  When the amendments to the Agreement on Uniform Principles of Technical 
Regulation would be adopted, the national legisl ation would be brought into compliance with these 
amendments.  
572.  In response to a specific question, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan explained that in 
Kazakhstan, technical requirements in the fields of telecommunication and nuclear energy were 
subject to the Law on Technical Regulation of 9 November 2004.  The mandatory requirements to 
products and (or) the processes of their life cycle were established in the following national 
technical regulations:  
- in the field of nuclear energy:  "Nuclear and Radiation Safety of Nuclear Power Plants", 
approved by Government Resolution No. 683 of 1 July 2010; "Nuclear and Radiation 
Safety of Nuclear Research Facilities", appr oved by Government Resolution of No. 684 of 
1 July 2010; and "Nuclear and Radiation Safety", approved by Government Resolution No. 768 of 30 July 2010. 
- in the field of telecommunications: "Gener al Requirements for Safety, Functional and 
 Technical Requirements for Telecommunication Equipment During Search Operations",  approved by Government Resolution No. 805 of 6 August 2010. 
- (ii) Technical Requirements Not Su bject to Law No. 603 "On Technical  
  Regulation" 
573.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on mandatory technical 
requirements that were not regulated under Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation", and how the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 181 - 
 
  requirements of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade were applied in these areas.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan expl ained that safety requirements in the field of 
civil aviation were not regulated by the Law "On Technical Regulation" and were regulated by 
national legislation in the field of civil aviation.  Kazakhstan was a party to the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation (hereinafter - CICA) (since 1992) and the CIS Intergovernmental Agreement on Civil Aviation and use of Airspace (IAC).  In this regard, Kazakhstan based its civil 
aircraft certification requirements, including airworthiness requirements and certification 
procedures, on international requirements of the CICA and IAC.  In accordance with international standards of CICA, Kazakhstan developed its Law No. 339-IV "On Use of Air Apace of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 15 July 2012.  Article 16 and Chapter 5 of the Law stipulated the main 
objectives and requirements for certification in the field of civil aircraft.  Certification in the field of 
civil aircraft included confirmation of conformity of aircrafts (certification of airworthiness, 
certification of type of civil aircraft, certification of specimen of civil aircraft), aerodromes and aviation services to the requirements established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
in the field of use of airspace and aviation activity.  The certification was carried out by the 
competent authority in the field of civil aviation – the Committee on Civil Aviation under the Ministry of Transport and Communication of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
574.  Civil aircrafts had to be airworthy and were allowed for exploitation with a valid certificate 
of airworthiness, which ensured compliance with the requirements approved  by the Resolution of 
the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 859 of 26 July 2011.  Certificates of 
airworthiness of civil aircrafts issued by foreign countries were recognised in accordance with Rules approved by the Order of the Acting Minister of Transport and Communication of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 112 of 3 March 2011.  
575.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all technical requirements applied to 
goods on the territory of Kazakhstan, including those applied as technical regulations as provided 
for in Law No. 603 of 9 November 2004 "On Technical Regulation" (as last amended on 
10 July 2012) and other national legislation, the relevant CU Agreements and other CU Acts, to the 
extent that they corresponded to the definition of a "technical regulation" under the 
WTO TBT Agreement, would comply with the princi ples of the WTO TBT Agreement, relating in 
particular to transparency, predictability, and avoiding the creation of unnecessary obstacles to 
trade.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- (iii) Voluntary National and International Standards 
576.  With regard to standards, she said that pursuant to the Law "On Technical Regulation", 
standards were applied on a voluntary basis and equally regardless of the origin of the product or 
service.  Whereas the application of a variety of standards had been foreseen (including international, regional and national), the application of international standards would prevail.  
International or foreign countries' standards and regulations were used in drawing up national 
standards, except when such standards were ine fficient or inadequate for achieving the desired 
objectives.  National standards were developed, reviewed and terminated in accordance with the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 182 - 
 
  National Standard of the Republic of Kazakhstan ST RK 1.2-2008 "Procedure for the Development 
of National (State) Standard and Standards of Organizations" and the Rules for Harmonization, 
Recording, Approval, Amendment, Cancellation and Entering into Force of National (State) 
Standards, Classifiers of Technical and Economic Information approved by Order of the Deputy 
Minister of Industry and New Technologies of th e Republic of Kazakhstan No. 40 of 23 April 2010.  
She added that the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry of Industry 
and New Technologies was the only authorised St ate body in charge of administering work and 
issuing standards in the field of technical regulation, metrology and certification. 
577.  According to the national standard RK 1.2- 2008, requirements established in national 
standards had to be based on:  (i) the results of  research and development works, (ii) patent 
research, (iii) provisions of international, regional or national standards and regulations of foreign 
countries, (iv) and (or) other official information on the latest achievements of domestic and 
foreign science, engineering and technology.  Nati onal standards were developed on objects that 
addressed tasks of national importance to provide safety of products and related processes 
(works), quality of services, protection of co nsumers from deceptive practice, production of 
competitive products.  National standards could be developed by natural and juridical persons of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including technical committees on standardization, in accordance with 
the plans of state standardization approved by th e competent authority in the field of technical 
regulation and plans of authorities whose competence covers objects of standardization.  
National standards could also be developed off-plan.  In this case in order to avoid information on 
development of national standard had to be forwarded to the competent authority in the field of technical regulation.   
578.  National standards could be developed at the request of state authorities, producers and 
consumers of products, non-governmental organizations and other interested parties.  The competent authority concluded a contract on development of the national standard with 
developer of a national standard.  Information on national standards that were under development 
had to be published on the official website of the competent authority in the field of technical 
regulation.  Developer of a national standard established a working group which prepared the first 
draft of the national standard.  The draft national standard and explanatory note were published at the official website of the competent authority in  the field of technical regulation and sent to 
interested parties for review and comments.  The time-frame for review by interested parties was 
60 calendar days.  The developer prepared the fina l draft of the national standard taking into 
account comments and proposals received from interested parties.  The developer approved the 
draft standard and sent it for approval to the competent authority in the field of technical 
regulation.  
- (iv) Disposition of Mandatory Na tional Standards of Kazakhstan 
579.  Some Members requested information on the elimination of WTO-inconsistent mandatory 
national standards.  In particular, these Member s enquired whether there were any explicit plans 
to address such standards.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 183 - 
 
  580.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with the Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan "On Technical Regulation" in cases where a technical regulation for a particular product had not been enacted, for the purpose of  confirmation of conformity the manufacturers 
could apply international, regional (interstate) or national (State) standards that met the technical 
regulation objectives.  In such cases, compliance with the standard chosen by the manufacturer was mandatory for that manufacturer.  As soon as  the relevant technical regulation was adopted, 
the chosen standard could be applied on a volunt ary basis.  Standards that contained conflicting 
provisions could not be used for confirming the conformity with the technical regulation and became void.  
581.  [In response to a request from some Members for Kazakhstan to bring its standards and 
technical regulations system into compliance with WTO requirements prior to WTO accession, 
the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that upon accession to the WTO, relevant international 
standards or relevant parts thereof would be used for development of technical regulations, unless they were ineffective or inappropriate means for the fulfillment of legitimate objectives 
pursued[, as provided for in the TBT Agreemen t].  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.] 
582.  A Member welcomed the proposed commitment and expressed the view that it should 
explicitly include a commitment to amend or rescind any existing standard, technical regulation or 
conformity assessment procedure that was not compliant with the WTO TBT Agreement.  
This Member requested further information on how Kazakhstan intended to implement this 
commitment if all WTO-inconsistent mandatory standards had not been phased-out and whether these mandatory standards would become voluntary. 
583.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan, jointly with other 
CU Parties, was actively working on development of technical regulations which would replace WTO-inconsistent mandatory standards.  Thus, standards containing mandatory requirements, 
which were currently in force, would be replaced by CU technical regulations as part of the 
CU technical regulation harmonization process, ba sed on the work plan and timetable for adoption 
of priority technical regulations contained in CU Commission Decision No. 492 and EEC Council 
Decision No. 103.  Pending their replacement by CU technical regulations, standards containing mandatory requirements were in force only to the extent that they ensured:  protection of human 
life or health; protection of the environment and of animal and plant life or health; provision of 
national security; prevention of deceptive practices and energy efficiency (all of which were set-out 
in the Law "On Technical Regulation").  Further, such national standards, were considered by her 
Government to be "technical regulations" as  that term was defined in Annex 1 of the 
WTO TBT Agreement.  She also added that nation al standards contradicting the WTO requirements 
were being reviewed with a purpose to harmonize them with international standards.  To date, the 
total number of national (State) standards of Kazakhstan amounted to 4,627 units, of which 3,323 units were harmonized with international standards.  Thus, 72% of national standards were WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 184 - 
 
  harmonized with international standards.  In addition, the Law "On Technical Regulation" 
(sub-paragraph 5 of Article 4) prioritised the use of international standards. 
584.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all standards currently in force in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan containing mandatory requirements would be applied in compliance with 
the WTO TBT Agreement from the date of accessio n.  In case of their inconsistency with the 
provisions of the WTO TBT Agreement, such standards would be modified in accordance with the 
procedures set-out in CU Commission Decision No. 48 of 20 June 2012, Regulation on 
Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, and the national legislation.  Any concerns of interested parties and Members 
regarding compatibility of such mandatory requ irements with the WTO TBT Agreement would be 
duly and effectively addressed in the framework of mechanisms and procedures provided for in the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and in CU technical regulations.  She added that 
information about the opportunities offered by these procedures would be made available to interested parties and Members, inter alia , through the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS.  
She confirmed that the Republic of Kazakhstan would fulfil all requirements of the 
WTO TBT Agreement, including those on notification s, as of the date of accession.  The Working 
Party took note of this commitment.] 
- (v) Conformity Assessment Procedur es including the Accreditation of 
 Conformity Assessment Bodies 
585.  Accreditation of conformity assessment bodies enabled a conformity assessment body 
included in the Unified Register of Accredited Certification Bodies and Testing Laboratories of the 
CU (hereinafter - Unified Register) to issue documents on conformity assessment within the area of its accreditation that would be accepted within the territory of Kazakhstan, as well as the rest of 
the CU.  Articles 2 and 3 of the CU Agreement on Mandatory Conformity Assessment established 
the responsibility of the CU Parties' accreditation bodies:  (i) to conduct comparative examinations 
(peer assessment) of procedures in the bodies of other CU Parties; (ii) to implement, where 
possible, relevant international standards in the national accreditation system; (iii) to maintain the national Register of accredited certification bodies and laboratories; (iv) and to consider complaints 
from enterprises connected with an accredited certification body or laboratory.  Apart from the 
Unified Register, the EEC also adopted common forms for the certification and declaration of conformity; and the Unified Registry of Certificates of Conformity and Declarations of Conformity.   
586.  Products subject to CU technical regulations could be released for circulation within the 
CU customs territory provided they had undergone all necessary conformity assessment 
procedures established by the relevant CU technical regulations.  The CU Parties conducted 
conformity assessment in accordance with CU tec hnical regulations.  Conformity assessment had 
to be carried out in the form of registration, testing, expertise and co nformity verification.  
As set-out in Article 7.2 of the CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation Principles, 
mandatory assessment (confirmation) of conformity (compliance) of products with requirements of 
CU technical regulations was confirmed by a decl aration of compliance or certificate that was WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 185 - 
 
  issued by a certification body listed in the Unified Register based on tests performed by accredited 
laboratories and testing centres.  For registration of declaration of conformity, the following persons could act as applicants:  a juridical person or a natural person registered as an individual 
entrepreneur in accordance with national legislation of CU Parties or a person acting as a 
producer/seller or performing the duties of a foreign producer on the basis of a contract, concluded with the producer, which stipulated that supplied products met the requirements of CU technical 
regulations and established liability for non-complia nce of supplied products with the requirements 
of CU technical regulations.  CU Commission Decision No. 621 of 7 April 2011 "On the Regulation on the Application of Model Schemes of Conformi ty Assessment (Confirmation) in the Technical 
Regulations of the Customs Union" (hereafter:  CU Commission Decision No. 621), established 
common forms and regulations on the application of model conformity assessment schemes to 
ensure compliance with the requirements of technical regulations of the Customs Union. 
587.  Pursuant to Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation Principles, 
activity related to conformity assessment had to be carried out by the accredited certification 
bodies and testing laboratories included into the Unified Register.  The Unified Register was formed 
in accordance with the CU Agreement on Mand atory Conformity Assessment.  Recognition of 
results issued by accredited certification bodies and testing laboratories had to be carried out in 
accordance with the CU Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Accreditation Bodies.  Results of 
conformity assessment of products for which no technical regulations of the CU came into force 
were recognised in accordance with the CU Agreement on Mandatory Conformity Assessment. 
588.  For the purpose of conformity assessment, the CU  Parties, in accordance with Article 6 of 
the CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation Principles, could apply international and 
regional standards and in the absence thereof - national standards.  Application of these standards 
on a voluntary basis ensured the compliance with CU technical regulation requirements.  The EEC adopted a list of such standards (hereinafter – List of Standards).  The national standards 
contained rules for testing and measurement techniques, including rules for sampling required for 
application and implementation of technical regu lation requirements and conducting conformity 
assessment. Application of international, regional and (or) national standards included into the List 
of Standards on a voluntary basis was a sufficient condition to prove compliance with CU technical regulation requirements.  However, non-compliance with the standards included into the List of 
Standards did not mean non-compliance with the CU technical regulations.  
589.  Pursuant to Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Uniform Technical Regulation Principles, the 
liability for non-compliance with requirements of CU technical regulations, as well as for violation 
of conformity assessment procedures, was established by legislation of each member-State.  
Each CU member-State had a right to take all appropriate measures whenever it ascertained that 
products did not conform to the requirements of  CU technical regulations.  Such measures 
included actions aimed at prohibiting their plac ement on the market, withdrawing the products 
from the market in accordance with the national legislation of CU Parties and informing other 
members-States thereof.  CU Parties aimed to harmonize all relevant legislation in the sphere of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 186 - 
 
  establishing liabilities for violation of the requir ements of CU technical regulations as well as 
conformity assessment procedures.  With this view, the CU Parties had developed a draft Agreement establishing the types of administrative violations in the sphere of technical regulation 
and the application of sanitary, veterinary, and phytosanitary measures.  Furthermore, the 
CU Parties had a right to take emergency measures to prevent entry of hazardous products into the CU market.  Any CU Party seeking to apply such  measures had to notify the other CU Parties. 
590.  With respect to conformity  assessment, the Representative of Kazakhstan stated that at 
the national level the Law "On Technical Regulation" provided for (i) "conformity recognition" – a procedure that resulted in a documental certification (in the form of declaration of conformity or 
conformity certificate) of conformity of an object (product or process) to the requirements 
established in technical regulations or standards; and (ii) "accreditation" – an official recognition 
by an accreditation body of the competence of ju ridical persons to perform conformity recognition 
works.  Conformity recognitions could be mandatory – in the form of certification by an accredited conformity assessment body or a producer's declar ation of conformity (for products subject to 
technical regulation requirements); and voluntary – in the form of certification or a conformity 
declaration of a producer/seller indicating that the requirements of standards, other documents or special requirements were met (for products no t subject to mandatory conformity recognition). 
591.  [The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan would, from the date of 
accession, ensure that State bodies use existing (or soon-to-be-completed) relevant guides or 
recommendations, or the relevant parts of them, issued by international standardization bodies as 
a basis for their conformity assessment procedures, except where, as provided for in Article 5.4 of the WTO TBT Agreement, such guides or recommendations or relevant parts of them were 
inappropriate for Kazakhstan [and/or any CU Party].  In addition, she confirmed that in accordance 
with Article 5.1.2 of the WTO TBT Agreement, in respect of products subject to mandatory 
certification the conformity assessment procedure provided for in CU Agreements and Acts would 
not be more strict or be applied more strictly than was necessary to give Kazakhstan adequate 
confidence that products conformed to the applicable technical regulations or standards.  
She confirmed that the products subject to mandatory certification set-out in the CU Unified List 
would be defined in accordance with the provisions of the TBT Agreement, including the provisions of Article 5.1.2 thereof.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
592.  In response to a Member enquiring how a manufacturer could obtain a certificate, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that according to the procedure for issuing conformity certificates established in the technical regulation "Procedures of Conformity Certification" adopted 
by Government Resolution No. 90 of 4 February 2008: 
- the applicant submitted an application for carrying out certification to a conformity 
certification body;  
- the conformity certification body reviewed the application and informed the applicant of its 
decision within three days upon receipt of the application;  
- the decision for carrying out the certification procedure had to contain all basic certification 
conditions based on the established certification procedures for the type of product being 
certified, as well as proposed certification scheme, list of the necessary technical WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 187 - 
 
  documents, list of the parameters, inspection conditions and title of an accredited 
laboratory/centre (further – laboratory) which carried out the testing; 
- if the applicant agreed with the conditions of the certification procedures, they concluded a 
contract for carrying out the works; 
- tests were carried out on the samples, the design, structure and production technology of 
which had to be the same as that of the product supplied to consumers; 
- the conformity assessment body or an accredited laboratory, upon request of the 
conformity assessment body or a commission consisting of auditors appointed by the 
applicant, carried out sampling.  Quantity of samples, procedure for their selection, as well 
as storage rules, were established in accordance with the regulatory and methodical 
documents on certification and testing methods of a specific product; 
- the applicant had to submit technical documentation for the samples, the structure and 
content of which were established in the normative documents of a specific product as well 
as the technical documents to be submitted in accordance with the basic certification 
conditions, mentioned above; 
- accredited laboratories carried out testing on the samples provided to the conformity 
assessment body; 
- certification tests had to be carried out in accordance with the methods and within the 
terms stipulated in the regulatory documents designed for a specific product but no longer 
than 30 calendar days; and 
- after analysis of the test results, and other documents on product conformity, the 
conformity assessment body conducted conformity assessment. 
593.  The conformity certificate was issued by the conformity assessment body on the basis of 
the expert conclusion.  In case of negative test ing results, the conformity assessment body had to 
issue the decision indicating the reasons for refusal. 
594.  The representative of Kazakhstan further described that Government Resolution No. 367 
"On Mandatory Conformity Assessment of Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 April 2005 
established two lists of products subject to mandatory conformity assessment in Kazakhstan:  
(i) List of Products and Services Subject to Mandatory Certification; and (ii) List of Goods 
Conformity of which Could Be Verified by Declaration of Conformity.  To circulate as well as enter 
into Kazakhstan's market, the listed products had to undergo conformity assessment for the purposes of mandatory requirements and had to be accompanied with a conformity certificate or a 
declaration of conformity.  With respect to the re lationship of the two lists with the Unified List 
adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 620 of 7 April 2011, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that products, that passed mandatory conformity assessment in Kazakhstan, would still 
need to receive conformity certificate or declaration of conformity in a CU Party, when being 
exported to such CU Party, if the products were not included in the Unified List.  She recalled that 
the CU and national lists were subject to revision upon adoption of a relevant CU technical 
regulation for a product included into the above-mentioned lists. 
595.  Referring to a previous statement of Kazakhstan on revisiting and subsequent elimination 
of the list of products subject to mandatory certification upon adoption of related technical 
r e g u l a t i o n s ,  a  M e m b e r  c o m m e n t e d  t h a t  s o m e  c a t e g o r i e s  o f  p r o d u c t s  w o u l d  a l w a y s  r e q u i r e  mandatory certification.  Asked to confirm whether Kazakhstan was considering that products like 
pharmaceuticals and medical devices be subject to mandatory conformity certification, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan currently did not foresee to cancel mandatory conformity assessment requirements for all products.  In general, a conformity WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 188 - 
 
  assessment scheme for a specific product would be established in a relevant Customs Union 
technical regulation. 
596.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in order to receive access to 
Kazakhstan's market, pharmaceuticals and medical devices were subject to State registration 
conducted by the Ministry of Health.  Within the CU framework, pharmaceuticals were not included 
into the Unified List of Products Subject to Mandatory Requirements within the Framework of 
Customs Union adopted by the CU Commission De cision No. 526 of 28 January 2011.  Therefore, 
the development of a CU technical regulation for pharmaceuticals was not planned.  Medical devices were included into the Unified List.  In accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 103, the decision on the development of the CU technical regulation "On Safety of Medical 
Devices" would be made after the adoption of the Agreement on Conducting Uniform Policy in the 
Field of Registration and Monitoring of Circulation of Medical Devices (Medical Devices and Medical 
Equipment) in the Territory of the Customs Union and Common Economic Space (hereinafter – the Agreement on Circulation of Medical Devices).  The draft Agreement on Circulation of Medical 
Devices and the draft Agreement on Cooperation of  CU member-States in the Field of Circulation 
of Pharmaceuticals were developed in order to regulate the placement of medical devices and pharmaceuticals on the territory of the CU.  The draft Agreements provide for a phased 
implementation of the uniform policy in the sphere of registration and monitoring of circulation of 
medical devices and pharmaceuticals through harmonization in the first phase and the subsequent 
unification in the second phase of requiremen ts for medical devices and pharmaceuticals.  
This would provide a basis for mutual recognition of the results of work on state registration of medical devices and pharmaceuticals with the application of uniform permit documents. 
597.  A declaration of conformity could be prepared  on the basis of evidence collected by the 
applicant alone or on the basis of evidence ob tained with the participation of a conformity 
assessment organization.  The declaration of conformity had to be registered by the relevant 
accredited conformity assessment organization and was valid, similarly to a conformity certificate, 
on the entire territory of Kazakhstan.   
598.  Recognising the need for keeping track of manufacturer's declarations of conformity, a 
Member expressed concern that instituting an offici al register/requiring official registration could 
be disproportionate and unnecessarily trade-restrictive, especially concerning imports, since it 
would be certainly more burdensome in practice for non-domestic suppliers to apply for this 
registration.  This Member's country required the manufacturer to keep a full technical file with the specifications of the product including the supplier declaration of conformity.  This file had to be 
made available to public authorities (mainly in the framework of market surveillance) under their 
simple request.  In this regard, this Member requested information on (i) the formalities to 
accomplish in order to have a supplier declaration of conformity registered; (ii) if any, costs to be 
borne by the manufacturer/importer/legal representati ve; (iii) the length of registration procedure; 
and (iv) grounds of refusal.  In addition, this Member enquired whether Kazakhstan considered 
less trade-restrictive modalities to process supplie r's declaration of conformity, such as allowing WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 189 - 
 
  the manufacturer/importer/legal representative to keep a full technical file (including the 
declaration) at the disposal of the authorities under their simple request.  This Member also enquired how Kazakhstan intended to avoid that this provision put foreign manufacturers in a less 
favourable position compared to domestic ones. 
599.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that currently the CU legal framework did not 
stipulate uniform procedures in the sphere of decl aration of conformity.  Therefore, requirements 
and procedures related to declaration of conformity  were applied in accordance with the national 
legislation applied.  Chapter 4 of the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 90 "On Approval of the Technical Regulation "Conformity Confirmation Procedures" of 
4 February 2008 established procedure for declaration by market participants.  The manufacturer 
(performer) undertook a declaration based on the documents confirming the conformity of 
products to the specified requirements.  The following documents could be used as a basis for 
declaration by manufacturer (performer):  (i) protocols of approval and other control testing conducted by the manufacturer (performer) and/or accredited testing laboratories; (ii) previously 
obtained certificates in force, or testing protocols for primary products, materials, components; 
(iii) statement of State control confirming the product compliance with the requirements of the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and (iv) documents confirming the conformity of 
products to the specified requirements (deliver ies of primary products, production process, 
assembling, finished products, package, marking), quality management system certificates.  
In this regard, consideration and registration of  the declaration of conformity by a conformity 
assessment body had to be paid by the manufac turer (performer) on a contractual basis.  
Declaration could be undertaken for specific products or a group of homogeneous products in 
relation to which the common requirements were established.  Declaration could be taken for the 
period determined by the manufacturer (performer ) of products based on the planned period of 
production of such products or the sales period of a products lot, but not longer than for one year.  
Declaration accepted by the manufacturer (performer) had to be registered in an accredited 
conformity assessment body.  Within a period not exceeding three days, the conformity 
assessment body had to consider and check the following:  (i) presence of this kind of products in 
the list of the products conformity of which could be verified by the declaration; (ii) eligibility of manufacturer (performer) to undertake the declaration; (iii) completeness and accuracy of the 
indication of the regulatory standardization documents provided for the confirmation of these 
products conformity; (iv) presence of all document s provided by the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan for manufacturing of these products; and (v) accuracy of information filled in the 
declaration.  After review of submitted document s, the conformity assessment body registered the 
declaration in a special section of the registered declarations record.  The registered declaration 
had to be kept by manufacturer (performer) along with the documents on the basis of which the 
declaration had been filed, within the period no  less than three years after its expiry date.  
Within the same period, the conformity assessmen t body shall keep a copy of the registered 
declaration and the supporting documents.  If th e requirements of regulatory documents indicated 
in the declaration as well as reorganization of the legal person had changed, the manufacturer (performer) had to issue a new declaration and submit it for registration to the conformity WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 190 - 
 
  assessment body.  With respect to costs involved, she stated that the amount of payments for the 
works on review and registration of the declaratio ns had to be determined on a contractual basis 
between conformity assessment bodies and producers (performers).  As for the reasons for refusal 
of registration of conformity declaration, th e representative of Kazakhstan said that the 
registration could be refused only for the following reasons:  (i) a product's conformity could be verified only in the form of certification; and (ii) the presented documents were not sufficient to 
verify the conformity of a product with safety re quirements provided for in the relevant technical 
regulation or, when the technical regulation had not been developed - to the relevant regulatory 
legal act.  In conclusion, the representative of Ka zakhstan stated that the registration requirement 
equally applied to and were the same for both domestic and foreign suppliers.  Therefore, there 
was no provision in the legislation that put foreign manufacturers in a less favourable position 
compared to domestic manufactures.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that the 
Customs Union was in the process of simplifying the procedure of registration of declarations of conformity by introducing electronic registration.  Electronic registration would allow the 
manufacturer to register its declaration of conformi ty in the electronic Unified Register by filling 
out an electronic application form, submitting the declaration of conformity signed with an 
electronic signature, and the relevant evidence. 
600.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, depending on the technical regulation 
at issue, documents establishing compliance with the requirements of the technical regulation 
could include a supplier's own evidence, such as declaration of conformity with the relevant 
technical regulation, test reports, and other documents as relevant, in accordance with the legislation of Kazakhstan, CU Agreements and other CU Acts, or the results of conformity 
assessment procedures that Kazakhstan may accept pursuant to Article 6.1 of the 
WTO TBT Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
601.  [The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the cost of mandatory conformity 
assessment would be paid by an applicant.  Moreover, the cost of mandatory conformity 
assessment was to be determined regardless of the country and/or place of their origin or of the 
persons acting as applicants.  She confirmed th at the cost incurred by a conformity assessment 
body formed the basis for determining the cost to the applicant.  The elements that would typically 
be considered by a conformity assessment body in  the territory of Kazakhstan in determining fees 
included the costs of labour, any necessary materi als or equipment, and tests, as well as other 
usual costs and profits typical to commercial practices in this sphere.  She also noted that the provisions of Law "On Technical Regulation" as a whole reflected the principle of uniform 
application of requirements and conformity a ssessment procedures to domestic and imported 
products.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
602.  Some Members noted that there did not appe ar to be a commitment to ensure that 
regulatory authorities allow a reasonable period of time between the final publication of a conformity assessment procedure and its entry into force so that suppliers can adapt.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that CU technical regulations entered into force after a WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 191 - 
 
  certain transitional period after their official publication (normally around 18 months).  
She clarified that the rules of conformity to a technical regulation normally would be contained 
within the regulation itself.  It meant that the conformity assessment procedures also entered into 
force after a sufficient transitional period after their official publication. 
603.  [The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that, in cases where a positive assurance 
of conformity with technical regulations was required and technical rules and methods for ensuring 
compliance with technical regulations (i.e., elements of conformity assessment procedures, 
defining the methods of research, tests, measuremen ts, or selection of samples that could be used 
to comply with the technical regulations) were not included in a technical regulation, such rules 
and methods would be developed in accordance with EEC Collegium Decision No. 306 of 
25 December 2012, Regulation on Procedures for Development and Approval of Lists of 
International and Regional Standards, and in their Absence – National (State) Standards of 
CU member-States, that Ensure Compliance with Technical Regulations of the CU and Necessary for Conducting Conformity Assessment.  She co nfirmed that CU Commission Decision No. 48 
provided for their approval by the EEC Collegium not later than six months before the entry into 
force of the relevant technical regulation and th at EEC Collegium Decision No. 306 provided for the 
placement of such rules and methods on the official website of the EEC upon their adoption.  
She added that these rules were to be based on relevant guides or recommendations issued by 
international standardizing bodies, in accordance with Article 5.4 of the WTO TBT Agreement, and 
would define the methods of research, tests, meas urements, or selection of samples that may be 
used to comply with the technical regulations.  The rules must, where possible, list a choice of compliance methods and, in order to ensure compli ance with Article 5.1.2 and other provisions of 
the WTO TBT Agreement, conformity assessment pr o c e d u r e s  w o u l d  n o t  b e  m o r e  s t r i c t  o r  b e  
applied more strictly than necessary to give adequate confidence that products conform with the applicable technical regulations, taking account of the risks non-conformity would create.  
She confirmed that the above-mentioned rules would not create a bigger impediment to business 
activity than was necessary to fulfil the goals that  are specified in Article 4.2 of the CU Agreement 
on Uniform Principles and Rules of Technical Regulation in the Republic of Belarus, Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 18 November 2010.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
604.  Asked specifically about the existence of an appeal process, she said that an applicant 
could appeal decisions on conformity recognitio n to the Board of Appeals of the conformity 
recognition organization concerned, and then to the Board of Appeals of the Committee on 
Technical Regulating and Metrology of the Mini stry of Industry and New Technologies; the 
decisions of the latter could be appealed in court.  Pursuant to State standard ST RK 3.10-2007 
"The Order of the Examination of Appeals", an a ppeal had to be filed in writing, enclosing all 
relevant documents, within one month of the contested decision of the accredited certification body.  The Board took a decision within 15 days and the applicant was notified in the following 
10 days. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 192 - 
 
  605.  She added that any domestic or foreign organization could act as a conformity certification 
body or a test laboratory as long as it had received accreditation in accordance with legislation of Kazakhstan.  Certification bodies or laboratories were not allowed to operate (e.g. issue conformity 
assessments) outside their scope of accreditation.  Test results issued by foreign authorised bodies 
could be recognised through accreditation of these foreign bodies in Kazakhstan's national accreditation system.  At present, there were no foreign bodies accredited as conformity 
assessment organizations in Kazakhstan.   
606.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that pursuant to Article 33 of the 
Law "On Technical Regulation", certificates of conformity of foreign countries, testing results, 
conformity marks were recognised in accordance with international (bilateral or multilateral) 
agreements signed by Kazakhstan.  Recognition procedures were determined by the Rules of 
Recognition of Certificates of Conformity of Foreign Countries, Test Protocols, Conformity Marks 
and Other Documents Issued in Foreign Systems of Conformity Assessment approved by the Order of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of 22 April 2005 
(hereinafter – the Rules).  Paragraph 5 of the Rules confirmed that foreign conformity certificates, 
testing protocols, conformity marks, and other documents had to be recognised if there was an international (either bilateral or multilateral) agreement with a country issuing the document, i.e., 
agreement on recognition of conformity assessmen t results.  She added that at the CU level 
CU Commission Decision No. 621 of 7 April 2011 established scheme No. 9 which addressed the 
issue of recognition of certificates of conformi ty issued by third-country conformity assessment 
bodies.  
607.  [Asked whether Kazakhstan considered the WTO TBT Agreement as an international 
agreement or treaty within the meaning of Arti cle 33 of the Law "On Technical Regulation", the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that her country considered the WTO TBT Agreement as an international agreement within the meaning of Article 33.  Thus, it was possible under the 
Law "On Technical Regulation" for Kazakhstan to accept the results of conformity assessment 
procedures done in WTO Members on the basis of, and in compliance with, Article 6.1 of the 
WTO TBT Agreement, without requiring the conclusion of a mutual recognition or other agreement.  
The acceptance of such results throughout the CU was established by the CU Treaty on the 
Functioning of the Customs Union in Compliance with Customs Union Party Commitments under 
the Multilateral Trading System.  Therefore, from the date of its accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan 
would ensure, whenever possible, that results of conformity assessment procedures of conformity 
assessment bodies located in other WTO Members were accepted, provided that Kazakhstan was 
satisfied, as provided in Article 6.1 of the WTO TBT Agreement, that those procedures offered an 
assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to the own 
procedures of Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that as provided in 
Article 6 of the WTO TBT Agreement, such acceptance also could, for example, be achieved through the membership of Kazakhstan's national accreditation body in ILAC and the International 
Accreditation Forum (IAF) and signing of the ILAC Arrangement, which would build confidence in 
the adequacy and technical competence of the co nformity assessment bodies of third countries WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 193 - 
 
  accredited by other ILAC and IAF members, includin g acceptance of the results of such conformity 
assessment bodies, conclusion of a Mutual Recognition Agreement and other appropriate means.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
608.  Asked to provide information on international conformity assessment bodies which issued 
certificates that were recognised in Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan said that conformity certificates were mutually recognised in accordance with signed international 
agreements.  At present, such mutual recognit ion agreements existed only with CIS Parties – 
(i) the Agreement on the Coordinated Policy on Standardization, Metrology and Certification of 13 March 1992, which had established the Interstate Council for Standardization, Metrology and 
Certification (EASC) to carry out work on harmonizing standardization and conformity assessment 
legislation; and (ii) the Agreement on Principles of Mutual Recognition of Certification Activities 
with the CIS Countries of 4 June 1992, in the context of which Kazakhstan had agreed to 
recognise conformity certificates issued by CIS countries and to apply inter-governmental standards (GOST) alongside national standards ( SS RK).  Moreover, Kazakhstan planned to sign 
the draft Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Re sults of Accreditation of Test Laboratories 
(Centers) Conducting Conformity Assessment (Con firmation) Works of the CIS member-States.   
609.  In addition, in 2010 the National Center of A ccreditation (hereinafter - NCA) had become 
full member of ILAC and had signed the Multilat eral Agreement on Recognition of Testing Results 
(ILAC MRA).  In continuation of the work in this direction, on 3 February 2011 the NCA had signed 
an agreement with ILAC on the use of ILAC MRA Mark.  The NCA concluded the licence agreements 
on use of ILAC MRA Laboratory Mark, on the basis of which the contracts on the use of a combined MRA Laboratory Mark were concluded.  This MRA Mark signified that a laboratory issuing a testing 
report, a certificate of calibration/verification or other document, was accredited by the NCA, which 
was signatory of the ILAC MRA.  To date, 62 contracts with laboratories had been concluded.  The NCA was also a full member of the "Pacific Accreditation Cooperation" (PAC) organization, 
which was a regional organization of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), and a signatory 
to the PAC Multilateral Agreement on Products (MLA).  Membership in these organizations provided 
the basis for acceptance of test, inspection and calibration data issued by laboratories accredited 
by other ILAC and PAC members.  Moreover necessary procedures to join the IAF as a full member and join IAF Multilateral Agreement (MLA) had been completed.  The application was sent to the 
IAF Secretariat in 2012 and it would be considered in October 2013 at the IAF General Assembly.  
In the future, the NCA planned to continue its activity on joining multilateral agreements of the above-mentioned organizations in other areas. 
610.  Some Members of the Working Party noted the existence of bilateral agreements on 
standards with China and Turkey and asked whethe r the provisions of these bilateral agreements 
would be applied on a MFN basis.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the 
"Intergovernmental Agreement on Cooperation with the People's Republic of China on Quality Assurance and Mutual Inspection of Exported an d Imported Products" of 5 July 1996 provided for 
information exchange on legislation, conformity recognition and product supervision procedures WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 194 - 
 
  applicable to both sides.  To implement the pr ovisions of this Agreement, the two parties had 
signed a Memorandum on Mutual Understanding on 17 November 2006.  Also a Memorandum of Understanding between the Committee of Technical Re gulating of the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the State Department of Standardization of China had been signed on 1 September 2011 providing 
for development of cooperation in the sphere of standardization on the basis of internationally accepted principles.  Kazakhstan had also concluded inter-governmental bilateral agreements on 
cooperation in the area of standardization, metrology and certification with Armenia, Azerbaijan, 
Bulgaria, Israel, Qatar, Lithuania and Turkmenistan, as well as inter-departmental agreements between the Ministry of Industry and New Technolo gies and its counterparts in the Czech Republic, 
Germany, Moldova, Singapore and the Slovak Repub lic.  These bilateral agreements were aimed at 
removing technical barriers in mutual trade as well  as cooperating in the sphere of research and 
technology by means of mutual recognition of standardization, metrology and certification 
systems, including conformity certificates.  She said that Kazakhstan stood ready to negotiate a bilateral agreement on standards with any WTO Member.  She confirmed that upon 
WTO accession, Kazakhstan would provide WTO Members with MFN treatment in relation to the 
application of technical barriers to trade. 
611.  A Member expressed concerns regarding ap plication of Kazakhstan's conformity 
assessment procedure in practice, notably in the case  of veterinary drugs, noting that the resulting 
process seriously distorted trade, as it was time-consuming and costly, and as such was 
incompatible with the WTO TBT Agreement.  Some Members sought information on the 
requirement to receive separate permissions from the chief veterinarian to transport imports of 
veterinary drugs within Kazakhstan, even after obtaining a valid certificate of conformity.  
In response the Representative of Kazakhstan explained that currently veterinary drugs were not 
included into the Unified List of Products approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526 and, thus, were not subject to mandatory conformity assessmen t.  Veterinary drugs imported to Kazakhstan 
for the first time were subject to registration by th e Ministry of Agriculture.  She also added that in 
order to import veterinary drugs to Kazakhstan permission from the chief veterinarian was 
required.  However, permission from the chief vete rinarian was not required to transport imported 
pharmaceuticals within the country. 
612.  A Member requested more information on the im plementation of the provisions of the new 
Law "On Technical Regulation", enquiring specifically about the application of mandatory 
requirements in the area of telecommunications within the framework of the new legislation.  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the telecommunications sector, like all other 
sectors, fell within the coverage of the Law "O n Technical Regulation".  Accordingly, the Law 
"On Communications" had been amended, in particular Article 7 (stipulating the authority of the 
Government to approve technical regulations) and Article 16 (conformity assessment in the area of 
telecommunications).  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 195 - 
 
  - (d) Transparency 
613.  With regard to the transparency and publicat ion requirements of the WTO TBT Agreement, 
the representative of Kazakhstan said that, for administrative reasons, CU Parties established their own national enquiry points on technical regula tions and sanitary and phytosanitary measures.  
In case of Kazakhstan, the combined TBT/SPS Enquiry Point (Information Centre) had been 
established by Government Resolution "On the Rules on Creation and Functioning of the Enquiry 
Point on TBT/SPS" No. 718 of 11 July 2005 (hereina fter - the Rules on the Enquiry Point) under 
the Kazakhstan's Institute for Standardization and Certification, which was subordinate body of the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies.  Any interested party could approach the Enquiry Point for information.  
She also added that units responsible for providing information on SPS measures to the Enquiry Point had been appointed at the Ministri es of Agriculture and Heath.  According to 
paragraph 12 of the Rules on the Enquiry Poin t, government agencies submitted appropriate 
information on adoption and application of TBT and SPS measures to the Enquiry Point.  The main 
functions of the Enquiry Point for SPS and TBT measures were (i) interaction with the 
WTO Secretariat, WTO Members and international organizations to provide interested parties and foreign States with the following information and documents upon their request:  (a) copies of 
documents and information on adopted or proposed technical regulations, standards, sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures, amendments made to them, (b) conformity assessment procedures, (c) membership or participation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in international organizations and 
international treaties on standardization, SPS measures, conformity assessment, bilateral and 
multilateral accreditation, and (d) sources of publications of drafts, technical regulations, 
SPS measures and standards; and (ii) publication of notifications in the Enquiry Point's Journal.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that to date there were no plans to divide the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS into two separate  enquiry points.  The Enquiry Point could be 
contacted at:  
Address: Astana city, Left Bank district,  
  Orynbor st. 11, 
  Astana 010000, 
  Republic of Kazakhstan 
Telephone: +7 (7172) 22 66 63 
Fax:  +7 (7172) 20 64 81 
E-mail:  enquirypoint@mail.ru  
Website: www.wto.memst.kz 
614.  Adopted and draft regulations on TBT and SPS,  including CU technical regulations, were 
regularly published on the websites of the Enquiry Point, the Committee on Technical Regulation 
and Metrology, Ministries of Health and Agricultur e, local executive bodies and on the websites of 
accredited public associations.  These regulations were also published in the journal "Bulletin of the 
TBT/SPS Enquiry Point". 
615.  Draft technical regulations were developed an d examined by working groups, which were 
composed of representatives of State bodies, technical committees on standardization and other WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 196 - 
 
  interested parties (including public organizations, scientific unions, businesses and entrepreneurial 
associations).   
616.  In response to a Member's question on notification procedures in the CU, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that taki ng into account that CU members acceded to the 
WTO separately, each of them had separate obligations on notification.  Thus, Kazakhstan and CU Parties that were also WTO Members, in acco rdance with their commitments, would have to 
notify all draft CU technical regulations.  The noti fied drafts would be identical and subject to the 
same deadlines for comments.  All comments received from third countries would be sent by the CU members to the EEC.  The EEC was responsible for processing all the comments, publishing 
them on the official website of the Commission and forwarding them to developer of the draft 
technical regulations (relevant competent authority of the CU Party).  Thus, the process 
established within the CU ensured that there was no duplication in considering the comments 
received on draft documents. 
617.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, in accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 48, the period for public consultations for draft technical regulations had to be no less than 
60 days from the day of the placement of the draft technical regulation on the official website of 
the Commission.  Neither the Law "On Technical Regulation" nor the CU agreements and acts on 
standardization or technical regulation defined or  limited the number or character of interested 
persons who could submit commentary or suggestions to drafts of technical regulation.  
EEC Council Decision No. 48 explicitly provided for participation of all interested persons in public 
consultations.  She also noted that the relevant international agreements and other legal acts did not provide for any restrictions on foreign persons to participate in the public consultations of draft 
technical regulations as interested parties.  In accordance with the EEC Council Decision No. 48, 
interested persons, including persons from third countries, could submit their proposals and comments on draft CU technical regulations to the EEC.  According to paragraph 9 of EEC Council 
Decision No. 48, all proposals and comments  received from interested parties of the 
Customs Union and third countries, had to be publis hed by the EEC on the official website of the 
EEC upon their receipt.  The EEC sent all comment s and suggestions to the Developer of the draft 
technical regulation (relevant competent authority of the CU member) upon completion of the public discussion.  The Developer of the draft technical regulation revised the draft technical 
regulation and related documents taking into account the comments and proposals.  For each 
comment and proposal, the Developer of the draft technical regulation specified information on its acceptance or justification for its rejection.  The EEC ensured subsequent publication of the 
summary of comments on the draft technical regula tion, including decisions on each of them and 
reasons for such decisions, on the official website of the EEC.   
618.  A Member asked how Kazakhstan envisaged to cope with its forthcoming obligations 
resulting from the TBT Agreement, for example, noti fication of draft technical regulations, taking 
into account ongoing transfer of competences in the field of technical regulation to the CU.  
In response the representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan was actively involved in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 197 - 
 
  all works undertaken at the Customs Union level and could fulfil its commitments as a 
WTO Member, including the commitment to forward notification of draft CU technical regulations.  From the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, the TBT/SPS Enquiry Point would fulfil all 
obligations on notifications specified by the WTO Agreements on TBT and SPS, including 
notifications on the proposed technical regulations of the Customs Union to the WTO Secretariat and would provide WTO Members with copies of proposed technical regulations upon request.  
Moreover, in accordance with the Regulation  on Development, Adoption, Amendment and 
Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, during public consultations CU draft technical regulations and notifications about the commencement and completion of public 
consultations on draft CU technical regulation were  published on the official website of the EEC.  
The same information was also published on the official website and bulletin of the Committee on 
Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Republic  of Kazakhstan as well as the website of the 
Enquiry Point on TBT/SPS of the Republic of Kazakh stan.  Upon development of the first draft of a 
technical regulation or upon completion of public consultations, a developer of the draft technical 
regulation (a designated State body of Kazakhstan) prepared and sent the relevant notification to 
the Enquiry Point on TBT/SPS of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
619.  As for standards, these were developed by te chnical committees on standardization, which 
included Government representatives and interested parties (including public organizations, 
scientific unions, businesses and entrepreneurial associations).  Comments were taken into 
account in the process of finalising draft standards, and the agreement of all interested parties was 
sought.  All interested parties could request copies  of d raft s tand ard s , as  we l l as  c op ie s  of the 
comments received on a draft.  Following review and approval at the inter-agency committee 
level, the draft would be submitted to the Govern ment for approval.  Once adopted, the standard 
would be published in the "Code of Normative Acts of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and Government of Kazakhstan", the republican level newspaper, the official publication of the 
authorised body ("Technical Regulation Bullet in"), and on the web (http://www.memst.kz).  
A draft Plan on the development of standards wa s printed in the monthly "Informational Catalog 
(register) of Standards" (ICS), published by Commi ttee on Technical Regulation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to enable interested parties to submit comments on drafts.  Drafts were published in the official publication of the Committee.  In ad dition, two subordinate State enterprises of the 
Committee – the Kazakhstan's Institute of Standardization and Certification, and the Kazakhstan's 
Institute of Metrology issued periodic publications ("Gosstandard News", "Metrology", and "Monthly Informational Index of Standards").  Electronic ve rsions of the plans for development of technical 
regulations and standards were put on the we b at http://wto.memst.kz.  The EEC website, 
www.tsouz.ru, was the point of publication for do cuments related to the development, adoption, 
and application of CU technical regulations.   
620.  [The Representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would ensure that all laws, regulations, and other measures within the scope of the 
WTO TBT Agreement, such as technical regula tions, standards, and conformity assessment WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 198 - 
 
  procedures, applied in Kazakhstan complied with  the provisions of the WTO TBT Agreement.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
- Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
[to be completed]   
- Trade-Related Investment Measures 
621.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan applied local content 
requirements, in the form of preferences for purcha se of locally produced goods, with a view to 
diversifying the national economy.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation, local content 
requirements applied in procurement of goods and services13 by subsurface users within the 
framework of investment contracts in the oil and gas and mining sectors; in the automotive 
sector; in the procurement of the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" the National Managing Holding "KazAgro", the JSC "National Info-Communication Holding 'Zerde'", the JSC "National 
Scientific and Technological Holding 'Parasat'" and national companies, that do not belong to 
national managing holdings or national holdings (referred to in the Chapter on State Ownership, State-Trading Entities and Privatization); and in  procurement by other state owned enterprises 
under Law No. 303 "On Government Procurement" (referred to in the Chapter on Government 
Procurement). 
- TRIMs in the Oil and Gas and Mining Sectors 
622.  In the oil and gas and mining sectors, the requirement for local content was regulated by 
Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and its Use" of 24 June, 2010 (hereinafter:  Law No. 291-IV), 
which had replaced Law No. 2828 "On Subsurface and its Use" of 27 January 1996.  Pursuant to 
Article 69 of Law No. 291-IV, subsurface use contracts were concluded for a period determined in the project documentation for carrying out extrac tion works and contained provisions for the 
possibility to extend their term.  These contract s were required by the Law No. 291-IV to contain 
commitments for subsurface users to use domestically produced goods provided that they met the requirements of project documentation and legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on technical 
regulation.  Amendments to signed contracts were  subject to negotiations between the authorised 
body and the subsurface user, and could be intr oduced on the basis of consensus between the 
parties.   
623.  In accordance with Article 77 of Law No. 291-IV, the purchase of goods for conducting 
subsurface operations could be carried out by one of the following methods:  (1) open tender; 
(2) price offer request; (3) from a single source; (4) through the electronic procurement system; 
or (5) through commodity exchanges.  Article 78 of Law No. 291-IV stipulated a local content requirement and established that, when identifyin g an open tender winner, the tender organizer 
had to conditionally reduce by 20% the price of goods produced in Kazakhstan. 
                                               
13 The term "services" includes both services and work as those terms are used in Law No. 291-IV. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 199 - 
 
  624.  The procedure on the purchase of goods made  by subsurface users was specified in the 
Government Resolution No. 1139 "On Approval of Rules for Purchases of Goods and Services in Performance of the Subsurface Use Operations" of 28 November 2007.  In a tender process, the 
winner of competitive bid was determined on the basis of the lowest price in accordance with 
paragraph 62 Article 3 of this Resolution.  Preferences were granted to local producers of goods only when they fully met all the requirements of the bidding process and submitted documents 
that confirmed the local origin of goods.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that local 
content in goods was defined as a percentage value of domestic materials and inputs used in the value of finished goods produced on the territory of Kazakhstan
14.  The local origin of goods was 
verified with certificate "CT-KZ" issued by the Chamber of Commerce of Kazakhstan.  For example, 
in 2012, the share of local content in the total valu e of goods procured by subsurface users within 
the framework of investment contracts was 12.6%15.  Tender procedures had to take place in 
Kazakhstan.  Both national and foreign investors were equally entitled to participate in the bidding process.  In her view, such provisions were non-discriminatory and introduced an opportunity for 
imported goods.  However, not all subsurface us ers were fully compliant with their contractual 
obligations on local content requirement, which could result in penalties or termination of contracts.  In 2012, subsurface users paid ov er US$2.3 million in penalties, including US$1.2 
million with respect to purchases of goods. 
625.  In response to a question on the changes introduced by Law No. 291-IV, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that inter alia  Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and its Use" of 
24 June 2010 incorporated all the provisions on local content requirements contained in Law No. 2828 "On Subsurface and its Use" of 27 January 1996.  She further added that Law 
No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and its Use" of 24 June 2010 provided clarification on the definitions of 
local content in goods, services and workforce.  Particularly, two new terms had been introduced:  
(i) "a register of goods and services used in subsurface operations and their producers", which was 
a state information system established to control and monitor the purchase of goods and services 
used in subsurface operations and their producers, and (ii) a uniform methodology for calculation 
of local content by organizations procuring good s and services, which was the procedure approved 
by the Government of Kazakhstan.  According to  Article 76 of Law No. 291-IV, a subsurface user 
was required to submit an annual procurement programme and report on goods and services 
purchased for implementation of the investment contract.  
626.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that amendments made to Law No. 291-IV in 
January 2012 further clarified the existing re quirement for research and development (R&D) 
funding by a subsurface user with the purpose to develop knowledge-based industries producing 
high value-added goods and services.  She furthe r clarified that according to the amendments:  
                                               
14  The goods of Kazakhstan's origin were determ ined according to the Rules on Determining the 
Country of Origin of Goods, Drafting and Issuing Expertis e Acts on Origin of Goods and Issuing a Certificate of 
Origin of Goods adopted by the Resolution of the Go vernment of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1647 of 
22 October 2009.  
 
15 In 2012, the total procurement of goods made by subsurface users was equal to 758.3 billion tenge, 
including goods of Kazakhstan's origin  in the amount of 95.2 billion tenge. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 200 - 
 
  (i) a subsurface user's annual funding of R&D would not be less than 1% of aggregate annual 
income within the contractual activity; and (ii) funding would be channelled to Kazakhstan's producers of goods and services.  
627.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  Kazakhstan's economy was dominated by the 
production of hydrocarbon and mineral resources, an d the oil sector was the most attractive sector 
for both foreign and local investors.  Forecasts showed that the volume of foreign investments in 
oil production was continuously increasing, while other sectors of the economy remained 
underdeveloped.  Hence, her Government had introduced the local content requirement to encourage the use of domestically produced g oods in order to:  (i) ensure the rational 
restructuring of subsurface use; (ii) achieve sustainable economic development through economic 
diversification and reduction of the economy's high dependence on volatile world prices for exports 
of mineral resources; and (iii) create an environment conducive to development of processing 
industries and production of high value-added goods.  She emphasized the importance of the 
diversification programme for Kazakhstan's economy, and added that creating a favourable climate 
for development of processing industries was a priority for her Government. 
628.  She added that during the period of economic adversity in the early 1990s, in order to 
attract foreign direct investments and to develop Kazakhstan's unexplored oil fields, her 
Government had signed long-term (up to 40 years) investment contracts with major multinational 
oil companies, on terms which granted VAT and cu stoms duty exemptions for imported goods used 
in oil operations.  Since the terms of signed contracts could not be changed retroactively 
(i.e., pursuant to a contract stability clause), the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the provisions of Law No. 291-IV were aimed at offsetting the discriminatory effects of those earlier 
investment contracts which created a disadvantage for domestically produced goods, which 
remained subject to the payment of VAT. 
629.  Upon request of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan said that in accordance with 
Article 50 of Law No. 291-IV, the tender offers for obtaining rights to use subsurface for 
exploration, extraction, combined exploration and extraction, inter alia , had to contain the 
following proposals:  (i) local content in purchasing goods and services required for 
implementation of  the contract; (ii) obligations regarding local content in personnel, which had to increase to the extent of implementation of traini ngs thereof; and (iii) obligations on education of 
Kazakhstani personnel.  All these provisions had to be included into the subsurface use contracts. 
630.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, local content provisions were established 
individually in each subsurface use contract depending on the specifics of the goods required for its 
implementation.  Currently there were 565 contracts signed between the Government of 
Kazakhstan and subsurface users:  203 of whic h on crude hydrocarbons and 362 in the mining 
sector.  Of 203 contracts on crude hydrocarbons, 94 would expire by 2020 and 109 in the period 
from 2021 to 2053.  Of 362 contracts in the mining sector, 144 would expire by 2020 and 218 in the period from 2021 to 2060.  She further added that, of 203 contracts on crude hydrocarbons, 
193 contained numerical local content commitments set in percentage and 10 contained textual WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 201 - 
 
  local content commitments.  Of 362 contracts in the mining sector, 351 contained numerical 
commitments set in percentage and 11 contained textual local content commitments.  The typical textual commitment on local content in subsurface use contracts was as the following:  "To use 
equipment, materials and goods produced in the Re public of Kazakhstan provided that they meet 
the requirements of the project documentation and legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan".  
The typical numerical commitment text on local content was as the following:  "Size of the local 
content under the contract each fiscal year shall not be less than (...) % with respect to goods, not 
less than (...) % with respect to works and not less than (...) % with respect to services in conducting operations on subsurface". 
631.  A Member asked to explain how all WTO-inconsistent measures applied under investment 
contracts under the provisions of Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced and whether the 
future amendment to Law No. 291-IV would make only the WTO-inconsistent parts of measures of 
the contracts ineffective.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan requested the [X]-year transitional period starting from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO to 
phase-out WTO-inconsistent measures applied in existing subsurface use contracts under the 
provisions of Law No. 291-IV.  These measures would cease to be enforced through:  (i) introduction of the amendments to Law No.291-IV aimed at removing measures inconsistent 
with the WTO TRIMs Agreement with regard to proc urement of goods by the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO; and (ii) signing supplementary agreements with subsurface users, which 
would remove from investment contracts WTO TRIMs Agreement inconsistent measures with 
regard to procurement of goods and replace them with WTO TRIMs Agreement consistent measures by the date of expiration of the [X]-yea r transitional period starting from the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.   
- TRIMs in the Automotive Sector 
632.  Regarding the automotive sector, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal 
basis for preferential tariffs or tariff exemptions for imports of parts and components used for 
assembling motor vehicles and parts and components thereof under "industrial assembly" regime was established by the CU Common External Tari ff (CET) (as approved by the Decision of the 
Inter-State Council of EurAsEC No. 18 of 27 November 2009 and put into effect through the 
CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009) and in the relevant national legislation. 
633.  In Kazakhstan, industrial assembly agreements were concluded in accordance with the 
"Rules on Concluding the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles" approved by Order of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of  Industry and Trade" No. 113 of 11 June 2010 
(hereinafter:  Order No. 113).  According to these rules, industrial assembly of motor vehicles 
meant a system of serial production based on technological processes providing for project production capacity under two-shift operation of no  less than 25,000 pieces per year and featuring 
the following technical operations: 
- welding, assembly and painting of the body; 
- installation of cabin equipment; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 202 - 
 
  - installation of a power train, steering mechanism, and exhaust system; 
- installation of electrical equipment, suspension components; - installation of exterior elements; and - conducting control tests of finished motor vehicles. 
634.  Juridical persons that signed an agreement on industrial assembly qualified for preferential 
tariffs (from 0 to 5%) on the import of parts and components used in the assembly of automobiles 
under tariff lines of the CU Commo n External Tariff (CET) "for the industrial assembly of motor 
vehicles under headings 8701-8705, their components and assemblies" provided they met the 
following conditions: 
(1)  to have productive assets of at least 2 billion tenge as of the agreement signing date; and 
(2) to have an obligation in a period not exceeding 84 months from the signing date of the 
agreement: 
- to launch the industrial assembly of at least one model of the motor vehicles of 
CU HS heading 8703; 
- to import car parts originating from countries not party to the Customs Union under the 
tariff lines of the CU Common External Tariff (CET)"For the Industrial Assembly of Motor 
Vehicles under Headings 8701-8705, their Components and Assemblies" in volume of no more than 70% of the total value of the auto-components used in the production, taking 
into account the cost of the body, bein g classified in CU HS heading 8707. 
635.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that in the automotive sector in accordance with 
Order No. 113, to date four companies had concluded agreements on industrial assembly with the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies. Th ese companies were:  "AgromashHolding" JSC, 
"SAUR" JSC, "SaryarkaAvtoProm" LLP and "AziaAvto" JSC.  The agreements were signed in 2010 for a term of 8 years with the possibility of further extension.  In response to a Member's question, 
the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that Order No. 113 provided only for the assembly of 
automobiles under CU HS heading 8703.  These Ru les did not envisage industrial assembly of 
other types of motor vehicles or agricultural machinery.  In response to a specific question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the industrial assemblies of Peugeot and Toyota 
automobiles were launched under the existing industrial assembly agreements with 
"AgromashHolding", which would expire on 1 July 2018. 
636.  Some Members considered that the requirement to use domestically produced products 
was inconsistent with the WTO TRIMs Agreement.  These Members added that this requirement 
also appeared to constitute prohibited expo rt subsidies under Article 3.1 of the WTO SCM 
Agreement.  These Members asked Kazakhstan to  explain how it intended to bring existing 
legislation and existing contracts into conformity with WTO requirements.  These Members sought 
a commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of WTO accession, it would not maintain 
measures that would be in conflict with the WTO TRIMs Agreement nor enforce contract provisions 
that contained such measures. 
637.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that taking into account the importance of 
the application of the local content requirements for diversification of the economy in investment 
contracts concluded prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO under the provisions of Law WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 203 - 
 
  No. 291-IV and industrial assembly agreements concluded under the provisions of Order No. 113, 
a transitional period was required to phase-out these measures.  
638.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of its accession to the 
WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure that all laws, regulations and other measures applied in 
Kazakhstan that were within the scope of WTO TRIMs Agreement, whether adopted by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU, would be co nsistent with the relevant provisions of the 
WTO Agreement, including the TRIMs Agreement, except for measures applied under investment 
contracts concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012] under the provisions of the Law No. 291-IV, and industrial assembly agreements concluded under 
the provisions of the Order No. 113 prior to [the  date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] 
[31 December 2012].  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that from [the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012], Kazakhstan would not include in any 
new investment contracts or industrial assembly agreements concluded with investors in any sector, or include or maintain in the renewal of any existing investment contracts or industrial 
assembly agreements, provisions that are inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the 
WTO Agreement, including the TRIMs Agreement.   The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
639.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures applied 
under investment contracts concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] 
[31 December 2012] under the provisions of the Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced 
[by xxxx] [as of the date of expiration of the initia l duration of the contracts or as of the date of 
expiration of the [X]-year transitional period starting from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to 
the WTO, whichever takes place sooner].  She further confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent 
measures applied in accordance with industrial a ssembly agreements concluded prior to [the date 
of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012] under the provisions of the Order 
No. 113 would be eliminated by [1 July 2018].  [T he representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
with respect to the measures applied under the industrial assembly agreements pursuant to the 
Order No. 113 and under the investment contracts pursuant to the Law No. 291-IV concluded prior 
to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012], Kazakhstan would 
engage in consultations with interested WTO Members no later than [1 July 2016] and [[X Date], 
respectively], regarding WTO consistent measures that could be applied, and notify WTO Members 
of any measures planned to replace WTO-inconsistent measures at least six months prior to the adoption of any new measures.]  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Free Zones, Special Economic Areas 
640.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the establishment of Special Economic Zones 
(SEZs) was aimed primarily at attracting foreign direct investments; accelerating development of 
modern high technology industries, transport infrastructure, and tourism; increasing employment; 
and other purposes as defined in the legal document s establishing individual SEZs.  In Kazakhstan, 
Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 204 - 
 
  (hereinafter – 2011 Law on SEZs) had replaced Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Zones in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007.  The 201 1 Law on SEZs had invalidated the previous Law 
and now was the basic Law on SEZs.  Additional relevant provisions were contained in the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan and the Tax Code of Kazakhst an.  The representative of Kazakhstan further 
confirmed that, within the Customs Union established with Belarus and the Russian Federation, special economic zones were regulated by the Agre ement on Free (Special) Economic Zones on the 
Customs Territory of the Customs Union and the Customs Procedures of the Free Customs Zones 
of 18 June 2010 (hereafter the CU Agreement on SEZs), as well as by the CU Customs Code and other CU legal instruments.  She continued that the CU Agreement on SEZs provided the general 
framework within the CU for rules on establishment and operation of new SEZs, and application of 
provisions of the Agreement to existing SEZs, including provisions on customs regime of the free 
customs zone on the territory of SEZs. 
641.  Working Party Members requested further information on the current rules of 
establishment and operation of the SEZs established and administered under Kazakhstan's new 
Law on SEZs, as well as information to help them assess whether the zones met 
WTO requirements.  Members also sought information about the relationship between Kazakhstan's 2011 Law on SEZs and the provisions  of the CU Agreement on SEZs which entered 
into force on 1 July 2010.  Information was also requested on current status of the six SEZs 
previously established under Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007, and whether they were now operated in accordance with the current 
legislation.  Working Party Members also asked for details on how WTO obligations would be enforced in all the SEZs operating on the territory of Kazakhstan after accession, in particular 
whether Articles I and III of the GATT 1994 would be applied, and whether incentives granted to 
firms established in the SEZs would be based on export performance or local content requirements.  Other issues raised by Members in this connection concerned the need to restore 
any tariffs or taxes from goods or inputs imported from non-CU Parties used in the manufacturing 
process in the SEZs to goods eventually exported to the rest of Kazakhstan or the territory of 
other CU Parties, even if imported inputs had been  transformed sufficiently to meet the criteria as 
domestic goods.  One Member stated that, in its view, there was no level of transformation sufficient to eliminate the need to restore exempt ed duties and taxes on inputs imported from 
non-CU Parties into the SEZ duty- and tax-free, as rules of origin operated between countries, not 
parts of countries.  Other Members sought information on what other benefits, if any, in terms of tax exemptions or otherwise, were available to firms that located in the SEZs.   
- (a) Customs Union Regulation of SEZs 
642.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, as previously stated, the SEZs established in 
K a z a k h s t a n  u n d e r  t h e  n a t i o n a l  L a w  o n  S E Z s  c o n f o r m e d  t o  C U  r e q u i r e m e n t s  f o r  S E Z s  a s  w e l l ,  
including those set-out in the CU Agreement on SEZs and the CU Customs Code.  This Agreement 
and the CU Customs Code provided the general fram ework within the CU for SEZs, but left specific 
regulations on their operation establishment, mana gement, extension, early termination, types of 
SEZs, and types of activities allowed in SEZs to be determined by the national legislation of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 205 - 
 
  CU Parties.  In many cases, the CU and national regimes worked together to establish the specific 
elements of the CU regime for SEZs.  For ex ample, while national laws provided for the 
registration of residents of the SEZs and national authorities would maintain a national register of 
such residents, however, the CU Agreement provid ed that the CU Parties were required to send 
the information on SEZ operations and the register of residents to the CU Commission, which in turn created and published a common CU register of residents.  The CU Commission had the right 
to decide what economic activities and operations could be prohibited within SEZs in addition to 
those prohibited by each CU Party in its SEZs.   
643.  In response to Members' questions, the representative of Kazakhstan also explained that 
according to Article 1 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, a free (special) economic zone was defined as 
a part of the territory of the CU Party within the boundaries determined by the legislation of the 
CU Party, where a special (special legal) regime for entrepreneurial and other activities was in 
effect, and customs regime of free customs zone could be applied.  The CU Agreement on SEZs 
also confirmed that the territories of SEZs were zones under customs control and that customs 
regime of free customs zone as defined by the CU Customs Code and the CU Agreement on SEZs 
was applied to goods placed in SEZs.  She explained that the customs authorities of Kazakhstan were responsible for customs control in SEZs according to the national legislation.  
644.  Prior to the enactment of the CU Agreement on SEZs, foreign and Kazakhstani goods had 
entered the territory of SEZs without obtaining a permission from the customs authorities.  
Such goods were only subject to regular customs clearance procedures when entering the customs 
regime of the free customs zone.  Currently, acco rding to the CU Agreement on SEZs, goods could 
be imported into and exported from the SEZ te rritory only with the permission of customs 
authorities.  In response to a Member's ques tion about the legislation that described the 
procedures for issuing permits, the representative  of Kazakhstan said that the Customs Control 
Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan had developed a draft Resolution "On Some Issues of 
Application of the Customs Procedure of Free Customs Zone", which established procedures for 
issuing permits for the importation and exportation of goods into/from the territory of SEZ, as well 
as forms for these documents.  According to the draft resolution, for obtaining a permit for 
importation of goods into the SEZ territory, SEZ residents submitted to the customs authorities copies of commercial, transport (shipping) or customs documents in respect of imported goods 
that contained information required for customs control of goods and vehicles.  Based on 
verification of the documents against the actual data, the customs authorities made a decision on the import of the goods and the means of transportation to the SEZ. 
645.  Pursuant to Article 10 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, a "free customs zone" regime was 
defined as the customs procedure within SEZ borders, under which foreign goods were placed and 
used within the territory of SEZ or its part without paying customs duties and taxes and were not 
subject to non-tariff regulation; goods of the Customs Union were placed and used within the territory of a SEZ or its part without application of bans and restrictions to them. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 206 - 
 
  646.  Article 10 of the CU Agreement on SEZs also provided that goods that incorporated 
imported inputs and were manufactured by SEZ residents registered prior to 1 January 2012, could be recognised as Customs Union goods up until 1 January 2017, i.e., they could be sold into 
the rest of the customs territory of the Cust oms Union without paying the exempted customs 
duties on imported inputs, provided such imported  inputs had been substantially transformed, i.e. 
they met any of the following conditions listed  in Article 19 of the CU Agreement on SEZs:  
(i) manufacturing had changed the HS classification code of the good at the level of  
any of the first four-digits;  
(ii) its transformation was recognised as sufficiently implementing a predetermined list 
of conditions, production and technological or manufacturing operations, necessary 
to be recognised as goods of the Customs Union;  
(iii) the percentage share of the value adde d had reached a predetermined share of the 
price of the final good (the rule of ad valorem  share) or the percentage share of 
the cost of foreign goods did not exceed a predetermined share.  
647.  The CU Commission had the right to decide by consensus:  (i) the list of conditions and 
operations for goods manufactured in SEZs, incorp orating imported goods that were, or were not, 
sufficient for these goods to be recognised as goods of the Customs Union, and (ii) the procedure 
for using the rule of ad  valorem  share as a criterion of sufficient processing for these goods to be 
recognised as goods of the Customs Union.  The rule of ad valorem  share could not be applied to 
repairs of the goods of the Customs Union done in the SEZs.  Goods would not be recognised as 
Customs Union goods, if the transforming operations applied, did not meet the criteria for sufficient processing established by the CU Commis sion.  The national authority, as defined by 
national legislation, carried out the determination of the status of the goods in accordance with the 
rules of the CU Agreement on SEZs, issued the relevant legal findings and enforced them.  In case of Kazakhstan, this national authority was the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies. 
648.  In response to a Member's request to clarify what were the predetermined shares used as 
a sufficient processing criterion, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that an ad valorem  share 
rule was established by CU Commission Decision No. 115.  According to this Decision, goods 
produced with the use of foreign goods placed under the customs procedure of free customs zone or a free warehouse customs procedure (hereinafter – foreign goods) were considered as 
sufficiently processed if the percentage share of the cost of foreign goods used in the manufacture 
of the final product did not exceed 50% of the price of the final product.  The cost of foreign goods 
placed under the customs procedure of free customs zone or free warehouse customs procedure, 
and used in the manufacturing of the final product, was determined as a the customs value of such 
goods, established on the date the customs author ities registered the customs declaration filed for 
placing goods under the customs procedure of free customs zone or free warehouse customs 
procedure.  The price of the final product was determined on ex-works conditions.  She further added that, currently, Kazakhstan applied national sufficient processing criteria established by the 
Resolution of the Government of the Republic of  Kazakhstan No. 1647 "On Approval of the Rules of 
Determining the Country of Origin of Goods, Drafting and Issuing Expertise Acts on Origin of Goods and Issuing a Certificate on Origin of Goods" of 22 October 2009.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 207 - 
 
  649.  She stated that Article 17 of the CU Agreement on SEZs established procedures for 
payment of customs duties and taxes applied to goods exported from the territories of SEZs.  
In particular, goods of the CU exported from SEZs  into the rest of the CU customs territory were 
not subject to payment of customs duties, including export duties.  Goods of the CU exported from 
SEZs to locations outside of the CU customs terri tory were subject to payment of export customs 
duties, if applicable.  When calculating export duty , the duty rate itself, value of goods and (or) the 
physical characteristics of in-kind (number, mass, volume or other characteristics), as well as the 
quantity of goods and the exchange rate, establis hed in accordance with the legislation of the 
CU Party, were determined on the day of regi stration by customs authorities of the customs 
declaration, submitted for placing goods under customs regime of export.  As for foreign goods, 
they were subject to payment of import customs duties and VAT when exported from SEZs into 
the rest of the CU customs territory.  When foreign goods were exported from SEZs to locations 
outside of the CU customs territory export duties and VAT were not levied.  She further stated that goods produced (processed) in the SEZs by residents registered prior to 1 January 2012 
incorporating imported components, but recognis ed as goods of the CU based on sufficient 
processing criteria, i.e., substantial transformation, were not subject to payment of customs duties 
when exported from SEZs into the rest of th e CU customs territory.  These latter provisions 
expired on 1 January 2017. 
- (b) Basic Law on SEZs 
650.  The previous national law regulating special economic zones, Law No. 274 "On Special 
Economic Zones" (SEZs) provided that SEZs could be established for a period of not more than 
25 years and administered by the Customs authorit ies as customs regimes of "free customs zone" 
within the SEZs borders.  Foreign and Kazakhstani goods placed in a SEZ and used there were 
exempt from customs duties and taxes, except fo r excise tax applied to imports.  Other than 
safety requirements, no non-tariff regulatory meas ures were applied.  When goods were exported 
from the territory of SEZs to another country, neit her taxes nor tariffs were charged.  When goods 
incorporating foreign components were exported to the rest of Kazakhstan, import duties were not applied, provided they met the sufficient proce ssing criteria.  The SEZ origin of goods was 
confirmed by a certificate of origin.  When such certificate of origin was not available, the goods 
were considered to be either Kazakhstani (when exported from Kazakhstan to third countries) or 
foreign (when imported into the rest of Kazakhstan). 
651.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Law on SEZs, which applied starting 
in 2011, stipulated procedures for establishing and operating SEZs on the territory of Kazakhstan.  
SEZs were considered a part of the territory of  Kazakhstan with defined boundaries within which 
the Government applied a special regime for conducti ng priority types of activities.  Within a SEZ, 
a special customs and tax regime was established for foreign and domestic goods imported into 
the SEZ from (a) the rest of the CU territory, an d (b) third countries, and to goods exported from 
the SEZ to (a) the rest of the CU territory, and (b) third countries.  Kazakhstan's products and 
products of the CU countries were treated as do mestic goods for the purpose of applying customs 
duties when placed under the customs regime of  free customs zones, i.e. were not subject to WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 208 - 
 
  customs duties.  As for VAT, CU Protocols and the Agreement (see section on "Application of 
Internal Taxes on Imports") established that imports among CU Parties would be subject to VAT.  However, Article 21 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, which supersedes Kazakhstan's national 
legislation, indicated that goods from CU count ries placed under the customs regime of free 
customs zone would be eligible for zero rate VAT provided that a copy of the customs declaration certified by customs authorities in accordance with which such goods were placed under the 
customs procedure of customs-free zone was submitted.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
emphasized that only goods included into the list of goods that are required for a SEZ participant to carry out priority activities could be placed under the customs regime of free customs zone, i.e. 
be exempted from payment of import duties an d VAT.  These lists of goods were defined in a 
Contract on conducting activity signed with each SEZ participant.  The Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies was the relevant authorised body administering the establishment, operation 
and termination of SEZs on the territory of Kazakhstan.   
652.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that according to the 2011 
Law on SEZs, central or local executive bodies, and juridical persons of Kazakhstan could submit a 
proposal on establishment of a SEZ to the comp etent authority, which contained the information 
on the purpose of the SEZ, priority business acti vities, current economic situation in the region, 
where the SEZ will be located, and the forecasted impact on the economy.  Upon approval of the 
proposal by the competent authority, the entity had to conduct a feasibility study for the proposed 
SEZ with the assessment of the effect on the environment.  Upon approval of findings of the 
feasibility study by all relevant Government agencies, the competent authority submitted the proposal on establishment of a SEZ to the Government.  A decision on establishment of a SEZ and 
on priority business activities that correspond to the objectives of the SEZ was adopted by the 
President based on the proposal of the Government.   
653.  Pursuant to Article 8 of the 2011 Law on SEZs, an SEZ could be established for a period of 
up to 25 years.  The term of operation of each SEZ was determined in a Presidential Decree on 
creation of that particular SEZ.  The land plots on which SEZs were established and used for 
conducting priority activities were leased to the prospective SEZ operators in accordance with the 
land legislation of Kazakhstan for the term for which a particular SEZ was established.  Normally, a SEZ was liquidated upon expiration of its term. In case of failure to reach the target indicators of a 
SEZ by its residents, a SEZ could be terminated by the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
based on the proposal of the Government.  The re presentative of Kazakhstan stated that once a 
SEZ was established, investors could apply to become a SEZ resident, i.e. to be registered as a 
legal entity eligible for a special tax regime and other conditions more favourable than those 
available to legal entities in the rest of the customs territory, and conclude agreements that 
specified terms of their activities within a SEZ.  The list of documents that had to be submitted by 
an applicant was described in Article 10 of the 2011 Law on SEZs.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that foreign invested firms irrespective of the percentage of foreign 
participation could be registered as SEZ residents subject to fulfillment of respective requirements 
applied on a non-discriminatory basis to all applicants.  An applicant had to have financial WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 209 - 
 
  resources and other property in an amount specified in the feasibility study report and its business 
activity had to correspond to the objectives and legitimate activities in a SEZ.  
654.  The following entities could not apply to conduct an activity within the SEZs: 
 1. subsoil users; 
 2. entities producing excisable goods, except for entities that produce, assemble  
  excisable goods stipulated in sub-paragraph 6 of Article 279 of the Tax Code;  3. entities using special tax regimes;  4. entities that were granted investment tax preferences; and 
 5. entities involved in gambling business.  
655.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that the Law on SEZs envisaged the creation 
of managing companies in the form of joint-st ock companies.  The following individuals could 
become founders of a managing company:   
 1. the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
 2. local executive bodies of oblasts, ci ty of a Republican status, capital city; 
 3. non-State juridical persons; or 
4. foreign juridical persons with an experience in managing SEZ in other countries or 
in Kazakhstan. 
656.  Pursuant to the 2011 Law on SEZs, in the event a SEZ was established on the initiative of 
central or local executive bodies, the State retained ownership of at least 50% of the voting shares 
issued by the managing company, unless otherwise provided in the Presidential Decree on the establishment of the SEZ.  If the SEZ was established on the initiative of a non-State juridical 
person, the State retained ownership of at least 26%  of the voting shares issued by the managing 
company.  The specified legal form of a managing company allowed investors to participate in the 
share capital of the managing company, and thus, to participate in the management of project 
implementation and to ensure transparency of procedures applied within SEZ.   
657.  According to the 2011 Law on SEZs, a "single window" had been introduced for the 
provision of public services within SEZs, which envisaged simplified procedures for preparation and 
submission of documents.  
658.  The six existing SEZs created under Law No. 274 of 6 July 2007 had adopted the 
operational and administrative provisions of the 2011 Law on SEZs when that Law had come into 
force (see Annex 18 for a list of the current SEZs and their purposes).   
- (c) Customs and Tax Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
659.  The representative of Kazakhstan further note d that a new Tax Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan that entered into force in January 2009 established a uniform approach to tax 
preferences granted for SEZ residents, including the residents of SEZs created under Law No. 274 
of 6 July 2007.  In addition to customs duty exemptions, Article 151 of the Tax Code provided for 
reduction by 100% of the corporate income tax rate, zero coefficient to related rates in calculation 
of the land tax, and 0% rate to the average value of the property subject to taxation in calculation 
of the property tax.  Moreover, in accordance with Article 244-2 of the Tax Code, sales to the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 210 - 
 
  territory of a SEZ of goods that were included in  the list of goods determined by the Government 
and fully consumed in conducting business activities that meet the purposes of the SEZ were to be taxed at zero rate of VAT.  The latter provision was aimed at equalizing the treatment provided to 
goods imported to SEZs from the territory of Kazakhstan with the treatment provided to foreign 
goods described in paragraph [645] of this section. 
660.  Pursuant to Article 150 of the Tax Code, to be eligible for tax preferences, SEZ residents 
had to comply with the following requirements:  (i) be registered at the tax authorities within a 
SEZ territory; (ii) have no structural divisions outside of a SEZ territory; and (iii) of the total annual income from sales of goods of own production (works, services), derive at least 90% from 
the activities that complied with the objectives of a SEZ.  Business activities that complied with the 
objectives of SEZs were identified in Article 150 of the Tax Code and included projects aimed at 
development of the IT industry; textile industry  and production of leather goods; chemical 
industry; metallurgical industry; machinery building, including production of vehicles, trailer trucks and two-wheel trailers; production of railroad engines and rolling stock; production of electric 
equipment and household appliances; pharmaceut icals industry; food production; paper and 
furniture production; aviation industry; petroc hemical industry and related industries and 
technologies; and tourism services.   
661.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan's legislation provided uniform 
requirements both for domestic and foreign companies to be eligible for tax and customs 
preferences in SEZs.  
662.  A Member said that Kazakhstan's SEZs were authorised by legislation that contained 
provisions for granting special benefits contingent on export orientation and/or import substitution 
of enterprises.  This Member held the view that, these provisions violated both the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, as well as the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures, and, therefore, should be eliminated.  This Member sought a 
commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would ensure the 
enforcement of its WTO obligations in SEZs existing or established within its territory, including the 
prohibition of TRIMs or subsidies based on the us e of domestic goods or export performance.  
Kazakhstan was also asked to confirm that the right of firms to establish and operate in these zones would not depend on export performance, trade balancing, or local content criteria.  
In addition, Kazakhstan needed to ensure that goods produced in the SEZs under tax and tariff 
provisions that exempted imports and imported inputs from tariffs and certain taxes would be 
subject to normal customs formalities when entering the rest of Kazakhstan, including the 
application of tariffs and taxes. 
663.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that both criteria related to export performance 
and import substitution had been removed by Decree of the President of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 657 "On Amendments to Decrees of the President Nos. 853 and 1166 of 26 April 2002 and 18 August 2003 respectively".  According to Decree of the President No. 657, 
the term "export oriented production" used in legislation that regulated SEZs had been changed to WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 211 - 
 
  the term "competitiveness", while the term "impor t substitution" had been removed from the texts 
of the Decrees.  In addition, the Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1376 "On Approval of the Regulation on Establishmen t and Allocation of Finances of the Fund for 
Economic and Social Development of Special Ec onomic Zones" of 26 September 1997 had been 
revoked.  Furthermore, there were no provisions re lated to the right to establish an enterprise in a 
SEZ that were made contingent upon export perf ormance and/or import substitution contained in 
the 2011 Law on SEZs, the CU Agreement on SEZs, or any of the Presidential Decrees relating to 
SEZs.  
664.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that at the moment nine SEZs were operational in 
Kazakhstan:  "Astana-New City", "Seaport Aktau", "Informational Technologies Park", "Ontustyk", 
"National Industrial Petrochemical Techno-Park", "Burabai", "Saryarka", "Pavlodar" and 
"Horgos-East Gates".  The first six of thes e had been established under Law No. 274 of 
6 July 2007.  Their terms and periods of operation were now regulated by the 2011 Law on SEZs.  The other three were established as SEZs under the 2011 Law on SEZs (see Annex 18 for more 
information on these zones). 
- (d) Free Warehouse Customs Regime 
665.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that establishment and operation of free 
warehouses on the territory of Kazakhstan were regulated by the CU Agreement "On Free 
Warehouses and Free Warehouse Customs Procedure" of 18 June 2010 (hereinafter – the 
Agreement on Free Warehouses).  According to this Agreement, a free warehouse was a 
construction (building), within which foreign goods and goods of the Customs Union placed under 
the customs regime of a free warehouse, as well as other goods in accordance with the 
Agreement, could be placed and used.  She added that according to Article 8 of the Agreement on 
Free Warehouses, a free warehouse customs regime was a customs regime under which foreign 
goods were placed and used without payment of customs duties and taxes, as well as without 
application of non-tariff regulatory measures; an d goods of the Customs Union were placed and 
used without application of bans and restrictions.  Goods banned for importation into the 
Customs Union territory or for exportation from the Customs Union territory could not be placed 
under free warehouse customs regime.    
666.  She further explained that according to the Agreement on Free Warehouses, the owner of 
a free warehouse was a juridical person of the Customs Union Party which was registered in 
accordance with the national legislation of the relevant Party  and met the requirements established 
in Article 4 of the Agreement.  The juridical person was recognised as an owner of a free 
warehouse upon inclusion of that person by customs authorities into the Register of free 
warehouse owners (hereinafter - the Register).  The procedures for including and excluding owners of free warehouses into/from the Register were established in the Resolution of the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1086 of 22 September 2011.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 212 - 
 
  667.  Pursuant to Article 11 of the Agreement on Free Warehouses, the following operations 
could be performed at free warehouses: 
(i) storage (stockpiling, splitting) of the goods; 
(ii) loading (unloading) of goods and other cargo operations associated with storage; 
(iii) operations to ensure safety of goods,  as well as simple operations on preparing 
goods for shipment and sale, including fragmentation of the consignments, formation of shipments, sorting, packaging, repackaging, labelling, operations to improve product quality; 
(iv) processing operations as a result of which goods lose their individual 
characteristics, and (or) manufacturing and production of goods (including assembly, disassembly, installation, adjustme nt), as well as repair operations; or 
(v) operations involving transactions on transfer of ownership, use and (or) disposal 
rights for these products.   
668.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in accordance with Article 8 of the 
CU Agreement on Free Warehouses, foreign goods placed under the customs regime of a free 
warehouse retained the status of foreign goods, and goods of the Customs Union placed under the 
customs regime of a free warehouse retained the status of the goods of the Customs Union.   
669.  Article 14 of the CU Agreement on Free Warehouses established procedures for payment of 
customs duties and taxes applied to goods exported from the free warehouses.  In particular, 
goods of the CU exported from free warehouses into  the rest of the CU customs territory, were not 
subject to payment of customs duti es, including export duties.  Goods with the status of goods of 
the CU exported from free warehouses to locations outside of the CU customs territory were subject to payment of export customs duties, wher e applicable.  When calculating export duty, the 
duty rate itself, value of goods and (or) the physical characteristics of in-kind (number, mass, 
volume or other characteristics), as well as the quantity of goods and the exchange rate, established in accordance with the CU Customs Code and the legislation of the CU Party, were 
determined on the day of registration by cu stoms authorities of the customs declaration, 
submitted for placing goods under the customs regime  of export.  As for foreign goods, they were 
subject to payment of import customs duties an d VAT when exported from free warehouses into 
the rest of the CU customs territory.  When fo reign goods were exported from free warehouses 
outside of the CU customs territory, export duties and VAT were not levied.  She further stated 
that goods produced (processed) in free warehouses whose owners were included into the Register 
prior to 1 January 2012 incorporating imported components and recognised as goods of the CU were not subject to payment of customs duties when exported from free warehouses into the rest 
of the CU customs territory.  The latter provis ion expired on 1 January 2017.  Goods produced 
(processed) with the use of foreign goods could be  recognised as Customs Union goods if they met 
the following criteria of sufficient processing descr ibed in Article 16 of the CU Agreement on Free 
Warehouses:  
(i) manufacturing had changed the goods' HS classification code at the level of any 
first four-digits;  
(ii) its transformation was recognised as sufficiently implementing a predetermined list 
of conditions, production and technological or manufacturing operations, necessary to be recognised as goods of the Customs Union; and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 213 - 
 
  (iii) the percentage share of the value adde d had reached a predetermined share of the 
price of the final good (the rule of ad valorem  share); or the percentage share of 
the cost of foreign goods did not exceed a predetermined share in the price of the final good.  
670.  The list of conditions and operations for goods manufactured in free warehouses 
incorporating imported goods that were, or were not, sufficient for these goods to be recognised as 
goods of the Customs Union was adopted by the CU Commission by consensus.  The CU 
Commission also approved the procedure for using the rule of ad valorem  share as a criterion of 
sufficient processing for these goods to be recognised as goods of the Customs Union. 
671.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that according to the national 
legislation of Kazakhstan, goods that were produced in free warehouses and sold from these areas 
to the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan we re exempt from VAT if they met the sufficient 
processing criteria adopted by the Government of  the Republic of Kazakhstan and were included 
into the list of products adopted by the Government  of Kazakhstan.  This preference was provided 
in accordance with Article 49 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 100-IV "On Entering 
Into Force of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Taxes and Other Mandatory Payments to 
the Budget'" of 10 December 2008 and the Resolu tion of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 133 
"On the List of Goods Produced in the Territory  of Free Warehouse and Sold by the Owner of a 
Free Warehouse in the Territory of the Republic  of Kazakhstan, Sales Turnover of which are 
Exempted from VAT, and the List of Goods Produced  in the Territory of Free Warehouse and Sold 
from this Territory to the Rest of the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 19 January 2012.  
According to the Tax Code, the preference would expire on 1 January 2017. 
672.  According to Article 7 of the Resolution of th e Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 1647 "On Approval of the Rules of Determining the Country of Origin of Goods, Drafting and 
Issuing Expertise Acts on Origin of Goods and Issuing a Certificate on Origin of Goods" of 22 October 2009, goods were considered as meeting sufficient processing criteria if one of the 
following conditions were fulfilled:   
- processing of goods results in a change of the HS code at a level of any of first four-digits; 
- fulfillment of certain industrial and technological operations sufficient to recognise a 
country where these operations took place as a country of origin of these goods; or 
- changes in the cost of a good when the percentage share of the cost reaches a fixed share 
of the price of the finished good ( ad valorem  percentage rule).  
Resolution No. 1647 described the terms, manufacturing and technological operations required for 
a good to acquire an origin status when goods imported from third countries were used in a 
production process. 
673.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that currently 59 juridical persons were registered 
as free warehouse owners in Kazakhstan.  Their operations were specialised primarily in the 
following activities:  assembly of vehicles, assembly of agricultural machines and equipment, food 
production, and production of construction materials.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 214 - 
 
  674.  Members recalled that substantial transformation and local content level could not be 
applied to goods produced or processed in SEZs or free warehouse customs regimes with imported goods from non-CU countries for the purpose of exempting these goods from application of 
customs duties or taxes when sold into the rest of Kazakhstan.  These imported inputs should 
re-acquire their tariffs or taxes when entering Kazakhstan or CU territory, whether or not they 
have been processed in SEZs or free warehouses and transformed into other products.  In their 
view, to treat these imported inputs differently for tax or tariff purposes would not be consistent 
with Article I of the GATT 1994, and exempting these charges based on an assessment of local 
content (substantial transformation criteria) could constitute a prohibited subsidy.  Members asked 
Kazakhstan to eliminate these provisions and to operate its SEZs and free warehouses in 
conformity with WTO provisions.   
675.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, subject to the exceptions that applied 
for the transition periods specified below in respec t of the goods of juridical persons registered in 
SEZs and/or operating free warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, SEZs and free 
warehouses in Kazakhstan would be established, maintained and administered from the date of 
accession in conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agreement.  She added that Kazakhstan 
would apply the provisions of the WTO Agreement in  all of its SEZs and in the operation of free 
warehouses.  
676.  With respect to local content requirements, sufficient processing, i.e., substantial 
transformation, and exemptions from tariffs and taxes, the goods of juridical persons which had 
been registered and active in SEZs and free warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, would continue to enjoy the treatment described in paragraphs [646], [649], [669], and 
[671] of this Report, during the transition period ending on [xxxx].  Upon expiration of the 
transition period, firms registered in SEZs and operating these free warehouses would not be subject to export performance, trade balancing, or local content criteria requirements, in law or in 
practice, nor would any new firms registering in SEZs or to operate a free warehouse be subject to 
such requirements.  In addition, goods imported into free warehouses and SEZs under provisions 
that exempt imports from non-CU Parties from customs duties and certain taxes, which were then 
released to the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan  and the territory of the CU, would be subject to 
those duties and taxes as applicable and custom s formalities when entering the rest of the 
territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the CU.  If those imported goods were reprocessed, 
i.e., substantially transformed, within the territory  of a SEZ or in a free warehouse, the duties and 
taxes that would otherwise have been assessed for those goods were to be paid when the final 
products entered the rest of the territory of Kaza khstan and the territory of the CU.  The Working 
Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Government Procurement 
677.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that government procurement was governed by: 
the Law No. 303 "On Government Procurement" (h ereinafter – the Law No. 303) of 21 July 2007 
as last amended in April 2012 by Law No. 15-V, Government Resolution No. 1301 "On Rules for WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 215 - 
 
  Holding Government Procurement" of 27 December 2007, Government Resolution No. 623 
"On Approval of the Rules for Holding Electronic  Government Procurement" of 15 May 2012, and 
Government Resolution No. 1301 "On the Determination of State Support for Domestic Categories 
of Potential Suppliers" of 27 December 2007.  The above legislation had been developed taking 
into account the requirements of international law, specifically the Model Law of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).   
678.  Kazakhstan's government procurement legislation was aimed at developing of fair 
competition among potential suppliers, providing equal opportunities for potential suppliers to participate in government procurement, optimal and effective expenditure of cash assets used for 
Government, and providing publicity and transparen cy of the government procurement process.  
The body responsible for development and implem entation of State policy in the area of 
government procurement was the Ministry of Finance. 
679.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  pursuant to the Law No. 303, government 
procurement was defined as purchases made by customers of goods and services
16 essential for 
their operation, performance of State functions or customer's statutory activity, conducted in 
accordance with Law No. 303 and civil legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, except for the 
services purchased from natural persons under employment contracts or from natural persons not 
involved in entrepreneurial activity, on the base of paid services contracts, in the framework of 
fulfilment of State tasks and contributions, incl uding contributions to the capital stock of newly 
established juridical persons.  Customers are State bodies, State agencies, as well as State 
enterprises17, juridical persons and any affiliates thereof, with 50 or more per cent of voting shares 
held by the Government, except for national managing holdings, national holdings, national 
managing companies and national companies, and their affiliated entities, including the National 
Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", which was a national managing holding.  
680.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the process of government procurement 
included the following stages:  (i) elaboration an d approval of an annual government procurement 
plan; (ii) selection of a supplier and conclusion of a State procurement contract; and (iii) fulfilment 
of the State procurement contract.  
681.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that government procurement could be conducted 
through the following methods:  (i) tender; (ii) one source procurement; (iii) supplier selection on 
the basis of price quotation requests; (iv) auctio n; and (v) commodity exchange.  The method for 
conducting government procurement could be selected by the customer without coordination with the Ministry of Finance.  Government procurement by auction and price quotation requests could 
be conducted only in electronic format.  Government procurement by tender and one source 
methods could be conducted in both paper and electronic formats.  From 1 July 2012, government 
procurement by tender would be conducted only in electronic format.  The lists of goods eligible for 
                                               
16 The term "services" included both "services" and "works" as those terms were used in the legislation 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 216 - 
 
  procurement through auction, one source, and commodity exchange were found in 
Annexes 19 (a), (b) and (c).  
682.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the tender was the main method of 
government procurement and could be used in all cases.  Government procurement by the one 
source method could be conducted in the following cases:  (i) State enterprises and juridical persons and affiliates thereof, with 50 or more per cent of voting shares held by the Government, 
needed to conduct other purchases from the same supplier for the purposes of unification, 
standardisation or ensuring of compatibility with already purchased goods, equipment, technology or services; (ii) the government procurement by tender method had been recognised as invalid; 
(iii) there was a necessity to conduct government procurement of goods and services of daily and 
(or) weekly needs as an interim measure wh ile the results of the ongoing government 
procurement by tender were concluded and entere d into force; or (iv) measures provided by 
L aw N o. 3 0 3 that we re und e rtake n by a c us tomer d id  not re sult in c onc lu s ion of a g ove rnme nt procurement contract by method of price quotation requests.  Government procurement by the 
price quotation request method had to be conducted in relation to like goods and services in cases 
where the volume of such goods and services did not exceed 4,000 MCI established for the 
relevant fiscal year on the basis of the law on the national budget.  Moreover, the price was a 
determining factor in government procurement by the price quotation request.  Government 
procurement by the auctions method had to be conducted through official web portal of 
government procurement in the real time mode.  The conduction of government procurement by 
auctions had to be provided by single operator in government procurement.  The government procurement subject to auction were goods and se rvices according to the list approved by the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, with an annual volume more than 4,000 MCI 
established for the relevant fiscal year by the Law "On the National Budget".  Government procurement of goods through commodity exchanges had to be conducted based on 
the list of commodity exchange goods in accordan ce with the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on commodity exchanges. 
683.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Law No. 303 contained provisions on 
transparency of the procedures for conducting government procurement.  All the information on government procurement was provided on the official website (web portal) - 
www.goszakup.gov.kz.  No later than three work ing days from the day of approval of the 
competitive bid documents, but not less than 30 calendar days and, in case of electronic 
government procurement, not less than 20 calendar days before the final date for submission of 
applications for participation in the competitive bidding by potential suppliers, the organizer of 
government procurement was obliged:  (i) to place on the customer's website the text of the 
announcement on conducting the government procurement by tender, and the list of competitive 
bid documents; (ii) to place on the official web portal of government procurement the text of the 
announcement on conducting the government procurement by tender; and (iii) to ensure in the 
                                                                                                                                               
17 State enterprises are defined in the Section "State ownership, Stat e Trading Entities and 
Privatization". WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 217 - 
 
  chronological order registration on the customer's website the facts of presentation of competitive 
bid documents.  Notices of invitation for participation in government procurement had to include the following information:  full name; post and electronic addresses of the organizer of 
government procurement; the subject of the contra ct; the required amount; the location and date 
of delivery of goods and services; the place and ways for obtaining a copy of the tender documentation; the place and deadline for submission of applications for participation in the 
tender; and the date, time and place of opening envelopes with applications for participation in the 
tender. 
684.  She noted that the winner of the tender was selected in accordance with the rules 
established in the national legislation, i.e., the laws and rules laid out in the first paragraph of this 
section.  Within two working days after completi on of the tender process, the protocol of the 
government procurement results was published on an official website of the entity and on the 
web portal on government procurement. 
685.  In response to questions about the local content requirements in Kazakhstan's government 
procurement laws, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that such requirements were set-out 
by Law No. 303, Rules No. 1301 and No. 623.  When the Tender Commission evaluated and compared all submitted bids, it took into account the criteria stipulated in paragraph 4 of Article 17 
of Law No. 303.  These criteria had to be spec ified in the tender documentation and applied 
equally to all competitive bids.  In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 17 of the Law No. 303, 
the competitive price quotations of participants were affected by the following criteria:  
(i) characteristics of a potential supplier as follows:  (a) experience in the market of goods and services which was required for conducted government procurement; (b) a document confirming 
performance of voluntary certification of goods by domestic producers in accordance with 
Kazakhstan legislation on technical regulation; (c) certified system on management quality in accordance with State standards; (d) a certified system on management of environmental control 
in accordance with the requirements of State standards and (or) the confirmation of compliance 
with standard of ecologically clean production in accordance with Kazakhstan legislation on 
technical regulation; (ii) the functional, technical and qualitative characteristics of goods and 
services, and (or) the costs of operation, maintenance and repair of the purchased goods; and (iii) local content.  In accordance with Law No. 303, Rules No. 1301 and No. 623 the Tender 
Commission could reduce the conditional competitive price quotation for domestic producers of 
goods by up to 20% and for domestic supp liers of services (works) up to 15%.  
686.  The potential supplier had the right to appeal actions (omission) of the customer, organizer 
of government procurement, commissions, expert and single operator involved in government 
procurement where their actions (omission) infringed rights and legal interests of the potential 
supplier. 
687.  In response to the question of a Member on whether there would be a common EEC 
procurement regime for state and (or) municipal procurement, the representative of Kazakhstan 
stated that the Agreement on State (Municipal) Procurement had become effective on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 218 - 
 
  1 January 2012 within the Single Economic Space.  The Agreement provided that Kazakhstan 
would grant national treatment for government procurement to other SES Parties from 1 January 2014 on a reciprocity basis.  The Agreement covered procurement conducted by state 
bodies, budget-funded organizations, including state agencies as well as other entities specified by 
the legislation of the SES Parties.  According to Article 1 of the Agreement, the SES Parties had the right to exempt in their national legislation,  state enterprises and enterprises with state 
participation from the scope of the Agreement. 
688.  Members noted that the scope of "government procurement", as provided for in current 
Kazakhstani legislation, covered more than "procurement", as defined in Articles III:8 and XVII:2 
of the GATT 1994 and Article XIII: 1 of the GATS, i.e., products and services purchased for 
governmental purposes and not with a view to commercial re-sale or, with a view, to use in the 
production of goods for commercial sale, or to use in the supply of services for commercial sale.  
"Procurement" also appeared to cover more than the goods and services typically subject to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement.  Laws, regulations and other measures relating to 
purchases that fell outside the scope of the definitions in Articles III:8 and XVII:2 of 
the GATT 1994, and Article XIII:1 of  the GATS, would not be excluded from the coverage of the 
Agreements in Annex 1 of the Marrakesh Agreemen t Establishing the World Trade Organization.  
These Members noted that in Kazakhstan's legisl ation, "procurement" appeared to include, in 
addition to goods for governmental purposes, goods and services for direct consumption and 
support, i.e., products or services by firms that were sold commercially or used to produce goods 
and services for commercial sale.  They sought confirmation that, in making purchases that would not be considered as government procurement within the meaning of Article III:8 and XVII:2 of 
the GATT 1994 and Article XIII:1 of  the GATS, and that national treatment and MFN requirements 
would apply.  These Members also sought confirmation that Kazakhstan would ensure that goods and services procured under Kazakhstan's legislation on Government Procurement would not be 
re-sold in the commercial sphere or used in the production of goods or the supply of services for 
commercial sale.   
689.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, in respect of procurement of goods and 
services, including by State-owned and State-contro lled enterprises, which were not purchased for 
governmental purposes, but with a view to commercial re-sale or with a view to use for production 
of goods and supply of services for commercial sale, such purchases and sales would not be 
considered to be "government procurement" within the meaning of Articles III:8(a) of the GATT 1994 and XIII:1 of the GA TS, and thus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the competent 
bodies of the CU would comply with all applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working 
Party took note of this commitment.] 
690.  Some Members of the Working Party sought a commitment from Kazakhstan that it would 
initiate negotiations for membership in the Agreement on Government Procurement by tabling an entity offer [immediately after] its accession to the WTO. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 219 - 
 
  691.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the intention of Kazakhstan to join the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurement and to notify the Committee on Government Procurement to this effect at the time of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO and to ensure that 
from the date of accession, its Government agencies would award contracts in a transparent 
manner according to published laws, regulations and guidelines.  She also confirmed that Kazakhstan would request observership in the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement at the 
time of its accession to the WTO and would initiate negotiations for membership in the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurement by ta bling an Appendix 1 offer within four years 
after accession.  She confirmed that, if the result s of the negotiations were satisfactory to the 
interests of Kazakhstan and the other Members of the Agreement, Kazakhstan would accede to 
that Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
692.  The Government of Kazakhstan was developing amendments to the legislation on 
government procurement with the purpose to exclude procurements made by state enterprises and enterprises with state participation procuring goods and services for the purpose of 
commercial sale (resale) from the coverage of Law No. 303 "On Government Procurement" of 
21 July 2007.  The relevant amendments to the le gislation of Kazakhstan regulating government 
procurement would be enacted by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. 
- Transit 
693.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan allowed free transit consistent 
with the provisions of Article V of the GATT 1994.  She added that the basic principles that 
Kazakhstan had followed previously had not been affected by the participation of Kazakhstan in 
the Customs Union with the Russian Federation an d the Republic of Belarus.  From 1 July 2010, 
customs control of goods in transit through the territory of Kazakhstan had been based on the 
provisions of Chapter 32 of the CU Customs Code.  The provisions of the Co de of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Procedures" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter – the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan) concerning transit control were applied to the extent that they did not conflict 
with the CU Customs Code.   
694.  Specifically, Article 215 of the CU Customs Code stated that customs transit was a customs 
procedure under which foreign goods (i.e., no t Russian, Kazakhstani, or Belarusian) were 
transported:  (i) across the CU customs territory under customs custody between the point of their 
entry into and departure from the CU customs territory (i.e., if transit constituted a part of their 
itinerary which began and ended outside the boundaries of the CU customs territory); (ii) from the point of entry into the CU to a customs point of en try within the CU; (iii) from an internal customs 
point to the point of departure from the CU cust oms territory; and (iv) between two customs entry 
points within the CU customs territory.  In addition, it provided that the customs procedure of customs transit was applied to goods transported by international mail, by pipelines and by power 
transmission lines.  Goods in customs transit we re exempted from any customs taxes and duties 
or application of any economic restrictions or prohibitions, except for:  (i) prohibitions applied to 
the goods listed in Sub-Section 1 of the Common List of Goods that were Subject to Non-Tariff WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 220 - 
 
  Measures adopted by the CU Commission Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009, re-approved by 
Collegium Decision No. 134, and included in Annex 14; (ii) SPS measures described in paragraphs [...] through [...] of this Report; and (iii) prohibit ions introduced by the Republic of Kazakhstan in 
regulations implementing UN Security Council Decisions.   
695.  Any foreign merchandise could be subject to international customs transit, except for 
goods whose transit was prohibited pursuant to laws, other statutes and legal norms of the CU and 
Kazakhstan and other international treaties to which Kazakhstan was a party.  However, specific 
control procedures for goods in transit transported by railway on the territory of the Customs Union were defined by a separate CU Agreement, i.e., the Agreement "On the Specificity 
of Customs Transit of Goods, Transported by  Railway on the Customs Territory of the 
Customs Union" signed on 21 May 2010, and in effect since 1 July 2010.  Furthermore, as 
stipulated in Article 215 of the CU Customs Code, customs transit procedure was not applied to the 
goods transported by air transport, if the air vessel, in an international flight, performed an intermediate landing or a landing by necessity (technical landing) without a partial discharging 
(unloading) of goods.  She added that customs transit could be applied to goods of CU Parties if 
these goods were transported from a point of depart ure in the CU to the point of entry in the CU 
through a third country.  Goods of CU Parties originating from one CU Party, exported through the 
territory of another CU Party, were placed in the customs procedure of export and transported 
through the territory of the CU without being placed  in customs procedure of transit, unless it had 
otherwise been decided by the Eurasian Economic Commission.   
696.  She further noted that, pursuant to Article 216 of the CU Customs Code, the placement of 
goods under the customs procedure of customs transit was allowed, if the following conditions 
were fulfilled:  (i) the import of goods into th e customs territory of the Customs Union was not 
prohibited; (ii) the documents, confirming that requirements (if any) for the transportation of goods through the customs border of the Customs Un ion had been fulfilled, were presented; (iii) if 
the goods were to be subject to such control at the place of arrival, the customs control and other 
forms of State control had been performed at their point of entry; (iv) the transit declaration had 
been presented (i.e. the goods had been declared ); (v) the measures ensuring the customs transit 
in accordance with Article 217 of the CU Customs Code were fulfilled; (vi) the identification of 
goods in accordance with the Article 109 of the CU Customs Code was ensured; and (vii) the 
international transport vehicle was equipped in a due manner, if the goods were transported under 
the customs seals.  According to Article 156 of th e CU Customs Code, the requirement specified in 
point (vii) of the previous sentence did not appl y to goods carried by sea or river vessels or 
aircrafts crossing the customs territory of the Customs Union without stopping at a port or airport 
located in the customs territory of the Customs Union, or to the goods transported via pipelines 
and electricity transmission lines. 
697.  As of 1 January 2009, transit fees for vehicles were regulated by Article 461 of the 
Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV of 10 December 2008.  Pursuant to Article 461 
of the Tax Code, transit fees for foreign vehicles transporting international cargoes by automobile WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 221 - 
 
  roads were fixed at 10 Monthly Calculated Indices.  In 2013, the transit fee had been equal to 
KZT 17,310 (approximately US$115).  As for railway transit, the representative of Kazakhstan 
stated that Kazakhstan was a party to the Agreement on International Transit Tariffs (ITT) and the 
Agreement on the Single Transit Tariffs (STT).  Thus, railway tariff rates for carrying goods in 
transit were established according to the principles of these international Agreements and calculated on a non-discriminatory basis.  Basic ceiling tariffs were calculated on the principles 
provided for by these Agreements and the Member s established applied tariffs below the ceiling 
calculated annually.  The transit tariff rates for same railways/destinations were unique and did not depend on the nationality of goods.  Generally, th e transit tariff policy was mostly dependent on 
competitive capacity of international transit routes, crossing several countries, and the rates were 
established by such countries jointly (see the sectio n on "Pricing Policies" for more information).  
698.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as of 1 July 2010, the guarantees for payment 
of customs duties and taxes, pursuant to Articl e 217 of the CU Customs Code, included:  (i) a 
guarantee for payment of customs duties and taxes in relation to foreign goods in accordance with 
Chapter 12 of the CU Customs Code; (ii) customs escort; and (iii) establishment of routes for 
transportation of goods (applied only as an additional measure to the above-mentioned measures).  Customs escort charges and related procedures were described in the section "Fees 
and Charges for Services Rendered".   
699.  Pursuant to Article 218 of the CU Customs Code, customs bodies had the right to put 
goods in transit under customs escort in the following cases:   
- defined on the basis of the risk management system; 
- upon non-presentation of guarantee of  payment of customs duties and taxes; 
- due to repeated non-fulfilment by the transport operator of the operators' obligations in 
transport of goods in accordance with the customs procedure of customs transit, which 
was established by the resolutions, entered in to legal effect, on imposing administrative 
penalty for cases of administrative customs law infringement, if at least one of the above-mentioned resolutions had not been fulfilled; and  
- due to non-fulfilment by the transport operator of the obligation to pay the customs taxes, 
duties in accordance with Article 227 of the CU Customs Code. 
700.  She confirmed that these were all of the circumstances in which customs escort could be 
required, but that this list of circumstance s could be changed through amendment of the 
CU Customs Code or establishment of domestic legislation conforming to that Code.  Customs escort of goods was to be carried out to ensure observance of applicable customs transit 
procedure.  Expenses associated with customs escort had to be fully reimbursed in the form of 
customs fees levied, in accordance with the legislation of Kazakhstan on taxes and duties.   
701.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that guarantees for customs transit were 
regulated by Articles 85 to 88 of the CU Customs Code.  These provisions set-out that guarantees 
could be required to secure the fulfilment of th e customs taxes and duties payable, unless:  (a) a 
procedure for transit escort was applied; (b) transit was conducted by Kazakhstan's authorised 
customs transport operators or accredited economic operators; or (c) customs transit was regulated by the obligations of Kazakhstan under international treaties, inter alia , the International WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 222 - 
 
  Road Transport (TIR) Convention, that provided ot herwise.  Transit by power transmission lines, 
pipelines and railways was also exempt from cu stoms guarantees.  The payer had the right to 
choose the means of guarantees:  (i) payment in cash; (ii) bank guarantee; (iii) surety; 
(iv) pledge of property; or other means foreseen in the national legislation of a CU Party.  
The representative of Kazakhstan informed Me mbers that Article 88 of the CU Customs Code 
outlined the rules to assess the value of guar antees and noted that guarantees would be 
approximated to the value of the customs taxes an d duties payable.  She further explained that 
guarantees on customs transit were applied in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner and, in her view, were in line with the requirements of  Article V of the GATT 1994 on freedom of transit. 
702.  Asked about the redemption of a guarantee, th e representative of Kazakhstan replied that, 
as of 1 July 2010, pursuant to the CU Customs Code, a guarantee for payment of customs duties 
and taxes was refunded after the customs body  determined that all commitments had been 
fulfilled or in case, commitments had not aris en (Article 85.6 of the CU Customs Code).   
703.  In response to а question from a Member on the impl ementation of the CU Customs Code 
in the area of trade in transit in the national legislation of Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that Chapter 38 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan included provisions of the CU Customs Code related to trade in transit.  She noted that the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
incorporated the provisions of the CU Customs Code and the CU Agreements concerning the 
customs issues, and additional provisions addressi ng the issues left by the CU Customs Code to 
the national competency of the CU Parties.  In  particular, Article 319 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan incorporated Article 215 of the CU Customs Code.   
704.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that Kazakhstan would apply all its laws, 
regulations and other measures governing transit of goods (including energy), such as those 
governing charges for transportation of goods in transit by road, rail and air, as well as other charges and customs fees imposed in connection with  transit in conformity with the provisions of 
Article V of the GATT 1994 and other relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, from the date of accession, all laws and 
regulations regarding the application and the leve l of those charges and customs fees imposed in 
connection with transit would be published.  Further, upon receipt of a written request of a concerned Member, Kazakhstan would provide to that Member information on the revenue 
collected from customs fees and customs charges and on the costs of providing the associated 
services.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
- Government-mandated Counter-trade and Barter 
705.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that barter trade was not regulated by the 
Government.  Government approval was not required to engage in counter-trade and barter transactions.  Moreover, where barter trade occu rred, the products traded were subject to the 
same tariff and non-tariff measures and customs formalities as like products imported through 
normal channels.  For example, Kazakhstan applied the same WTO-based customs valuation WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 223 - 
 
  system for such transactions as was applied to g oods imported through normal channels – i.e., if 
the transaction value of the imported merchandise could not be determined, then the goods were valued on the basis of one of the other valuat ion methods provided under the Customs Valuation 
Agreement, applied in sequential order.  Any barter and counter-trade arrangements were only 
conducted on a company-to-company basis. 
- Agricultural Policies 
[to be completed] 
- Trade in Civil Aircraft 
706.  Some Members asked that Kazakhstan commit to join the Agreement on Trade in Civil 
Aircraft upon accession and to establish zero rates of tariff duty on imports of civil aircraft and 
parts.  These Members also requested that all inte rnal taxes would be applied to the sale or lease 
of civil aircraft in a non-discriminatory fashion between such imported and domestically produced 
goods and between such goods imported from third countries.  Finally, they requested additional 
information on Kazakhstan's customs requirements  for imported civil aircraft and parts, e.g., 
import licensing, leasing, and tariff duties, pa rticularly with regard to how Kazakhstan's 
participation in the Customs Union with Belarus and the Russian Federation might affect market 
access in Kazakhstan for such imported goods. 
707.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan did not plan to join the 
Agreement on Civil Aircraft prior to its accession to the WTO.  Applied tariff duties and import licensing requirements corresponded to those laid out in the Customs Union Common External 
Tariff (CU CET) and CU Agreements on non-tariff barriers.  Kazakhstan did not require licenses for 
imported civil aircraft and parts.  She explained that under the CU CET, Kazakhstan as well as 
other CU Parties, currently applied 0% rate of customs duty on imports of certain types of 
aircrafts, including small aircrafts (i.e., those with fewer than 50 seats and weighing between 
2,000 and 20,000 kg), aircrafts with more than 300 seats, aircrafts with 50 to 300 seats and 
weight in the range of 90,000 to 120,000 kg, and large aircrafts (i.e., with weight exceeding 
120,000 kg).  For imports of all other types of civil aircrafts, Kazakhstan as well as other CU Parties currently applied the CU CET of 20% .  The VAT of 12% was normally collected on 
aircraft purchases, both on those of CU or igin or imports except as provided below. 
708.  In addition, CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 allowed temporary imports 
of aircrafts under HS Codes 8802 40 003 2 and 8802 40 004 2 with 50 to 111 and 170 to 
219 seats with conditional customs duty and tax (VAT) exemptions, provided that the following 
conditions were met:  (i) the importers concluded foreign trade contracts (e.g. leasing contracts); 
and (ii) an aircraft was placed under the customs procedure of temporary imports until 
31 December 2013 for a period not exceeding five years from this date.  The Decision additionally allowed duty and tax-free importation of civil passenger aircrafts with no more than 19 passenger 
seats (HS 8802 30 000 2 and 8802 40 001 1) owned by foreign persons and used for 
non-commercial flights within the CU customs territory.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 224 - 
 
  709.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, in accordance with CU Commission Decision 
No. 130 of 27 November 2009, customs duty exem ptions were granted until 1 July 2014 for 
aircraft under HS Codes 8802 40 003 2 and 8802 40 004 2 imported into Belarus and Kazakhstan 
for international, domestic flights, and flights within the CU territory. 
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME 
- GENERAL - Industrial Property Protection 
710.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan's policies in the area of intellectual 
property rights protection were aimed at (i) bringing its legislation in line with international standards; (ii) developing relevant enforcement mechanisms; and (iii) training experts in this 
area.  The objective of these policies was to ensu re the lawful use and protection of intellectual 
property rights in Kazakhstan, as set forth in the Concept of Protection of Intellectual Property 
Rights, approved by Government Resolution No. 1249 of 26 September 2001.   
711.  She added that legislation governing the protecti on of intellectual property rights included 
the General Part of the Civil Code of 27 December  1994, the Special Part of the Civil Code of 
1 July 1999, the Civil Procedure Code of 13 July  1999, the Criminal Code of 16 July 1997, the 
Administrative Offences Code of 21 January 2001, the Customs Code of 30 June 2010, the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 10 June  1996, the Law "On Trade Marks, Service Marks 
and Appellations of Origin" of 26 July 1999, the "Patent Law" of 16 July 1999, the Law 
"On Protection of Selective Achievements" of 13 July 1999, and the Law "On Legal Protection of 
Layout Design of Integrated Microcircuits" of 29 June 2001.  The Law "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Ka zakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 9 July 2004 
had introduced changes to all principal legislation that regulated the protection of intellectual 
property rights in Kazakhstan.  In addition, th e Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative 
Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellect ual Property" of 22 November 2005 had increased 
the administrative and criminal liability for violation of intellectual property rights and had 
improved and streamlined existing criminal procedures.  She added that Kazakhstan would 
continue to amend existing legislation and impl ement programmes to improve legal practices.  
In an effort to improve inter-ministerial cooperation in this area, a number of joint orders had 
been adopted in September 2005.  These orders addressed coordination and collaboration procedures between the public prosecutor's offices, the financial police, the department of internal 
affairs, customs, as well as the taxation and judicial bodies.   
712.  With regard to efforts made to educate the public on intellectual property rights, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights regularly 
held regional and national workshops on protection of intellectual property rights in order to 
upgrade the qualifications of intellectual proper ty rights protection experts, and to share 
experiences in this field.  Officials of the just ice, law, and customs bodies, judges, owners of 
intellectual property rights, as well as users and the media took part in these workshops.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 225 - 
 
  She further noted that the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights conducted seminars jointly 
with international organizations, including the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights Protection, the Phonograms Producers International 
Federation and USAID.  In addition, officials of the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights 
actively participated in radio and television shows on protection of intellectual property rights in 
Kazakhstan.  Twice a year, the Ministry of Justice held a national campaign ("Intellect").  This was 
a permanent large-scale campaign with the active participation of interested public bodies, 
international agencies, public associations, commercial organizations, educational institutions, the media, and the citizens of Kazakhstan.  The campaign aimed at promoting the concept of 
intellectual property, increasing the public's awar eness of the need to take action against piracy 
and the distribution of counterfeit products, and st rengthening the role of intellectual property and 
the status of authors, innovators and inventors.   
713.  In addition, she noted that the number of app lications for registration of copyright and 
related rights, as well as of licence agreements  for the use of copyright and related rights, had 
increased.  In her opinion, these developments demonstrated that the number of authors and 
persons aware of copyright and related laws had increased. 
- Responsible Agencies for Policy Formulation and Implementation 
714.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights 
of the Ministry of Justice was authorised to perf orm specific executive, monitoring, and supervisory 
functions, as well as general administrative functions, in the area of intellectual property, including 
copyrights, patents, and trademarks.  The Committee had been established by Government 
Resolution No. 411 of 29 March 2001 "On Issues Relating to the Committee for Intellectual 
Property Rights of the Ministry of Justice", which had abolished the Committee for Copyright of the 
Ministry of Justice and the Republican State Enterprise on Patents and Trademarks "Kazpatent" of the Ministry of Justice.  She noted that the respon sibility for evaluating, issuing, and promoting the 
commercialization of industrial property rights had been delegated to the Republican State 
Enterprise "National Institute on Intellectual Property (NIIP)" of the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights of the Ministry of Justice.  The NIIP had been established by Government 
Resolution No. 756 "On the State Enterprise 'National Institute of Intellectual Property' of the 
Committee on Intellectual Property Rights of the Mi nistry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan" 
of 11 July 2002.  Its main task was to examine ap plications for intellectual property protection, 
including inventions, useful models, trademarks, appellations of origin of goods, industrial designs and plant selection achievements.  It also kept the State Register of intellectual property 
protection documents (patents for inventions and certificates for trademarks and copyrights) and 
prepared them for issuance.  The NIIP also conducted scientific and research activities, and evaluated and promoted the commercialization of industrial property.  Through its Training Centre, 
it conducted training seminars on intellectual property protection and retrained intellectual 
property protection specialists working at the Mi nistry of Justice, Ministry of Education and 
Science, and the private sector.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 226 - 
 
  715.  A Member requested additional information on how collecting societies were regulated by 
the Government of Kazakhstan and whether collecting societies must be accredited by the Government in order to operate in Kazakhstan.  This Member also asked whether collecting 
societies might represent/collect royalties for only a single exclusive right or for multiple exclusive 
rights and whether more than one collecting society might represent/collect for the same exclusive right.  This Member also inquired whether a collecting society might represent/collect for rights 
holders with whom a collective management agreement had been concluded as well as for rights 
holders with whom a collective management agreement had not been concluded and how Kazakhstan ensured transparency and accountability in each collecting society's operations. 
716.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Articles 43 through 47 of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" addressed the collective management of intellectual 
property rights.  As provided in Article 43(1), authors had the right to establish organizations that 
managed intellectual property rights on a collective basis.  Under Article 43(3), authors could establish collecting societies that managed: various rights for various categories of rights holders; 
various rights for a single category of right holder; or one type of right for various categories of 
rights holders.  Articles 46 and 47 contained several transparency and accountability requirements, including the requirement to:  provide information on royalty collection to rights holders; maintain 
a website containing information on the collecting so ciety, the rights that had been transferred to 
that organization; and to provide such information to the relevant regulatory authority.  In reply to 
a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that collecting societies had to 
regularly report to all right-holders they represented, whether directly or under reciprocal agreements, on any licenses granted, applicable tariffs and royalties collected and distributed.  
She further explained that the members of such organizations collectively granted their respective 
organization permission to use their works.  She further explained that these organizations represented/collected for rights holders with whom a collective management agreement had been 
concluded as well as for rights holders with whom a collective management agreement had not 
been concluded.  In response to a further question regarding representation of or collection on 
behalf of right holders who did not have a colle ctive management agreement, she explained that 
under Article 46(1)(2), organizations had to obtain an accreditation certificate from the Government in order to represent/collect for rights holders with whom a collective management 
agreement had not been concluded.  Each collective rights management organization was required 
to report on a yearly basis on aspects of its op eration to the authorised body of the Government, 
including on auditing inspections, unclaimed royalties and other information specified in Article 47 
of the Copyright Law.  In addition, she clarif ied that this information could also include 
amendments made to the charter and other docu ments of the collecting society; agreements 
concluded with foreign collecting societies; financial reports and names of the collecting society 
representatives.  She explained that currently nine non-governmental organizations - including the Kazakhstani Collecting Society for Performers, the Association of Producers of Phonograms, the 
Union of Producers and Performers "Demeu", the Performers of Kazakh Songs, the Kazakhstani 
Copyright Society, the Union of Songwriters, th e Copyright Society "Abyroi", the non-commercial 
Organization on Protection of Copyright and rela ted Rights "Amanat", and the National Society on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 227 - 
 
  Reprographic Rights - acted as collecting societ ies and specialised in copyright protection for 
composers, poets, writers, artists, scientists, jo urnalists and other rights holders.  She further 
noted that all rights holders, foreign and domestic, were covered equally by these provisions of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", and that several Kazakhstani collecting societies had 
reciprocal collecting arrangements with foreign collecting societies. 
- Participation in International Intellectual Property Agreements 
717.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan was party to a number of 
international treaties, agreements, and conventions – notably the Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO Convention); the Paris Convention for the 
Protection of Industrial Property (1967); the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International 
Registration of Marks; the Madrid Protocol Concerning the International Registration of Marks; the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT); the Patent La w Treaty (PLT); the Berne Convention for the 
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1971); the Nice Agreement Concerning the International 
Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks; the 
Strasbourg Agreement Concerning the International Patent Classification; the Budapest Treaty on 
the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent Procedure; the Universal Copyright Conventi on; the Locarno Agreement Establishing an 
International Classification for Industrial Designs; the Trademark Law Treaty; the Eurasian Patent 
Convention; the Convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonograms Against Unauthorised Duplication of Their Phonograms; the Nairobi Treaty  on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol; the 
Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting 
Organizations; and the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks.  In addition, Kazakhstan had 
acceded to the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty in 
April 2004.   
718.  Asked specifically about Kazakhstan's participation in the Eurasian Patent Convention, she 
said that, by acceding to the Convention, Kazakhstan had not undertaken any obligations 
extending beyond the framework of the Paris Convention.   
719.  She noted that Kazakhstan had bilateral cooperation agreements in the area of intellectual 
property with Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Re public, the Russian Federation, the United States 
and Uzbekistan.  The bilateral agreements with these countries and other CIS countries did not 
contain any specific obligations, which would not be extended to other countries. 
720.  On 1 January 2012, the Agreement on Common Principles of Regulation in the Sphere of 
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights had entered into force.  The Agreement established 
common principles of copyright, trademark and patent regulation within the SES with the purpose 
to enhance intellectual property protection and prevent trade in counterfeit and pirated goods. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 228 - 
 
  - Application of National and MFN Treatment to Foreign Nationals 
721.  Some Members noted that Articles 3 and 4 of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related 
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) provided that Members would accord 
national treatment and most-favoured-nation trea tment, respectively, to each other's nationals 
with regard to the protection of intellectual property.  This protection included matters affecting 
the availability, acquisition, scope, maintenance and enforcement of intellectual property rights, as 
well as those matters specifically addressed in the TRIPS Agreement.  These Members asked what 
provisions Kazakhstan had made to comply with these WTO provisions.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Articl e 12.4 of the Constitution, Article 3.7 of the 
Civil Code, as well as Article 5 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", Article 48 of the Law 
"On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin" and Article 38 of the Patent Law, ensured that foreign natural and juridical persons were granted national and most-favoured-nation 
treatment with respect to the protection of their intellectual property rights in Kazakhstan.   
722.  In reply to a specific question, she confirmed that any foreign right holder had the ability 
to directly apply for geographical indications protection, without the intercession of its 
Government. 
- Fees and Taxes  
723.  Some Members were concerned about nationals and non-nationals of Kazakhstan being 
charged different fees for the grant of certain in dustrial property rights and enquired how such 
differences could be justified considering that Kazakhstan's Constitution and Civil Code required 
that foreign natural and juridical persons be given national treatment.  In addition, some Members 
noted that nationals of the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, and 
Uzbekistan could pay for patent fees in Russian rubles or Kyrgyz soms, according to the schedule 
applicable to Kazakhstani nationals, and did no t require the services of a Kazakhstani patent 
attorney when filing applications with the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights.  Kazakhstan 
was asked how it intended to bring its legislation into conformity with the most-favoured-nation 
principle.   
724.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that , pursuant to the Order of the Chairman of 
the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights, a pproved by the Agency for the Regulation of 
Natural Monopolies, Protection of Competition an d Support of Small Businesses of 27 May 2004, a 
new list of fees charged by the Republican State Enterprise "National Institute of Intellectual 
Property" of the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights had been adopted to remove any 
element of discrimination vis-à-vis  foreign right holders (provided in Annex 20).  As for the 
treatment of Russian Federation and Kyrgyz Republic  nationals, she replied that they could pay for 
patent fees only in Kazakhstani currency - tenge - as provided by the national legislation of Kazakhstan.  According to bilateral agreements concluded with the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, 
Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, and Uzbekistan, their nationals were not required to use the services 
of a Kazakhs tani p ate nt attorne y.  T his  was , in he r vie w, in c o nformity w it h Artic le  4 (d ) of the TRIPS Agreement. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 229 - 
 
  725.  One Member noted that Article 4(d) of the TR IPS Agreement applied only to international 
agreements entered into prior to entry into force of the WTO Agreement, i.e., on or before 1 January 1995.   
726.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan, from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, would implement fully the provisions of Articles 3 and 4 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- SUBSTANTIVE STANDARDS OF PROTECTION, INCLUDING PROCEDURES FOR THE 
ACQUISITION AND MAINTENANCE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
- Copyright and Related Rights 727.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 
10 June 1996 and the provisions of the Berne Convention (which applied directly pursuant to 
Article 4 of the Constitution) extended protection  of literary, artistic and scientific works to 
incorporate all forms of copyright covered by th e TRIPS Agreement.  The protection included 
computer programs, computer operating systems and databases (defined as a collection of 
information).  Rental rights for musical works in text of note form, phonogram works, audio and 
visual items, databases and computer software were stipulated in Article 16 of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".   
728.  Article 28 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" provided a term of protection for 
the lifetime of the author and 70 years following his/her death, except in cases stipulated in the 
Article.  The copyright for a work first published within 30 years of the author's death was 
protected for 70 years after the publication date.  Works, published anonymously or under a 
pseudonym, were protected for 70 years after the date of publication, unless the author had been revealed.  The rights of performers, phonograms  and broadcasters were protected for 70 years 
from the date of performance/publication/broadcast.  Special terms for cinematographic and 
photographic works were not foreseen.   
729.  Asked specifically about the protection of works that were still protected in their country of 
origin and that had not had a full term of protection in Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan extended protection to such works, as provided for in 
Article 28 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Ri ghts", unless they had become available in the 
public domain in their country of origin.  Works with  expired terms of protection fell into the public 
domain and were deemed to be national property that could be used free of charge by any person 
in accordance with Article 29 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".   
730.  A Member noted that the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" did not contain a clear 
provision on the protection of pre-existing work s and sound recordings and requested more detail 
on the Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Legisl ative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Intellectual Property", more specifically on its provisions addressing the protection of pre-existing 
works and sound recordings. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 230 - 
 
  731.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Law "On Amendments and Addenda to 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan  on Intellectual Property" of 9 July 2004 had 
introduced retroactive protection procedures and other amendments to the Law "On Copyright and 
Related Rights" and, specifically, amendments pertai ning to the protection of pre-existing works. 
732.  With regard to the enforcement of copyri ghts, a Member urged the Government of 
Kazakhstan to increase the penalties for copyright piracy and impose penalties that were sufficient 
to act as an effective deterrent to potential pirates and counterfeiters.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, in her view, existing penalties were sufficiently strict.  However, her Government had adopted the Law "O n Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Pr operty" of 22 November 2005 which provided for 
the enforcement of measures against the infringement of intellectual property rights and the illegal 
use of copyright.  Overall, 11 legislative acts had been amended, including the Criminal Code 
(Article 184(1)) and the Administrative Offences Code (Articles 128, 129 and 145).  Pursuant to these amendments, the categories "selection achi evements" and "integrated circuit layouts" had 
been introduced in Kazakhstani legislation; certain types of infringement – namely, illegal 
acquisition, storage or hauling of counterfeit copi es of works and phonograms – had been defined; 
applicable penalties had roughly doubled, the maximum penalty being five years of imprisonment; 
measures against recurring offences had been introduced; and, the seizure of equipment used for 
the production of counterfeit products had been authorised.   
733.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, in 2009, the Law "On Copyright 
and Related Rights" had been amended in order to  bring it into compliance with the WIPO's 
Copyright Treaty and the Performances and Ph onograms Treaty, and the term "technological 
measure" had been introduced into the law.  In re ply to a specific question, the representative of 
Kazakhstan clarified that, in accordance with the 2008 Amendments, "technological measure" was understood as technology (programme technology) or its components that controlled access to 
copyright works or objects of related rights and pr evented or restricted actions prohibited by the 
author, owner of related rights, or other owner of exclusive copyright or related rights.   
734.  A Member noted that Article 2(39) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" defined a 
"work of amateur and folk arts" as "a work including peculiar elements of traditional art heritage (folk fairy tales, folk poetry, folk songs, instrumental folk music, folk dances and plays, artistic 
forms of folk traditions, etc.)".  This Member asked whether these were works intended to be 
included within Article 6 ("Copyrighted Items an d General Provisions") of the Law "On Copyright 
and Related Rights", and whether these works were excluded under Article 8(3) ("Works of 
Folklore") of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  This Member also inquired whether 
works of amateur and folk arts were protected under other laws and, if so, asked the 
representative of Kazakhstan to describe the scope and nature of such protection. 
735.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that works of "amateur and folk arts", as defined 
by Article 2(39) of the Law "On Copyright and Rela ted Rights", were not protected by copyright or 
other laws of the Kazakhstan.  To be a "work of amateur and folk art" excluded from copyright WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 231 - 
 
  protection under Article 8(3) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", a work had to not 
have an author(s), but instead had to have been created by a community.  Anonymous works and works created under a pseudonym had an author; it  was only works created by a community that 
were not protected under Articles 2(39) and 8(3) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  
Derivative works using an underlying work of amateur or folk arts, like derivative works using other public domain works, would be protected as independent works under Article 7(3) of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  For example, a musical composer who created an 
arrangement of a work of amateur and folk art would have that arrangement protected by Articles 7(1)(5) and 7(3)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  Likewise, sound 
recordings, audio-visual works and other fixations of works covered by Article 2(39) would be 
protected under the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  Performers/producers/broadcasting 
organizations had the rights enumerated in Chapter III, Related Rights, of the Law "On Copyright 
and Related Rights" to fixations of works of amateu r and folk arts.  Works that could arguably fall 
under the folklore definition of Article 2(39) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", but 
which were protected as copyrighted works in the country of origin, would be protected as 
copyrighted works in Kazakhstan.   
736.  A Member noted that a number of terms used in the Law "On Copyright and Related 
Rights" were unclear and asked the representative  of Kazakhstan to explain their meanings.  
In particular, this Member requested a clarification of the meaning of the term "cite" and the 
citation in Article 19(1)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" and the meaning of the 
term "training nature" in Article 19(1)(2) of that Law.  A Member also asked Kazakhstan to clarify the meaning of the term "information purposes" in Article 41(1)(3).   
737.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the terms "cite" and "citation" in 
Article 19(1)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "quotation" as used in Article 10(1) of the Berne Convention.  The term "training nature" in Article 19(1)(2) of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "teaching" as used in Article 10(2) of the 
Berne Convention.  She noted that the term "informational purposes" in Article 41(1)(3) of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "to report events that are expected to occur in the 
near future" and "to report recent historical events".  She added that the term "current events" in Article 41(1)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "an event that is occurring at 
the present time, e.g., a live report".   
738.  A Member noted that Article 41 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" referred to 
the use of certain works without authorisation or payment and asked Kazakhstan to clarify what 
was meant by "exclusively" in Article (41)(1)(2).   
739.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the term "exclusively" in Article 41(1)(2) 
of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" mean t "solely" as used in Article 15(1)(d) of the 
Rome Convention. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 232 - 
 
  - Trademarks, including Service Marks 
740.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that with the adoption of the Law "On Trade Marks, 
Service Marks and Appellations of Origin" (Trademark Law) of 26 July 1999, Kazakhstan had ensured that all requirements of Articles 15- 24 of the TRIPS Agreement had been taken into 
account.  Other relevant legislation included Decree No. 136 adopting "The Instruction on 
Acknowledgement of Trademark (Service Mark) as Well-Known" of 23 April 2010 stipulating the 
rules for filing, submission and processing of app lications for the registration of a trademark.  
In addition, some changes and amendments to br ing the Law "On Trade Marks, Service Marks and 
Appellations of Origin" in full compliance with the TRIPS Agreement had been introduced in 2004 
and 2007.  She also noted that the terms of the Paris Convention, specifically Articles 6 bis and 
10bis, were directly applicable pursuant to Article 4 of the Constitution. 
741.  She added that the Trademark Law accorded trad emark protection to all pictorial, verbal, 
letter, digital, volumetric and other designations or their combinations that allowed a person to 
distinguish the goods and services of one manufactu rer from those of another.  Signs could not be 
registered if identical, or confusingly similar to those already protected, and when they had 
become generally accepted symbols.  Pursuant to Article 6 paragraph 3(1), signs that were false or could mislead the public about the product or its manufacturer – including geographical indications 
that could mislead the public about the product's place of production – could not be registered.  
All well-known trademarks (for goods and services) were protected without any restrictions.  She held the view that these provisions were in compliance with Article 16 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.   
742.  Protection of trademarks was provided on th e basis of registration and issuance of a 
trademark certificate by the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights and was also available to 
all owners of well-known trademarks, regardless of whether or not their trademark rights were 
registered in Kazakhstan.  The registration of a trademark could be contested and deemed invalid, 
in full or in part, and owners of a well-known trademark could petition in Kazakhstani courts for 
recognition of their mark as well-known and to pr event its continued unauthorised use.  The owner 
bore the burden of proof to establish that the trademark was "well-known" and was required to 
demonstrate this on the basis of public-opinion poll (survey) results.  In addition to survey results, 
the authorities could also consider information on the extent of use of the trademark in 
Kazakhstan, the methods of its use, the sales volume and the marketing outlets; information 
about the average annual number of consumers, the value of the trademark, the extent of advertising of the trademark, and the extent of initial or acquired distinctiveness of the trademark; 
and information about the trademark's use or a similar trademark by third parties, about the 
number of licenses, and about the trademark's registration abroad.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that in order to comply with the requirement of 
Article 16 of the TRIPS Agreement and determine th e knowledge of the trademark in the relevant 
sector of the public, Kazakhstan took public opinion results into account.  In addition, owners were 
allowed to use other means to demonstrate that the trademark was well-known, including those 
mentioned in the WIPO Joint Recommendations on the Protection of Well-Known Marks.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 233 - 
 
  According to Article 2 of these Recommendations the competent authority could consider:  (i) the 
degree of knowledge or recognition of the mark in the relevant sector of the public; (ii) the duration, extent and geographical area of any use of the mark; (iii) the duration, extent and 
geographical area of any promotion of the mark, including advertising or publicity and the 
presentation, at fairs or exhibitions, of the g oods and/or services to which the mark applied; 
(iv) the duration and geographical area of any registrations, and/or any applications for 
registration, of the mark, to the extent that they reflected use or recognition of the mark; (v) the 
record of successful enforcement of rights in the mark, in particular, the extent to which the mark 
was recognised as well known by competent authorities; and (vi) the value associated with the 
mark. 
743.  The validity of an initial registration and each renewal of registration of a trademark was 
10 years.  The registration of a trademark was rene wable indefinitely.  Any person could file for a 
cancellation of a trademark to the Appellate Council of the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights after three years of non-use.  However, trademark owners could submit evidence to 
demonstrate that non-use had occurred due to circumstances beyond their control.   
744.  Asked whether a trademark could be assigned with or without the goodwill of a company, 
the representative of Kazakhstan replied that assi gning trademark rights entailed transferring of 
the trademark itself, when used with certain produc ts or services, as well as transferring of the 
trademark's business reputation (goodwill) that had been gained through its use.  Pursuant to the 
Trademark Law, the owner of a registered trademark (licensor) could license the right to use a 
registered trademark to another party (licensee).  For licensing rights to a trademark, a written 
agreement had to contain provisions stipulating that the quality of goods associated with the 
licensee's use of the trademark must not be inferior to that of the licensor's, as well as provisions 
providing for the licensor's right to supervise compliance with the terms of the agreement.  
Licensing and assignment agreements had to be registered with the Committee for Intellectual 
Property Rights.  Asked about any possible negative effects of the registration procedure for such 
agreements, she clarified that official registrati on of agreements with the Committee implied that 
the rights of a person, to whom the rights for industrial property were assigned, must not be 
infringed in any way – in the event that the other party requested to make further changes to the agreement – and that such changes could only be made by court decision.  In her view, the 
provisions of the Trademark Law met the requirements of Article 6 quater  of the Paris Convention. 
745.  A Member questioned the value of the mandatory licence recording, in particular as it 
could affect the rights of legitimate trademar k owners.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that the mandatory licence recording procedure protected the rights of intellectual 
property owners and, as such, was in compliance with Article 21 of the TRIPS Agreement.   
746.  In reply to the specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that according 
to Article 6 of the Trademark Law, registration of generic names was not allowed.  Such names could be used as unprotected elements of a trademark if they were not predominant. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 234 - 
 
  - Geographical Indications, including Appellations of Origin 
747.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to the Law "On Trade Marks, Service 
Marks and Appellations of Origin" (Trademark Law), the term "appellation of origin" was equal to the term "geographical indication" as used in the TRIPS Agreement.  Appellations of origin 
(geographical indications) could be registered if they denominated a product with specific qualities 
which were mainly or exclusively associated with its place of origin (including natural conditions 
and/or human factors).  Only appellations of origin (geographical indications) associated with a 
particular product could be registered.  The registration certificate entitled the owner to the right to use the appellation of origin for the goods listed in  the certificate.  Registration of appellations of 
origin (geographical indications) was prohibited when it could mislead consumers about the place 
of origin, or when registration could infringe upon th e rights of third parties.  Appellations of origin 
which were false, identical, confusingly similar, or clearly misled consumers about the product's 
place of origin, were not protected.  In reply to a specific question from a Member, the 
representative of Kazakhstan clarified that registra tion of a geographical indication which, although 
literally true as to the place in which the goods originate, falsely represented to the public that the 
goods originated in another territory, was also not allowed.  She added that the Trademark Law 
provided for the protection of wines and spirits as required under Articles 22 and 23 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  Asked whether geographical indications were protected against unfair 
competition, she referred to Articles 16 and 17 of the Law "On Competition".   
748.  Applications for protection of appellations of origin (geographical indications) were filed 
with the National Institute on Intellectual Property Rights (NIIP) and included (i) a single name  
(composed of one or more words) indicating the place of origin of a good; (ii) the name and 
address of the applicant(s); (iii) the good's designation; and, (iv) the type of product for which 
appellation of origin registration was sought, including its place of manufacture and/or natural occurrence and a description of the specific properties of the good.  In addition to the above, 
foreigners had to submit applications through a pa tent attorney along with a document confirming 
the authority of the patent attorney to act on beha lf of the applicant.  National applicants had to 
provide a statement from the relevant local administrative body certifying that the applicant 
resided on its territory and that the quality of goods originating therein was associated with the 
natural conditions and/or human factors of that particular geographical area.  Similarly, foreign 
applicants had to accompany their applications by a document attesting the applicant's right to use 
the appellation of origin (geographical indication) in their country of origin (Article 29, paragraph 3(3) of the Trademark Law).  In reply to the specific question, the representative of 
Kazakhstan clarified that proof of registration in the country of origin could qualify for this 
requirement.  Besides, Kazakhstan would accept certification mark registration, or other evidence of use and control of the term, as long as it demonstrated that the appellation of origin 
(geographical indication) was protected in the country of origin.  In the view of representative of 
Kazakhstan, provisions stipulating these requirem ents did not create any preconditions to use 
them in such a way as to raise national treatment and MFN concerns. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 235 - 
 
  749.  One Member noted that a provision specifying that foreigners had to submit applications 
through a patent attorney could read like a discrim inatory treatment of foreigners and questioned 
whether domestic nationals had to use services of a patent attorney.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that nationals were not required to recourse to a patent attorney.  In her 
opinion, it could be justified within the WTO accession since Kazakhstan did not take any commitments with regard to services of patent attorneys in accordance with its Schedule of 
Specific Commitments on Services.  Moreover, paragraph 3 of Article 2 of Paris Convention 
(reflected in paragraph 2 of the TRIPS Agreement on  exceptions) provided that:  "the provisions of 
the laws of each of the countries of the Union rela ting to [...] the appointment of an agent, which 
may be required by the laws on industrial property, were expressly reserved". 
750.  Some Members continued to have concerns that the requirement for foreigners to use a 
patent attorney was contrary to the MFN provisions of the TRIPS Agreement and asked for 
establishment of non-discriminatory treatment in this matter.  In reply, the representative of 
Kazakhstan agreed that this requirement had to apply in accordance with the MFN provision of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  In this regard bilateral agreements concluded with Uzbekistan, the 
Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan and Georgia had to be revised in order to exclude preferential 
provisions allowing their nationals to submit applications without recourse to a patent attorney.  
Kazakhstan confirmed that it did not have any non-MFN arrangements with any other 
CIS countries or CU Parties in the area of intellectual property protection. 
751.  In reply to a specific question the representative of Kazakhstan said that, in terms of 
applications which had to be made through patent attorneys, "foreigners" had to be understood as "non-residents" of the Republic of Kazakhstan as  defined in the Tax Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan. 
752.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify whether, in order to have a geographical indication 
protected, it had to be registered in Kazakhstan.  This Member noted that such a provision would 
be in conflict with Article 22.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, which set an obligation for Members to 
provide legal protection regardless of registration.   
753.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Article 37(2) of the Trademark Law 
prohibited the use of unregistered appellations of origin (geographical indications) that were identical or similar to registered ones, where such use would result in confusion.  Such protection 
of appellations of origin (geographical indications) in Kazakhstan could be provided only through 
registration, which could be made on the basi s of a document proving that a geographical 
indication was protected in the country of origin .  The representative of Kazakhstan also added 
that, in her view, registration was a sufficient legal mean for interested parties to prevent illegal 
use of appellations of origin (geographical indications) as required under Article 22.2 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  According to Articles 16 and 17 of the Law "On Competition", illegal use of 
another person's appellation of origin (geographical indication) for similar goods was recognised as unfair use of appellation of origin (geographical indication) in Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan said that any interested party could challenge the illegal registration in Kazakhstan or WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 236 - 
 
  use in Kazakhstan of another person's appellation of origin (geographical indication).  To challenge 
the illegal registration in Kazakhstan or use in Kazakhstan of another person's appellation of origin (geographical indication), an interested party was not required to provide either proof of 
registration of an appellation of origin (geographica l indication) in Kazakhstan or proof of use of an 
appellation of origin (geographical indication) in Kazakhstan.   
754.  A Member raised a concern that Articles 16 an d 17 of the Law "On Competition" limited the 
scope of protection of Article 22 of the TRIPS Ag reement to cases where a specific geographical 
indication was illegally used for "similar goods".  A Member asked for clarification concerning the 
protection granted to geographical indication s according to the legislation of Kazakhstan 
implementing Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement and in particular to know whether this protection 
applied to any kind of products.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Article 27 of 
Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods" fully implemented the 
provisions of the Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreemen t providing that the following designations could 
not be registered as geographical indications:  (i) representing the names of geographical objects 
(i.e., an indication that identified a product originating from a particular territory, region or 
locality) in a manner that misled the public as to the geographical origin of the good; (ii) those that, although literally true as to the territory in which the goods originated, falsely represented to 
the public that the goods originated in another territory; and (iii) containing names of geographical 
objects not related to the place of origin of the goods.  Therefore, Article 27 contained legal means 
of protection that were not limited to the spec ific type of good designated by the relevant 
geographical indication.  Articles 16 and 17 of Law "On Competition" implemented provisions of Article 22(2)(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, which required Parties to prevent any use which 
constituted an act of unfair competition within the meaning of Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention 
(1967). 
755.  A Member was concerned that Kazakhstan would not be providing national treatment to 
the nationals of WTO Members and would also be de nying MFN treatment to at least some of those 
Members, if a bilateral agreement was required in order to obtain protection for foreign 
geographical indications.   
756.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, pursuant to Article 48 of the 
Trademark Law, foreign natural and juridical persons had the same rights and obligations as 
Kazakhstani nationals, unless otherwise provided in Kazakhstan's legislation.  In particular, 
foreigners could apply directly for protection of appellations of origin (geographical indications) in Kazakhstan without the need for a bilatera l agreement or government intervention.  
757.  Asked whether earlier protected trademarks would be protected from confusingly similar 
and later in time geographical indications, she said that Kazakhstan had developed a draft 
Law "On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legisl ative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Intellectual Property" which amended Article 39.3 of the Trademark Law.  According to the new 
amendments, the registration of an appellation of origin (geographical indication) could be 
contested and invalidated if it is likely to cause confusion for consumers as to the true identity of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 237 - 
 
  the good or its manufacturer due to the existence of an earlier in time trademark which had 
become renown in Kazakhstan due to its active use, including its promotion or its use in advertisements.  The amendments represented li mited exceptions to trademark rights because 
they provided for coexistence only in the case s where the likelihood of confusion between the 
trademark and appellation of origin (geographical indication) was low.  In cases where the likelihood of confusion was high, registration of appellation of origin (geographical indication) could 
be challenged in the court by the interested third parties. 
758.  A Member raised a concern that by referring to the possibility to invalidate a protected 
geographical indication, paragraph [757] of this Report seemed, however, to suggest that owners 
of trademarks containing of a geographical indication could not only contest later applications for 
geographical indication registration but also  require the invalidation of protected GI.  
759.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that paragraph [757] as well as the 
amendments made to the Law suggested the possibility to contest and invalidate registration of the geographical indication in certain circumstances, specifically if it could mislead consumers as to 
the true identity of the good or its manufacturer due to the existence of an earlier in time 
trademark which had become renown in Kazakhstan due to its active use, including its promotion or its use in advertisements.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in practice the 
possibility to contest and invalidate registration of the GI existed for a pending application and a 
registered GI. 
760.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that 
interpretation of "low" and "high" degree of the likelihood of confusion had to be made by the court in each case individually on the basis of  such criteria as renown of the trademark in 
Kazakhstan acquired due to its active use.  The time period limitation to contest and invalidate 
registration of geographical indication due to the existence of an earlier in time trademark was five years from the moment of publication of the information on the State registration of the 
geographical indication in the official bulletin.  
761.  With regard to subsequent registration of trademarks the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that according to Article 23 of the Trad emark Law it could be contested and invalidated 
during five years after the registration.  Bad faith registrations could be opposed without any limitations in time.  According to Article 42.1.1 disp utes on legality of the certificates confirming 
the registration of trademark or geographical indication were subject to consideration in court.  
762.  Asked to clarify if active use included use outside of Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that according to paragraph 4 of Article 19 of the Trademark Law manufacture, 
importation, storage, offering for sale, sale of goods with a trademark, its use in advertising, 
billboards, printed publications, on official le tterhead or other business document, transfer of 
trademark rights or its demonstration at exhibitions held in the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as 
other introduction into civil circulation were recognised as use of a trademark.  Therefore, active WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 238 - 
 
  use included also use outside of Kazakhstan.  Taking into account that trademark must be renown 
in Kazakhstan, it had to be actively  used in Kazakhstan as well.   
763.  With respect to the statement that the trademark had to be actively used in Kazakhstan, a 
Member pointed out that TRIPS Article 16(2) indicated that use in other States was sufficient.  
In response the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the term "use" in Article 39.3 of the Trademark Law had the same meaning and, in he r view, its definition in Article 19 of the 
Trademark Law covered the concept of promotion in the sense of Article 16 of the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement.  The competent authority considered whether a mark had been used intensively taking into account, inter alia , the advertising budget (proved by annual financial 
reports), the degree of familiarity of the mark to customers, and the information on countries 
where the mark was renown. 
764.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that traditional non-geographical names 
could be protected as geographical indications in Kazakhstan, if they were protected as geographical indications in their country of origin. 
- Industrial Designs 
765.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that th e rights of industrial designs were regulated 
by the Patent Law and certified only by patents, provided that the applied industrial design met 
patentability requirements, such as novelty and originality.  The "industrial applicability" criterion – 
i.e., the possibility to industrially reproduce the industrial design – was the main criterion for an industrial design.  Architectural objects (except for small architectural forms), industrial, hydraulic 
engineering and other stationary constructions were not recognised as industrial designs because 
they did not meet the "industrial applicability" criterion.  However, these constructions qualified for 
copyright protection.  Artistic-design solutions that  determined the exterior of a product, textile 
goods, as well as small architectural forms were co nsidered to be industrial designs (Article 8 of 
the Patent Law).  Small architectural forms recognised as industrial design included solutions that 
determined the exterior of different stands, tents or exhibition pavilions that could be reproduced 
serially.   
766.  She added that an industrial design patent was valid for 15 years as of the date of 
application.  Industrial design patents could be ex tended upon request of the owner for a period of 
up to five years.  The owner of an industrial de sign patent had the exclusive right to its use.  
A person other than the patent owner could use the protected industrial design only by permission 
of the patent owner and under a licence agreement subject to compulsory registration with the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights. 
- Patents 
767.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that , in her view, the Patent Law (as amended by 
the Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislat ive Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Intellectual Property" of 2 March 2009) met all the provisions of Articles 25-34 of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 239 - 
 
  TRIPS Agreement.  The Law covered inventions, industrial designs and utility models and 
stipulated an expanded list of ways for protecting  the rights of patent owners.  An invention was 
granted legal protection if it was new, involved an inventive step and was industrially applicable.  
Article 6, paragraph 2 of this Law provided an exhaustive list of subject matter that could be 
patented as an invention – including a device, process, substance, micro-organism strain or culture of plant or animal cells, as well as the use of a known device, process, substance or strain 
for a new purpose.  Diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods could also be protected as 
inventions under the Article 6 criteria.  The Patent Law did not recognise as inventions (i) discoveries; (ii) scientific theories; (iii) mathematical methods; (iv) methods of economic 
organization and management; (v) symbols, schedules, and rules; (vi) rules and methods for 
mental activities; (vii) algorithms per se  and computer programs; (viii) projects and plans of 
buildings and structures, and land development; (ix) proposals concerning solely the outward 
appearance of manufactured goods; and, (x) proposals that were contrary to the public interest, 
humanitarian principles and morality.  Article 11, paragraph 2 of the Patent Law stipulated the 
requirement that a patented invention be used – "use" was defined as manufacturing, application, 
importation, offer for sale, sale, as well as other means of putting the industrial property into circulation, including storage in view of subsequent use.  The provisions of the Patent Law applied 
equally to both foreign and Kazakhstani natural and juridical persons, in accordance with signed 
international agreements or in accordance with the reciprocity principle.   
768.  Some Members expressed concern regarding the exclusion of computer programs from 
patentable subject matter.  They explained that computer programs, for example, could be part of a patentable process for making or using products.  These Members asked for a clarification of 
whether such computer programs could be patented under Kazakhstan's Patent Law. 
769.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that patent protection in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan could be provided under a full patent and by an innovation patent.  
The degree of protection provided by an innovati on patent was functionally equivalent to that 
provided by a full patent.  The principal differen ce concerned the procedure for issuing the patent 
and the validity period.  Innovation patents could be issued after an examination of the application 
for industrial applicability and local novelty of an invention, and were valid for a period of three years.  Full patents were issued after cond ucting a substantive examination of the patent 
application, provided that the application for a full patent was filed within three years of filing an 
application for an innovation patent with the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights.  The substantive examination included verification of the patentability conditions of the innovation 
(novelty, originality and industrial application).  The full patent was valid for a period of 20 years 
starting from the date of initial application.  If, however, the innovation patent holder did not 
submit an application for an extension of the patent or for conducting a full examination within the 
prescribed period, the innovation patent was cancelled as of the date of its expiration (i.e. three years from the date of application).  The validity of an innovation patent could be 
extended upon the request of the patent holder for up to two years.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 240 - 
 
  770.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that rights to utility models were granted patent 
protection if utility models met the patentability requirements, including novelty and industrial applicability.  Utility model patents were granted for a period of five years, subject to subsequent 
renewal at the request of the patent owner for a period not exceeding three years.  Exclusive 
rights to use protected utility models and what constituted an infringement of such rights were identical to the rights and infringements provided to patented inventions and industrial designs. 
771.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan excluded th e patentability of "proposals that were 
contrary to the public interest, humanitarian principles and morality".  This Member was concerned that this language was broader than the permissi ble exceptions provided in Article 27(2) of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  This Member also expressed concerns regarding the exclusion from 
patentability of "methods of economic organization" and "computer programs". 
772.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in excluding the patentability of 
"proposals that were contrary to the public interest, humanitarian principles and morality", Kazakhstan intended to cover only the exclusions for " ordre public " and "morality" provided for in 
Article 27(2) of the TRIPS Agreement.  As for the exclusion from patentability of "methods of 
economic organization", she said that, according to paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Patent Law, only technical solutions were protected as inventions.  Methods of economic organization were not 
recognised as inventions because of their non-technical character.   
773.  A Member continued to have concerns regarding the scope of exceptions permitted under 
Article 6 of the Patent Law and requested that Kazakhstan amend the Law to comply with the 
requirements of Article 27.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. 
774.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Article 6 of the Patent Law was amended 
to comply with Article 27.2 of the TRIPS Agreem ent, by replacing the term "public interests, 
principles of humanity and morality" with " ordre public " and "morality" in the text of the 
Patent Law.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that an invention, such as a 
process, that includes a computer program was patentable subject matter under Kazakhstan's 
Patent Law.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
775.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide an explanation of how the compulsory licensing 
provisions of the Patent Law complied with the requirements of Article 31(a)-(l) of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  In reply, the representative of  Kazakhstan said that pursuant to Article 11, 
paragraph 1 of the Patent Law, the patent hold er had the exclusive right to use the protected 
invention.  The unauthorised use of a protected invention was deemed to infringe the exclusive rights of the patent owner.  Protected inventio ns could only be used by obtaining the patent 
holder's authorisation under a licensing agreement,  subject to compulsory registration with the 
Committee for Intellectual Property Rights or und er a compulsory licence granted pursuant to 
Article 11 of the Patent Law.  Pursuant to Article 11(4) of the Patent Law, any person could apply 
in court for a compulsory non-exclusive licence if, prior to the application, efforts to obtain authorisation from the right holder on reasonable commercial terms, and over a reasonable time WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 241 - 
 
  period, had failed.  An interested party could al so file an application requesting a compulsory 
licence if uninterrupted non-use had occurred for a period of four consecutive years, provided that the applicant provided evidence of non-use.  The court would issue a compulsory licence – 
s p e c i f y i n g  t h e  t e r m  a n d  s c o p e  o f  u s e ,  a s  w e l l  a s  t e r m s ,  a m o u n t  a n d  c o n d i t i o n s  o f  p a y m e n t  –  
unless the patent owner could prove that non-use had been due to valid reasons.  The compulsory licence would be non-exclusive and the amount of payment could not be lower than the market 
price of the licence.  As for the requirements of Article 31(1) of the TRIPS Agreement, pursuant to 
Article 11(5) of the Patent Law, the patent holder could apply to the court requesting a compulsory licence if the exploitation of his/her patent was not possible without infringing another patent, and 
efforts to obtain authorisation from the right holder of this patent had failed.  The courts could 
issue a compulsory licence specifying the term and scope of its use, as well as the terms, amount 
and conditions of payment.  The payment could not be less than the market price of the licence.  
A Member raised concerns regarding Article 11(5) of  Kazakhstan's Patent Law.  In this Member's 
view, Article 11(5) did not include the requirement of the TRIPS Agreement that the second patent 
be an important technical advance.  This Member also noted that Kazakhstan's Patent Law did not 
appear to limit the purpose for which a compulsory licence for semi-conductor technology could be granted, as required under Article 31(c) of the TRIPS Agreement.  This Member asked that 
Kazakhstan bring its compulsory licensing for patents into conformity with Article 31 of the 
TRIPS Agreement. 
776.  [Asked specifically how Kazakhstan's Patent Law addressed the issue of "use" or "non-use" 
in terms of imported patented products, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Article 11(2) of Kazakhstan's Patent Law provides that, in the case of importation of a patented 
product, non-use could not be established under Kazakhstan's Law.  In addition, prior to the date 
of its accession, Article 11 of the Patent Law would be amended to ensure that where use of the subject matter of a patent was authorised to permit the exploitation of a patent (second patent) 
which could not be exploited without infringing another patent (first patent), the invention claimed 
in the second patent must involve an important technical advance of considerable economic 
significance in relation to the invention claimed in the first patent, as provided for in Article 31(l) of 
the TRIPS Agreement.  Similarly, Article 11 would be amended to limited the purposes for which a compulsory licence for patented semi-conductor technology could be granted in order to comply 
with Article 31(c) of the TRIPS Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
777.  Pursuant to Article 12 of the Patent Law, the following were not considered to constitute a 
violation of the exclusive right of a patent holder:  (i) application of a patent in foreign 
transportation vehicles, which were present on the territory of Kazakhstan temporarily (or by 
accident), provided the patent was used for the needs of the vehicles; (ii) research or 
experimentation conducted on an object containing a patent; (iii) application of a patent in 
emergency situations (natural and other disasters, major accidents) with immediate notification of the patent holder and subsequent payment of co rresponding compensation to the patent holder; 
(iv) application of a patent for personal needs without a commercial purpose; and (v) a one-time WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 242 - 
 
  preparation of prescription medicine.  The afor ementioned provisions met, in her view, the 
requirements of Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement.   
778.  Asked specifically how Kazakhstan's law addressed the need to balance acceptable private 
uses with the need to prevent "unreasonable prejudice to the rights of patent owners", 
the representative of Kazakhstan replied that use of protected objects of industrial property was not considered as a violation of a patent holder's rights only in exceptional cases when this use 
was limited to private or personal purpose.  In addition, personal use of protected objects had to 
be non-commercial.  Taking into account that a patent provided a monopoly to a right holder over commercial activity, but did not extend so far as to cover non-commercial activity, such use of 
patented inventions did not, in her view, unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the 
right holder.   
779.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to bring Articles 12(2) and 12(4) of the Patent Law into 
compliance with the requirements of Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement, i.e., that these provisions 
would constitute limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, provided that 
such exceptions did not unreasonably conflict with  a normal exploitation of the patent and did not 
unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the legitimate interests of third parties. 
780.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that prior to the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO, Articles 12(2) and 12(4) of  the Patent Law would be amended to bring the 
Patent Law into compliance with the requirements of Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement.  
Specifically, Article 12(2) would be amended to indicate that the following is not an infringement of the exclusive rights of a patent holder, "carrying out scientific research or experiment on means 
which contain the protected object of industrial property when such research or experiment does 
not have a commercial purpose".  Article 12(4) would be amended to indicate that utilisation of a patent without the authorisation of the patent-holder for the satisfaction of personal, family, home, 
or other needs not connected with entrepreneurial activity would be permitted if the purpose of 
such utilisation was not financial gain.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
781.  With regard to reversal of the burden of proof in civil proceedings concerning the 
infringement of process patents, she said that the requirements of Article 34 of the 
TRIPS Agreement were not covered by the Patent Law, but were contained in Article 65 of the Civil 
Procedure Code, which stipulated that each party was responsible for providing proof for its own 
claims and statements.  Other parties involved in the process could also provide evidence. 
- Plant Variety Protection 
782.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that new kinds of plants and animals were protected 
in accordance with the Law "On Protection of Selection Achievements" of 13 July 1999.  This Law was awarded a positive legal opinion by the International Union for the Protection of New Plant 
Varieties (UPOV) for its conformity with the International Convention for the Protection of New 
Plant Varieties (adopted in Paris on 2 December 1961 and revised in 1972, 1978 and 1991).  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 243 - 
 
  She held the view that with the adoption of th is Law, Kazakhstan had met the requirement of 
Article 27(3)(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, namely that WTO Members would provide for the protection of plant varieties either by patents, an effective sui generis  system, or a combination 
thereof. 
783.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that plant variety protection would be 
accorded to natural persons and legal entities of all WTO Members from the date of the accession. 
- Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits 
784.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that lega l protection of layout designs of integrated 
micro-circuits was provided by Law No. 217 "On Lega l Protection of Layout Design of Integrated 
Microcircuits" of 29 June 2001, and was implemented through Articles 1013-1016 of the Civil Code 
(Special Part) which, in her view, reflected the provisions of Articles 35-38 of the TRIPS Agreement.   
- Requirements on Undisclosed Information,  including Trade Secrets and Test Data 
785.  A Member enquired how Kazakhstan's legal framework met the requirements of 
Article 39(3) of the TRIPS Agreement, noting that , in this Member's view, to protect undisclosed 
information and test data against unfair commercial use, Governments needed to provide an 
effective period of time during which the person first submitting the data was given a period of 
exclusive use during which a third party (e.g., a second applicant) could not use or rely on such 
data directly or indirectly to seek marketing a pproval/registration, without the permission of the 
person first submitting that data.   
786.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Kazakhstan was in the process of drafting 
the Law, which would introduce a norm provid ing for the applicant submitting undisclosed 
information and test data to obtain marketing approval/registration for a period of exclusive use 
that would guarantee that no third party would be pe rmitted to rely directly or indirectly upon the 
applicant's data for a period of time during whic h it would be appropriate under the circumstances 
to prevent unfair commercial use.  She added that, with regard to disclosure of such data, 
pursuant to Article 126 of the Civil Code, the civil legislation ensured the protection of information of real (actual) or commercial value, provided that this information was unknown to third parties, 
its confidentiality was strictly preserved, and it was not accessible on legal grounds. 
787.  She further added that a person accessing restricted information could be liable to 
Article 158 of the Law "On Administrative Violations".  Moreover, Article 200 of the Criminal Code 
prohibited collection of information that constituted a commercial or banking secret by persons 
who had access to such information in their work capacity, including disclosure or use of such 
information for financial or other personal interest without the consent of the owner.  Employees of 
ministries and other State agencies that disclosed protected information were held administratively responsible, together with their employers.  Such  disclosure was punishable by imprisonment of up 
to three years, payment of fines, arrest, or correctional labour.  In her view, undisclosed WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 244 - 
 
  information and test data submitted to obtain ma rketing approval/registration would be protected 
from disclosure under this legislation.   
788.  Asked to clarify how a person in control of restricted information could enforce his/her 
rights, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the civil legislation provided a number of judicial 
means, including the possibility to file a complaint with the court having jurisdiction over the alleged rights violation.  The court could orde r reimbursement of damages and all costs incurred 
by the claimant.  
789.  Asked whether the draft Law, which included a provision granting an applicant for 
marketing approval a period of exclusive use of data submitted to obtain that approval, would 
guarantee that no third party would be permitted to rely, directly or indirectly, upon the applicant's 
data without the applicant's permission and whether the draft law had been adopted, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that this draft Law "On Commercial Secrets" had been 
withdrawn from Parliament and that no reconsideration was planned. 
790.  [Some Members expressed their concerns that without legal provisions requiring 
authorities to prohibit the unfair commercial use of undisclosed information and test data provided 
to obtain marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan of pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemical products, there would be no effective protection against such use granted to the 
applicant providing such data.  A period of at least six years, starting from the date of marketing 
approval in Kazakhstan, should be provided, and during this period no person other than the 
person who submitted such data originally would be  permitted, without the explicit consent of the 
person who submitted the data, to rely directly or indirectly on such data in support of an application for marketing approval/registration.  These Members also sought confirmation that 
applicants that sought marketing approval/registration for generic versions of pharmaceuticals 
(reproduced medicines) were required to submit pre-clinical and clinical test results and other data that was required for marketing approval/registr ation of "original" medicines and would not be 
permitted to rely on others' data without permission for the six-year period of protection against 
unfair commercial use.  These Members requested th at Kazakhstan comply with Article 39.3 of the 
TRIPS Agreement and provide this level of protection.   
791.  Some Members also expressed concerns about the transparency of the process for 
granting marketing approval/registration for pharmaceuticals and requested that Kazakhstan 
establish procedures so that an entity submitting undisclosed information and test data to obtain 
marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical in Kazakhstan would be informed if another application was filed seeking marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical with a similar 
active ingredient.  These Members sought assurances that those entities that had a marketing 
approval/registration or pending application for a pharmaceutical with the same or similar active 
ingredient had an opportunity to provide information to Kazakhstan's officials on whether other 
applicants had permission to use the first applicant's undisclosed information and test data, and to bring to the attention of Kazakhstan's officials issues regarding a subsequent applicant's 
development and submission of its own undisclosed information and test data.  Members also WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 245 - 
 
  requested information on whether Kazakhstan's officials would deny marketing 
approval/registration for a pharmaceutical if the applicant did not provide its own undisclosed information and test data and on the status of pharmaceuticals that were improperly granted 
marketing approval/registration.  In particular, on whether pharmaceuticals that were granted 
marketing approval/registration based on applications that did not include the applicant's own undisclosed information and test data would be removed from the market until such legal 
requirements were satisfied.   
792.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that such undisclosed information 
and test data was protected against disclosure under the Civil Code, Criminal Code, and Code on 
Administrative Offences, and that there was no time limitation on this protection.  She further 
confirmed that Kazakhstan's laws did not permit others to rely, directly or indirectly, on 
undisclosed test data developed or submitted by another to obtain marketing approval/registration 
in Kazakhstan, and that upon its accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would adopt measures to provide for the protection of undisclosed information and test data, in compliance with Article 39.3 
of the TRIPS Agreement, providing that undisclosed  information and test data submitted to obtain 
marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan, i.e., registration of pharmaceutical products, which utilise new chemical entities, would have a period of at least six years of protection against unfair 
commercial use starting from the date of grant of marketing approval in Kazakhstan.  During this 
period of protection against unfair commercial use, no person or entity (public or private), other 
than the person or entity who submitted such undisclosed information and test data, could without 
the explicit consent of the person or entity wh o submitted such undisclosed information and test 
data rely, directly or indirectly, on such data in support of an application for marketing 
approval/registration in Kazakhstan.  Notice of subsequent applications for marketing 
approval/registration would be provided in accord with established procedures.  During the six-year period, any subsequent application for marketing approval/registration would not be 
granted, unless the subsequent applicant submitted his own data (or data used with the 
authorisation of the right holder) meeting the sa me requirements as the first applicant, and 
products registered without submission of such data would be removed from the market until 
requirements were met.  Further, he confirmed that Kazakhstan would protect such data against 
any disclosure, except where necessary to protect the public or unless steps were taken to ensure 
that the data were protected against unfair commercial use.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.  
793.  In response to Member's concerns about ge neric or "reproduced" pharmaceuticals, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that the [six-]year prohibition of unfair commercial use of 
undisclosed information and test data submitted to obtain marketing approval/registration in 
Kazakhstan also applied to generic or reproduced pharmaceuticals, including those 
pharmaceuticals subject to expedited or abbreviated approval procedures. 
794.  [In reply to the specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that despite 
the fact that Kazakhstan did not require registrati on of agrochemical products, in order to ensure WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 246 - 
 
  safety of humans, animals and the environment, it provided for registration of chemical products, 
including mineral fertilizers and registration of pesticides and poisons.  Specifically, under the Law on the Safety of Chemical Products and the Decree on the Approval of the Rules on the 
Registration and Production Testing and State Regist ration of Pesticides, registration requirements 
for chemical products, pesticides and poisons were the same for every applicant and did not permit the reliance on undisclosed data developed or submitted by another applicant to obtain product 
registration.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
[The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all agricultural chemicals, including mineral 
fertilizers, were subject to registration in Kaza khstan. In accordance with Law No. 302 "On Safety 
of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007, mineral fertilizers had to be registered not as agricultural 
products but chemical products.  Pesticides and poisons had to be registered in accordance with 
Government Resolution No. 1396 "On Approval of th e Rules on Registration and Production Testing 
and State Registration of Pesticides" of 30 November 2011.  Specifically, under Law No. 302 "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007 and Government Resolution No. 1396 
"On Approval of the Rules on Registration and Production Testing and State Registration of 
Pesticides" of 30 November 2011, registration requirements for chemical products, pesticides and poisons were the same for every applicant and di d not permit the reliance on undisclosed data 
developed or submitted by another applicant to obtain product registration.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments].] 
- ENFORCEMENT 
- Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies 795.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Civil Code, the Criminal Code, Article 33 
of the Patent Law, and Article 42 of the Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Geographical 
Indications" (Trademark Law) ensured that no  discrimination existed between domestic and 
foreign parties in disputes concerning possible infringement of intellectual property rights.  
Foreign and domestic holders of intellectual property rights had the right to settle disputes in court 
related to (i) authorship; (ii) the legality of granting protection; (iii) infringements of exclusive rights and other economic rights; (iv) identificati on of the patent owner; (v) the granting of a 
compulsory licence for patents; (vi) conclusion and execution of licence contracts; 
(vii) compensation and damages for infringement of exclusive rights; and (viii) other disputes 
arising from intellectual property rights.  She added that right holders had the right to seek 
protection of their rights from local authorities or administration, which did not prevent them from 
filing an application in court.   
796.  She noted that, pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 66 of the Civil Procedure Code, the 
court could assist the parties to a dispute in obtaining necessary evidence when evidence relevant to the substantiation of one party's claims was in the control of the opposing party.  If necessary, 
the court could provide the requesting party with an official letter of request for providing the 
evidence by the opposing party.  In addition, Ar ticle 74, paragraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 247 - 
 
  stipulated that a party could request a "securing of  evidence" when in doubt about the availability 
of the necessary evidence at a later point in time.   
797.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation, the court had the authority to recover from 
the infringer damages that had been incurred by the right holder.  In reply to the specific question, 
the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that Articles 9 and 917 of the Civil Code foresaw a 
complete recovery for damages, including actual damage and lost profit.  Damages included 
expenses that were made or should be made by the person whose right was violated, loss or injury 
of his property (actual damage) and profit that th is person could receive if his right would not be 
violated (lost profit).  In this regard, Articles 9 and 917 of the Civil Code clearly established that 
the calculation of damages would reference the value of the corresponding legitimate good.  
Article 44 of the Trademark Law stipulated that a person illegally using a trademark or a 
geographical indication had to discontinue such  use and provide compensation for the damages 
incurred by the right holders also including actual pr ofit and lost profit.  Pursuant to Article 49 of 
the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", the court could oblige a copyright infringer to:  
(i) compensate the claimant for damages including lost profit; (ii) compensate the profit received 
by the infringer; or (iii) pay compensation in  the amount of 20 to 50,000 minimum wages (500 to 
50,000 minimum wages for infringement of software or database copyright).  Moreover, in 
accordance with Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Code, the court could order the infringer to 
compensate the successful party for attorney's fees, however the sum could not exceed 10% of 
the amount of the claim.  Asked specifically about the authority of the courts to order recovery of 
profits pursuant to Article 45(2) of the TRIPS Agreement, she referred to Article 9, paragraph 4 of the Civil Code and Article 111, paragraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Code.   
798.  Asked to provide information on Kazakhstan's compliance with the provisions of Article 46 
of the TRIPS Agreement, she said that Article 49 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" 
stipulated that a judge could order the seizure and withdrawal of all copies of suspected pirated 
works and phonograms, as well as all materials and equipment used in their production or 
reproduction.  Pirated copies of works or phonog rams could be transferred to the rights holders 
upon their request, or be destroyed by a decision of the court.  In addition, Article 129 of the Code 
of Administrative Violations also provided for the seizure and forfeiture of pirated copies of works 
and phonograms.  The disposal of counterfeit goods outside the channels of commerce was 
foreseen in Article 145 of the Code of Administrative Violations, which had been in force since 
1 January 2008.  Pursuant to Article 44(2) of the Trademark Law, a person illegally using a trademark or appellation of origin, or using a confusingly similar designation, had to remove the 
mark or designation from the product, its packaging, blank forms and all other documentation.  
If doing so was impossible, the goods were destroyed (liquidated) in accordance with the relevant 
legal procedures.  In reply to the specific co mment that the simple removal of the trademark 
unlawfully affixed shall not be suffi cient, other than in exceptional cases, the representative of 
Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan was planning to amend Article 44 of the Trademark Law in 
order to ensure its compliance with the Articl e 46 of the TRIPS Agreement by the date of 
WTO accession. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 248 - 
 
  799.  Some Members enquired whether any training had been provided to judges to enable them 
to consider disputes involving intellectual property rights.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that judges took active part in discussions on intellectual property rights protection 
(workshops, conferences, roundtables).  For instance, in July 2005, the Committee for Intellectual 
Property Rights, in collaboration with the World Intellectual Property Rights Organization (WIPO), the Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) and the World Customs Organization (WCO), 
held a workshop on enforcement practices in the sp here of intellectual property for judges of the 
Supreme Court and oblast courts.  In 2011, the Committee for Intellectual Property Rights, in collaboration with the U.S. Agency for Internatio nal Development had held a conference entitled, 
"Judicial protection of intellectual property rights in the Republic of Kazakhstan".  In addition, the 
Judicial Academy under the Academy of State Serv ice of the Republic of Kazakhstan, organized 
skills improvement trainings for Kazakhstan's judges on different issues related to the applicable 
law of the country. 
- Provisional Measures 
800.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that judges and Government bodies had the 
authority to grant provisional measures if any delay was likely to cause irreparable harm to the right holder, or if a demonstrable risk of eviden ce being destroyed existed.  She noted that the 
Trademark Law and the Patent Law did not reference provisional remedies, but pointed to 
Chapter 15 of the Civil Procedure Code which prov ided for the imposition of such measures.  
According to Article 159 of this Code, judges – at  the request of the claimant, or at their own 
initiative – had the power to (i) seize the defendant's property; (ii) prohibit a defendant from 
taking certain actions, such as the sale of goods bearing a trademark belonging to the claimant; 
(iii) prohibit other persons from transferring property or performing certain actions in respect to 
the defendant; (iv) suspend the sale of property in cases where a claim was filed to cancel the seizure of property; (v) suspend a contested legal act issued by a Government body, organization, 
or an official; and (vi) suspend a penalty impo sed by an executive document, contested by the 
debtor in court.  The court could order any of the above measures without prior notice to the defendant.  The court could also apply other provisional measures for the purposes of Article 158 
of the Civil Procedure Code, which foresaw the adoption of such measures in cases where, in their 
absence, the court would not be able to issue a ruling or its work would be hindered.   
801.  In reply to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the 
Civil Procedure Code provided also for:  (i) the ri ght of the participants in a proceeding to request 
replacement of one type of provisional measure wi th another.  The request was considered by the 
court with notification of participants about time and place of the proceedings (Article 162).  
Therefore, a defendant affected by a provisional measure adopted inaudita altera parte (i.e. 
without prior hearing of the other side) had the right to request the review of the measure, 
including the right to be heard; and (ii) the right of the participants or the judge of proceedings to 
request revocation or cessation of effects of the provisional measures (Article 163).  Therefore, if 
proceedings leading to a decision on the merits of the case were not initiated within a reasonable 
period, participants or judge of proceedings co uld initiate revocation or cessation of such WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 249 - 
 
  measures.  In addition, the defendant could requ est compensation from the applicant where there 
was a decision of no infringement or threat of infringement (Article 165). 
802.  In reply to the concern of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in 
the cases where provisional measures had been adopted inaudita altera parte , parties affected had 
to be given notice, without delay after the execution of the measures at the latest. 
- Administrative Procedures and Remedies 
803.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, pursuant to Articles 128, 129 and 145 of the 
Code of Administrative Violations, certain actions were considered as an infringement of intellectual property rights and entailed administrative responsibility.  These included 
(i) non-criminal, but illegal, use of an invention, industrial design, utility model, selective 
achievement, or micro-circuit layout design prior to its official publication, as well as misappropriation of authorship or coercion into joint authorship; (ii) non-criminal, but illegal, use 
of copyright or related rights, as well as the purchase, storage, hauling or production of counterfeit 
copies of artistic works and/or phonograms for the purpose of sale, misappropriation or coercion 
into joint authorship; and (iii) non-criminal, but illegal, use of a trademark, service mark, 
appellation of origin or similar designations for goods (services), as well as illegal use of a firm name.   
804.  She noted that such infringements were review ed by the courts.  Petitions were permitted 
during meetings, persons participating in the review were given a hearing, and evidence was examined.  After consideration of the case, the court terminated the proceedings or imposed 
administrative sanctions.   
805.  For Article 128 violations, fines for natural persons were set at 20-50 Monthly Calculation 
Indices (MCI), for officials at 50-100 MCI, and for juridical persons at 100-400 MCI.
18  
For repeated violations under this Article, the corresponding fines were set at 50-100 MCI, 100-150 MCI and 200-700 MCI respectively.  As for Article 129 violations, fines for natural persons 
were set at 10-15 MCI, for officials at 20-30 MCI, and for juridical persons at 100-150 MCI – with 
a corresponding confiscation of copies of works and phonograms, as well as the equipment used for their production.  For repeated violations under this Article, the corresponding fines were set at 
15-20 MCI, 30-50 MCI, and 150-200 MCI respectively – with a corresponding confiscation of 
copies of works and phonograms and the equipment used for their production.  Finally, in the case 
of Article 145 violations, fines for natural pers ons were set at 10-30 MCI, for officials at 
30-50 MCI, and for juridical persons at 50-100 MCI (confiscation of the infringing goods was also provided for).  For repeated violations under th is Article, the corresponding fines were set at 
30-50 MCI, 50-100 MCI and 100-200 MCI respectively.  Any interested party could challenge the 
decision of the court to a higher court.   
                                               
 18 An MCI was worth approximately US$10 and wa s calculated on an annual basis.   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 250 - 
 
  806.  Asked about the administrative actions available to owners of intellectual property rights 
for the enforcement of their rights, the agencies re sponsible for such actions, as well as about the 
channels available to foreign parties to invoke such actions, she replied that the applicant (foreign 
or domestic) had the right to raise objections to the Board of Appeal of the Committee on 
Intellectual Property Rights (Articles 22, 23, and 29 of the Patent Law and Articles 12, 23, 31 and 
44 of the Trademark Law).  If the applicant remained  dissatisfied with the decision of the Board of 
Appeal, the applicant had the right to further appeal that decision in court.  She further noted that 
while infringements of intellectual property rights were considered by the courts, disputes concerning the rights to objects of industrial  property, other than those considered in the 
Administrative Code, were considered within the framework of civil legislation.  
807.  Asked to provide more information concerning the procedures followed by the 
administrative commissions in reviewing allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights 
and about the remedies that the commissions could impose, she replied that, in accordance with the national legislation, no administrative commissions on infringement of intellectual property 
rights could be established in Kazakhstan.  Under the legislation, all disputes concerning 
intellectual property rights could be settled only in the courts. 
- Special Border Measures 
808.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as of 1 July 2010, border measures in 
Kazakhstan were applied pursuant to Chapter 46 of the Customs Code of the Customs Union (Articles 328-334) and Section 53 of the Customs Code of the Republic Kazakhstan 
(Articles 436-445).  Consistent with the procedures set-out in Chapter 46 and Section 53, 
Kazakhstan's customs authorities were authorised to take action to prevent the import and export 
of goods containing objects of intellectual pr operty rights.  Kazakhstan's Customs Control 
Committee maintained a Registry of goods containing intellectual property, which was published periodically.  Goods were included in the Registry free of charge, at the request of rights holders.  
This guaranteed that the rights of applicants wo uld be protected by the customs authorities for the 
duration specified in the application, the maximum period being two years from the date of inclusion in the Registry (with a possible extension, which could not exceed the period of validity of 
the right itself).  Although right holders could regi ster their intellectual property with the Customs 
Control Committee, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that customs officials could 
exercise ex officio authority to seize suspect goods even if right holders did not have a 
registration.   
809.  In order to address the concern of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan gave the 
following examples of use of the ex officio powers:  
- registered trademark "Shemonaikhinskoe" (milk):  quantity – 21,000 kg for the value of 
US$12,005; 
- registered trademarks "Yaguar", "Diplomaticheskaya", "Senator" (caps for the spirits):  
quantity – 6,022.52 kg (28,012 items) for the value of US$12,045.04.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 251 - 
 
  810.  The representative of Kazakhstan explai ned that on 21 May 2010, the Customs Union 
Parties had signed the Customs Union Agreement on Unified Customs Registry of Goods Containing Objects of Intellectual Property and the Customs Control Committee maintained Kazakhstan's 
contribution to this Customs Union Unified Register.  According to this Agreement in order to be 
included in the Unified Customs Register, it was required that the intellectual property right had to be protected in Kazakhstan as well as the other Customs Union Parties.  In the case of an 
intellectual property right included in the Customs Union Unified Register, the minimum 
security/guarantee was €10,000.   
811.  In reply to the concern that security was considerable and could deter right holders from 
participating in the Customs Register, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the most 
widespread form of meeting this obligation was an insurance guarantee, i.e., a contract between 
an insurance company and an applicant.  In accordance with the contract, insurance company 
guaranteed payments to compensate for property damage.  The real expenses of the applicant for 
signing such contract would not be higher than from 4 to 7% of the security sum.  Insurance 
guarantee was required for each application, but the application could cover unlimited trademarks 
and objects of copyright.  No payment was re quired for submission and examination of the 
application and implementation by the customs authorities of border measures.   
812.  The Customs Union Customs Code and the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
authorised the national customs authorities to suspend the customs processing of goods containing 
intellectual property for up to 10 business days if the right holder applied for such protection and if 
they found that the goods violated the intellectual  property rights of the applicant.  The Customs 
Union Customs Code authorised the enforcement of intellectual property rights with respect to 
intellectual property not included in the Customs Union Unified Register in accordance with the 
Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
813.  Asked whether the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan provided for any 
measures allowing the customs bodies to suspend the export or transit of counterfeit goods in 
Kazakhstan, she said that Article 440 of the Custom s Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan allowed 
the customs authorities to suspend the release of goods included in the national Customs Registry 
if they discovered any signs of the goods being coun terfeit.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 436 
of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the customs authorities did not take 
enforcement action for goods in transit.  The pr ocedure for keeping the national Customs Registry 
was approved by Order of the Minister of Fina nce of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 356 of 
16 June 2010. 
814.  She further noted that, when such goods were discovered, customs authorities would 
attempt to identify right holders by consulting the Customs Union Unified Registry or Kazakhstan's 
National Registry.  If a right holder had not registered its intellectual property rights on these 
registers, the customs authorities would attempt to identify and contact the right holder by 
consulting the registries of the Committee for Inte llectual Property Rights.  After the right holder 
was identified, the customs authorities informed him/her about the goods under investigation and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 252 - 
 
  provided the right holder, or his/her representative, with the opportunity to inspect 
samples/specimens from the goods under customs supervision at the place of temporary storage (Article 440 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and  Customs Union Commission 
Decision No. 258 on Customs Examination under Customs Control of 20 March 2010).  Pursuant to 
Article 440 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the customs authorities had to 
provide the right holder with the name and addr ess of the declarant, as well as provide the 
declarant with the name and address of the right ho lder.  This was done within one day of taking a 
decision to suspend the release of the goods – i.e., before the matter was taken to court and before the infringement was identified by the right holder.  Pursuant to the Customs Code, the 
customs authorities were entitled to receive compensation to cover expenses incurred in 
connection with the suspension of the goods (e.g. for warehouse storage).  For goods that proved 
to be counterfeit, such compensation would be provided by the declarant, and for goods that 
proved not to be counterfeit, by the applicant.  Ho wever, so far, such a situation had not occurred.  
For goods that proved not to be counterfeit, the right holder would compensate the declarant for 
any damages incurred (minimum security/guarantee of €10,000 was a requirement for right 
holders wishing to include goods in the Customs Registry).  The exact amount of compensation 
could be agreed between declarant and right holder, or could be determined by the court.   
815.  In reply to a specific question, she said that the organizational structure of the Customs 
Control Committee was stipulated in the Decree of the Minister of Finance No. 278 "On Approval of 
Structure of the Customs Control Committee of th e Ministry of Finance of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 27 May 2010. 
816.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that intellectual property right holders would 
be provided, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the Customs Union, with 
procedures related to border measures that complied fully with the relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement (Articles 51 to 60).  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
817.  Asked whether customs agents were the sole enforcer of IP laws and what was the role of 
police units in proactive and reactive infringement investigations, the representative of Kazakhstan 
said that the court, the office of the Public Prosecutor, internal affairs authorities and the financial 
police were among those who were actively involved in the enforcement of IP laws in Kazakhstan.  Police units worked in close cooperation with right holders as well as conducted repeated, 
unannounced inspections in order to examine compliance with intellectual property rights 
legislation.  If evidence of unauthorised use of intellectual property rights protection was found, administrative or criminal proceedings were initiated.   
- Criminal Procedures 
818.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Criminal Code provided for legal protection 
against infringement of intellectual property rights and for criminal responsibility.  The provisions 
of the Criminal Code had been strengthened wi th the adoption of the Law "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 253 - 
 
  22 November 2005.  In particular, these amendments had introduced the concepts of "selection 
achievements" and "integrated circuit layouts", and had also provided definitions of certain types of infringement – namely, illegal acquisition, storage or hauling of counterfeit copies of works and 
phonograms.   
819.  Criminal sanctions for the infringement of authors' rights and related rights were provided 
in Article 184 of the Criminal Code.  Under paragraph 1 of the Articles 184 and 184(1), fines 
equivalent to 100-500 MCI or equivalent to up to five times the monthly income of the convicted 
p a r t y ,  a s  w e l l  a s  1 0 0  t o  1 8 0  h o u r s  o f  p u b l i c  w o r k  o r  i m p r i s o n m e n t  f o r  u p  t o  t w o  y e a r s  w e r e  authorised for:  (i) usurpation of authorship or coercion into joint authorship, if such action caused 
considerable damages; and (ii) disclosure with out the consent of the author/applicant of an 
invention, utility model, industrial design, selective achievement or micro-circuit layout design 
prior to its official publication.  Under paragraph 2 of Articles 184 and 184-1, fines equivalent to 
500-700 MCI or 180 to 240 hours of public work or im prisonment for a period of three to one year 
were authorised for:  (i) the illegal use of a copyright and related rights, as well as the purchase, 
storage and production of counterfeit copies of artistic works and/or phonograms for the purpose 
of sale (in significant quantities); and (ii) the illegal use of an invention, utility model, industrial design, selective achievement or micro-circuit layout design (in significant quantities).  
Under paragraph 3 of Articles 184 and 184(1), imprisonment for two to five years, with or without 
confiscation of the property of the convicted part y, was authorised for the actions identified under 
paragraphs 2 of Articles 184 and 184(1) where those actions were committed:  (i) on repeated 
occasions (either by individuals or a group of indi viduals); (ii) by a group of individuals or an 
organized group of individuals; (iii) on a large-sc ale or causing large-scale damage; or (iv) with 
abuse of official position.  She added that crim inal cases under paragraph 1 of Articles 184 and 
184(1) (in relation to private non-property righ ts) required a complaint by the right holder.  
Criminal cases under paragraphs 2 and 3 of Articles 184 and 184(1) (large-scale acquisition for the 
purpose of sale, repeated offences by organized gr oups, abuse of official position) could be opened 
without a complaint by the right holder because su ch offences were deemed to be dangerous for 
the society.   
820.  Pursuant to Article 199 of the Criminal Code, the minimum threshold for bringing criminal 
cases involving unlawful use of a trademark, service mark, firm name, appellation of origin or 
other designations of goods (services) was 500 MCI.  The court could impose a fine of 
200-500 MCI.  For repeated violations, or those resulting in large-scale damage (i.e. exceeding 500 MCI or approximately US$4,500), the court could impose fines equivalent to 200-500 MCI, or 
to the amount of income received by the convicte d party for a period of two to five months; 180 to 
240 hours of public work; detention for up to six months; or imprisonment for up to two years.  
For unlawful use of a trademark or appellation of origin not registered in Kazakhstan, if the action 
was performed repeatedly and resulted in large-scale damages, the court could impose fines equivalent to 100-200 MCI, or to the amount of income received by the convicted party for up to 
two months; public works for 120 to 180 hour s; detention for up to three months; or 
imprisonment for up to one year. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 254 - 
 
  821.  Actions were considered to cause considerable damage if the amount of the damage, the 
value of the rights for the use of intellectual prop erty rights, or the value of the copies of the 
works and phonograms containing an invention, utility model, industrial design, selective 
achievement or microcircuit layout design exceeded 100 MCI, as established at the time of the 
crime.  Actions were considered to cause large-scale damage if that value exceeded 500 MCI. 
822.  A Member asked what was the status and/or likely outcome for determining thresholds for 
application of criminal procedures and penalties with regard to cases of wilful trademark 
counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale and what was the timeline for Kazakhstan's decision.  The representative of Kaza khstan replied that the application of thresholds 
was traditionally used in Kazakhstan in order to separate criminal offences punishable by means of 
criminal prosecution from administrative misdemeanours.  This clear and unambiguous criterion 
was an effective, practical tool for enforcement, as it could be implemented easily and contained 
no element of subjective evaluation.  The ti meline for determining a threshold (within a 
preliminary investigation) could not exceed a two-month period which, however, could be 
extended in exceptionally difficult cases. 
823.  Concerning the seizure, forfeiture and destruction of counterfeit goods, as well as 
materials and equipment used in their production, she pointed to Article 121 (part 3) of the 
Criminal Procedure Code and Decree of the Su preme Court No. 19 "On Judicial Sentence" of 
15 August 2002 (see "Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies"). 
824.  According to official statistics, in 2009, 493 legal proceedings had been instituted under 
Articles 184 and 199 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
825.  Some Members noted that there was a criminal penalty for pirated copyright and related 
rights (Article 184 of the Criminal Code), but expr essed concern that there did not appear to be a 
criminal penalty for counterfeit trademarked goods.  They further stated that the administrative fine provided by the Administrati ve Code appeared insufficient to  serve as an effective deterrent. 
826.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that criminal penalties to prevent trade in 
counterfeit trademark goods were provided in Article 199 of the Criminal Code (Special Part).  
The representative of Kazakhstan added that the Law "On Changes and Amendments to Legislative 
Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellect ual Property" of 22 November 2005 had reinforced 
the sanctions available against infringement and repeated infringement of copyright and other 
rights, and provided for sanctions for administrative infringements.  Recognising Members' 
concerns, the representative of Kazakhstan stated  that in order to improve the effectiveness of 
enforcement measures in the area of intellectual property rights, when determining the existence 
of large scale or considerable damage, the prosecutor/court would take into account that storage 
of pirated copies of works or phonograms for th e purpose of sale was also considered to be a 
crime.  Thus, application of the thresholds to the activity would take into account both the value of 
the pirated copies of works or phonograms that we re sold, and the value of the pirated copies in 
storage.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's Law, the value of pirated copies was calculated by WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 255 - 
 
  reference to the value of the corresponding legitimate products, and not by reference to the price 
of the pirated product.  This approach of taking into account copies in storage would also apply in 
cases of copyright infringement over the Internet. 
827.  Some Members continued to have concerns that Kazakhstan's threshold for application of 
criminal procedures and penalties precluded action against certain cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  These Members requested Kazakhstan to 
ensure that criminal procedures and penalties would be applied to all cases of wilful trademark 
counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  In their view, the value of the products 
that were counterfeited or pirated was not always a good indicator of whether the counterfeiting 
was wilful or if piracy was on a commercial scale.  Other circumstances could establish wilful 
trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  For example, in some cases, 
each individual act of piracy might involve a small amount of money, but given other conditions in 
the market, e.g., the number of piratical copies, or the existence of copies made before the 
release of the work, the acts were clearly on a commercial scale.  Finding other evidence, such as 
a worn mold for making copies, would be another situation in which commercial scale piracy was 
evident. 
828.  [In response to Members' concerns regardin g thresholds for application of criminal 
procedures and penalties with regard to cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright 
piracy on a commercial scale, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that thresholds in such 
cases would be set and applied in a manner that reflected the realities of the commercial market 
place in Kazakhstan, including with regard to the Internet market.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
829.  Members sought a commitment that Kazakhstan would be in compliance with the 
TRIPS Agreement, including its enforcement provisions, as of the date of accession, without recourse to transitional arrangements.   
830.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would apply fully the 
provisions of the TRIPS Agreement from the date of its accession to the WTO, including provisions 
for enforcement, without recourse to any transitional period.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment.] 
VI. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
831.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the services sector was one of the most 
dynamic sectors of the economy, and its role was ex pected to grow in the future.  Since 1990, the 
share of services in GDP had grown steadily to reach a peak of 60% in 1998, while the average 
level for the last decade had been 50%; in 2010 the share had stood at 52.8%.   
832.  Some Members requested information on the legislative base regulating commercial 
services and asked whether the Government was ta king measures to ensure non-discrimination 
with regard to foreign service suppliers.  The representative of Kazakhstan, noting the growing WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 256 - 
 
  role of services in the national economy, said that the existing legislative framework governing the 
services sector was still being developed and generally there was no discrimination against foreign services suppliers.   
833.  In response to a question on "natural monopolies" in the telecommunications sector, she 
said that the Telecommunications Sector Development Programme for the period 2006-2008, adopted by Government Resolution No. 519 of 7 June 2006, had outlined a plan for a 
stage-by-stage liberalisation of the telecommunications market.  These measures were expected 
to facilitate competition, improve the quality and capacity of telecommunication services, and remove barriers to new entrants.  Accordingly, since 1 January 2005, the exclusive right of 
KazakhTeleCom to provide international and long-distance communication services had been 
discontinued, and licenses for the provision of these services were now held by more than 
25 operators.  In addition, since 1 January 2006, al l restrictions on the inter-connectivity between 
operators had been removed and customers were given the technical opportunity to choose between operators of international and long-dista nce communications.  Pursuant to amendments 
to Article 4 of Law No. 272-II "On Natural Monopoli es", the activities of natural monopolies no 
longer pertained to "telecommunication services through local networks", but instead covered (i) telecommunication services, when there was no other competing operator due to the fact that it 
might be economically and technically infeasible to enter the market (specifically, these 
telecommunication services included operator connection services to universal connection 
networks and telephone traffic transmission services); and (ii) lease or use of cable channels and 
other basic facilities technologically related to connecting telecommunication networks with telecommunications of common use.  She added that pursuant to Law No. 567 
"On Communications" of 5 July 2004 - (i) local telephone communications services; (ii) area and 
long-distance telephone services; and (iii) services providing mass Internet access with connection speed no less than 256 Kb/sec. - were defined as universal telecommunications services which 
were subject to governmental regulation.   
834.  In accordance with the Law "On National Security", foreign participation in the capital of 
companies providing long distance and/or international telecommunication services using fixed 
communication networks (cable, optical fibre, and radio relay) was limited to 49%.  This limitation had been introduced to protect the national security interests of Kazakhstan.  However, this 
limitation did not apply to operators of mobile, satellite and local communications and would be 
removed for all companies other than JSC "KazakhTeleCom" (and its possible successors) within […] years after Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.   
835.  The representative of Kazakhstan also pointed to a number of other liberalisation initiatives 
in this sector.  To avoid cross-subsidizing and to recover the financial losses of operators rendering 
universal telecommunication services in rural areas, her Government had begun subsidizing these 
operators through the State budget.  In 1997-2010 , 371 licenses for local communication services 
and 511 licenses for rendering data transmission se rvices had been issued.  To resolve the "last WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 257 - 
 
  mile" problem of access to customers, 51 operators had received permission to use the 5.2-5.9 
GHz radio spectrum.   
836.  Some Members noted that it was clear that there was no "natural" monopoly in the 
telecommunications services sector, adding that the limited nature of Kazakhstan's offer in the 
negotiation of its services commitments supported the contention that a State monopoly was being granted and preserved.  A Member noted that, while KazakhTeleCom no longer had exclusive 
rights for the provision of international and long-distance communication, the company had 
participated in a tender for the acquisition of another telecommunications company – effectively creating a State-owned monopoly in the telecommunication sector.   
837.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that KazakhTeleCom's actions were in 
compliance with Kazakhstan's antitrust legislation.  She noted that KazakhTeleCom's share in 
Kazakhstan's market did not exceed 30% in all types of telecommunication services. 
838.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to explain the local content requirements relating to 
services
19, in particular with regards to foreign invested companies and to identify those 
circumstances in which a foreign investor was required to buy services only from 
Kazakhstan-based companies unless the required service was unavailable in Kazakhstan.   
839.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the local content requirement with regard to 
surface and subsurface use pertained to all services acquired by subsurface users.  This was a 
non-discriminatory requirement, which equally applied to both foreign and domestic investors 
signing investment agreements with the Government of Kazakhstan on use of surface and 
subsurface resources.  This provision was included in the Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use".  This Law established a requirement for such investors to procure services from juridical 
persons of Kazakhstan provided that such se rvices met the requirements of the project 
documentation and Kazakhstan's legislation on technical regulation.  If services required were not found in Kazakhstan, a subsurface user could attract foreign country-based companies to provide 
those services.  The Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" did not stipulate a minimum 
percentage of local content requirements, but provided that a contract had to contain obligations 
in respect to Kazakhstan's goods, services, and personnel, which were determined individually in 
each contract on subsurface use and was dependant on the complexity and specificity of the project.  The winner of the competitive bidding to provide services to the investor was determined 
on the basis of the lowest price, with putati ve discounts granted for service suppliers meeting 
certain minimum thresholds  for employment of citizens of Kazakhstan.   
840.  Asked to clarify whether an investor must only  use the tender process or if it might find 
service providers through other methods, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan responded that, in 
addition to tenders, subsurface users could also use other procurement methods such as a 
quotation request, from one source and through commodity exchanges.  Tendering was the most 
                                               
19 The term services included both services and "works" as those terms were used in the Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use ". WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 258 - 
 
  commonly used procurement method since it was more transparent and gave equal opportunities 
to all suppliers to participate in the bid.  
841.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would not adopt any 
measure pertaining to requirements to use Kazakh stan content that exceeded those provided for 
in the Subsurface Law as was in effect in September 2011.  Upon accession, in establishing the terms for conducting a tender for granting subsurface use rights, Kazakhstan would not establish a 
minimum Kazakhstan content for personnel or services of more than 50%, as determined pursuant 
to this paragraph:  (a) Kazakhstan content of personnel of an investor that had been granted subsurface use rights ("the investor") would be calculated as the proportion, on a per capita basis, 
of executives, managers and specialists, as those terms were defined for purposes of entry and 
temporary stay of intra-corporate transferees in Kazakhstan's WTO schedule of specific 
commitments on services (hereinafter "qualified employees"), who were citizens of Kazakhstan; 
(b) Kazakhstan content in all services, which were  rendered to the investor, was defined as the 
share of the total annual amount of payments (e xpenditures) for services under all contracts, 
which were paid to juridical persons of Kazakhstan
20.  However, the amount paid to juridical 
persons of Kazakhstan would be reduced by any amount paid for services subcontracted at any level that were performed by enterprises that were not juridical persons of Kazakhstan; and (c) in 
determining the tender winner for purposes of granting subsurface use rights, Kazakhstan would 
not take into account the fact that a potential in vestor might have offere d a level of Kazakhstan 
content for personnel or services above 50%.  Within five years from the date of its accession to 
the WTO, Kazakhstan would bring into conformity with above-mentioned terms any contract signed between September 2011 and the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.]   
842.  Some Members requested information on the regulation of the banking sector and in 
particular requested information on the conditions under which a foreign bank would be able to 
obtain a licence to establish a branch within Kazakhstan.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that direct branching would be permitted under a new banking law or 
amendment to the current banking law within […] years after accession.  She reported that the 
activities of banking firms were regulated by the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 2444 "On Banks and Banking Activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 31 August 1995.  Under the Law, 
a juridical person was required to have a licence to engage in a banking business.  Article 15 of the 
current Law provided that banks must be established in the form of a joint-stock company.  The licensing criteria to be adopted for branches of foreign banks would be prudential in nature.  
Also the authorised body of Kazakhstan was permi tted to impose additional requirements providing 
for the solvency and stability of financial organizations.  However, there may be differences 
between the licensing criteria for a joint-stock bank and those for a branch of a foreign bank.  
The representative of Kazakhstan added that the National Bank of Kazakhstan would comply with 
                                               
 
20 A contract with a juridical person of Kazakhstan woul d be disregarded, if that person did not actually 
carry out the agreed activity in Kazakhstan.  The term "j uridical person of Kazakhstan"  included also individual 
entrepreneurs. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 259 - 
 
  the requirements of Articles XVI and XVII of the GATS when considering an application for a new 
licence subject to the limitations set forth in Kazakhstan's Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services.  
843.  [In response to questions from a Member related to the regulatory regime for foreign bank 
branches, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the regime was yet to be developed but it 
would be in line with commonly accepted international practice.  This regime would include, but 
would not be limited to such requirements, as fo r example, capital adequacy, which would depend 
on the parent bank's capital.  The specific ca pital requirement for a foreign bank branch would 
differ depending on its business plans in Kazakhstan; a branch would be required to maintain a 
deposit with the National Bank of Kazakhstan, the sum of which would be based on obligations 
which would be accepted by the foreign bank branch .  In addition, a branch would be required to 
have at least two resident managers.] 
844.  [Some Members stated that they expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to 
guarantee transparency of licensing requirements  and procedures, qualification requirements and 
procedures as well as of other authorisation requirements, in particular with respect to obtaining, 
extending, renewing, denying and terminating lice nses and other approvals required to provide 
services in Kazakhstan's market and appeals of such actions.  Kazakhstan's licensing procedures 
and conditions should not in themselves act as a barrier to market access and should not be more 
trade restrictive than necessary.  Kazakhstan should publish a list of authorities responsible for 
authorising, approving or regulating those service sectors in which Kazakhstan has made specific 
commitments and Kazakhstan's licensing procedures and conditions.  Members also expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that for those services included in Kazakhstan's 
Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services, relevant regulatory authorities would be separated 
from, and not accountable to, any service suppliers they regulate.  Members further expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that foreign service suppliers remain free to 
choose their partners.] 
845.  [In response, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, upon accession Kazakhstan 
would ensure that all normative legal acts of general application pertaining to or affecting trade in 
services, as well as information on their effective date and scope of application were published
21 or 
made otherwise publicly available.  She further confirmed that Kazakhstan would ensure that the 
names of competent authorities that were responsible for certification and issuing licenses for 
service activities were published or made otherwise publicly available.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
846.  [Without prejudice to the right of Kazakhstan to establish and apply licensing procedures 
and requirements, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed, that in sectors in which 
Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments, Kazakhstan would ensure that its licensing 
procedures would not in themselves constitute a restriction on the supply of the service, and its 
                                               
21 Publication would include publication on the Internet.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 260 - 
 
  licensing requirements directly related to eligibility to supply a service would not in themselves be 
an unjustified barrier to the supply of the service.   She further confirmed that for those services 
sectors in which specific commitments were undertaken by Kazakhstan in its Schedule of Specific 
Commitments, Kazakhstan would ensure that:  
(a) All licensing procedures and requirements were set-out in normative legal acts and that 
any law establishing or implementing licensing procedures or requirements would be published prior to its effective date;  
(b) Relevant authorities would review and make a decision on granting or denying a licence 
within the period specified in official procedures or, if no time period was specified, without undue delay;  
(c) Any fees charged in connection with the filing and review of an application for a licence 
would not constitute in themselves a restriction on the supply of the service; 
(d) Once any period established in a normative legal act for review of an application for a 
licence had lapsed, and on the request of an applicant, Kazakhstan's relevant regulatory authority would inform the applicant of the status of its application and whether it was 
considered complete.  If the authority required additional information from the applicant, it 
would notify the applicant without delay and specify the additional information required to complete the application.  Applicants would ha ve the opportunity to provide the additional 
information requested and to make technical corrections in the application.  An application 
would not be considered complete until all information and documents specified in the 
relevant laws and regulations were received;  
(e) Kazakhstan's relevant regulatory authority would make an administrative decision on a 
completed application for issuance of a licence and authorisation for the supply of a 
financial service, and, if appropriate, approval  of new products and rate changes, within a 
reasonable period of time and would promptly notify the applicant of the decision.  An application would not be considered complete until all information specified in the relevant normative legal acts is received.  Where it is not practicable for a decision to be 
made on:   
(i) an application for supply of banking services to receive an authorisation within 
six months, and to receive a licence within two months;  
(ii) an application for supply of other financial services to receive an authorisation 
within three months, and to receive a licence within one month. 
 The relevant regulatory authority would notify the applicant without delay; (f) On the written request of an unsuccessful applicant, a regulatory authority that has denied 
an application would, inform the applicant in writing of the reasons for denial of the 
application.  However, this provision would not be construed to require a regulatory 
authority to disclose information, the disclosure of which would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the national security interests; 
(g) Where an application has been denied, an applicant may submit a new application that 
attempts to address any prior problems for licensing; 
(h) Where approval was required, once the application had been approved, the applicant 
would be informed in writing and in the time period provided for by the relevant normative 
legal act or, if no time period is specified, without undue delay; and 
(i) Where examination was required to licence professionals, such examinations would be 
scheduled at reasonable intervals.  That would not apply to qualifying examinations administered or offered by financial service regulators or self-regulatory bodies or organizations. 
 The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
847.  [The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that in those sectors, where 
Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments, relevant regulatory authorities would not be 
accountable to any service suppliers they regulate d.  Further, the representative of Kazakhstan WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 261 - 
 
  confirmed that in sectors in which Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments it would 
ensure where practicable, that: 
(a) regulations of general application that it proposes to adopt were published in advance; 
(b) an opportunity to comment on such propos ed regulations was provided to interested 
persons and other Members; and 
(c) a reasonable time between publication of the final regulation and its effective date was 
allowed.   
 The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
848.  [With respect to foreign service suppliers' choice of partner, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that in those sectors, where Kazakhstan had undertaken specific 
commitments, foreign service suppliers, when entering into joint venture or other partnerships 
with persons of Kazakhstan, were free to choose their partner(s).  This is without prejudice to regulations relating to ownership of financial organizations or participation in them.  The Working 
Party took note of these commitments.] 
849.  In response to the question of a Member whether existing legislation of Kazakhstan 
provided for possibility to review administrative decisions, such as the denial of a licence, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 46 of the Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, if a licence was not issued within 
the time-frame established by the Law or the applicant contested the denial to issue a licence as 
unreasonable, an applicant had the right to appeal to the court in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan).  Terms and 
procedures for the review of decisions such as the denial of a licence were established in the Civil 
Procedure Code.  Specifically, in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Civil Procedure Code, a citizen or a juridical person had the right to file an application to the court within three months of the date 
when they became aware of the violation of thei r rights, freedoms and interests guaranteed by the 
law.  The application was reviewed by the court within one month.  If the court found that the 
applicants' rights, freedoms and interests were vi olated, the court obliged an appropriate state 
authority to eliminate the violation.  The relevant state authority had to notify the court and the applicant of the enforcement of the court's decision  no later than one month of the date the state 
authority had received the court's decision. 
850.  A Member asked to clarify the scope of EEC competence in trade in services and 
investments between the SES Parties, and between the SES Parties and third countries.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that trade in services and investments within the 
Single Economic Space were regulated by the Agreement on Trade in Services and Investments 
signed on 9 December 2010 and enacted as of 1 January 2012.  The Agreement regulated internal 
trade in services and investments between the SES Parties, and did not apply to trade in services 
and investments between the SES Parties and third countries.  Each SES Party had reserved the 
right to maintain the exemptions from national  treatment regime and reservations on market 
access that were stipulated in their Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services.  The basic objectives of the Agreement were the following:  (i) to create conditions to expand trade in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 262 - 
 
  services and promote its liberalisation; (ii) to create common principles and rules for mutual trade 
in services in the SES member-States in order to promote their economic growth; and (iii) to create favourable investment climate within the SES.  The Agreement did not provide the EEC with 
the authority to regulate trade in services and investments between the SES Parties, or between 
the SES Parties and third countries. 
851.  The Republic of Kazakhstan undertook market access negotiations in services with 
Members of the Working Party.  The commitments of  the Republic of Kazakhstan in services were 
contained in the Schedule of Specific Commitments, reproduced in Annex I to the Protocol of Accession. 
VII. TRANSPARENCY 
- Publication of Information on Trade 852.  Some Members requested a description of the measures providing legal authorisation for 
Kazakhstan to implement Article X of the GATT 1994 and the other transparency provisions in the 
WTO Agreements, together with a confirmation that these measures would be applied upon accession.  A clarification was particularly sought on where the laws, decrees, resolutions, orders, 
letters and other measures of general application of Kazakhstan would be published to fulfil the 
requirements of Article X of the GATT 1994, and the transparency provisions in other 
WTO Agreements, including the WTO GATS and TRIPS Agreements.  Because the Customs Union 
(CU) Parties and competent bodies of the CU were  adopting international treaties, decisions and 
other measures related to trade, Members also requested confirmation that the CU Parties and 
competent bodies of the CU would comply with th e transparency provisions of the WTO Agreement 
on matters within CU competency.   
853.  Some Members stated that access to customs regulations and decrees was vital for traders 
attempting to import and export.  In this regard, Members also noted that, since 1 July 2010, 
when the Customs Union had entered into force,  CU agreements, decisions and other measures 
affecting trade with the CU as a whole, and with Kazakhstan as a CU Party, had become relevant 
to Members and traders.  These Members requested information on when and where CU agreements, decisions and other measures woul d be published and made available to Members 
and traders. 
854.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Article 4 of the Constitution stipulated that 
all laws and international treaties signed by Kazakhstan had to be published.   
855.  The Law "On Regulatory Legal Acts" of 24 March 1998 provided for the official publication 
and subsequent publication of regulatory legal acts.  Regulatory legal acts - including those 
affecting the rights, freedoms and obligations of citizens (other than acts containing State secrets 
and legally-protected confidential information) - were published in the official periodicals.  In particular, laws were published in the Bulletin of Parliament; Presidential and Government 
Resolutions were published in the Collection of Acts of the President and the Government; and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 263 - 
 
  legal acts of the Central Executive and other Central Executive State Bodies were published in the 
Collection of Acts of the Central Executive and Other Central Executive State Bodies.  Regulatory 
legal acts were also officially published in the periodicals "Yegemen Kazakhstan" and 
"Kazakhstanskaya Pravda".  Regulatory Decision s and Resolutions of Maslikhats and Akims were 
published in local periodicals and were distributed within the respective administrative territorial entity.  Subsequent publication took place in periodicals after the texts had undergone a 
compliance check with the centralised bank of legal acts of Kazakhstan.  The list of regulatory legal 
acts was published and regularly updated at the website of the Ministry of Justice - www.minjust.kz. 
856.  In accordance with the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Regulatory Legal Acts", 
after the elaboration of a regulatory legal act, its draft had to be sent to the concerned State 
bodies and organizations for approval.  The draft regulatory legal act affecting the interests of 
private entities was subject to mandatory publication (circulation) in the mass media, including Internet resources, prior to sending them for the approval of the concerned State bodies.  
Regulatory legal acts affecting private entity interests had to be approved by accredited business 
associations.  The State body, which had elaborated the draft regulatory legal act, would send it to the accredited associations.  Accredited business associations considered the draft and submitted 
their opinion within 10 working days.  In case the formulation of the opinion would require 
additional time, the terms could be extended, upon  written request, for another 10 working days.  
If the government body, which had developed the draft regulatory legal act, agreed with the 
opinion, it introduced the relevant amendments into the draft regulatory legal act.  In cases where the government body disagreed with the expert report, it would send a reply, outlining its reasons, 
to the association.  If needed, the association would request a meeting of the expert council.  
Further, the draft regulatory legal act, including the opinion or justification of disagreement, would be sent to the Government bodies concerned, for approval.  After approval of the draft regulatory 
legal act, the government body, which had elaborat ed the draft regulatory legal act, would publish 
it on its official website, including the proposals of the expert councils and interested individuals, 
the replies of State bodies, as well as the protocol s and expert reports on each effective regulatory 
legal act that had been tabled for discussion at the experts' council meeting.  The terms of entry 
into force of regulatory legal acts that would affect private enterprise entities' interests were fixed 
with the acceptance of the terms required for entrepreneurs to be in a position to carry out their 
activities.  The terms and condition for the entry into force of regulatory legal acts must not cause damage to private enterprise entities.  Regulatory  legal acts that set qualification requirements, 
licensing of activities, and lists of goods that we re subject to export and import licensing did not 
become effective until 21 days after the re levant act's official publication.   
857.  With regard to the publication of CU Agreements, CU Commission Decisions and other 
CU measures, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that all information about the activities and decisions of the CU bodi es was available on the website www.ts ouz.ru.  Decisions were posted on 
this website within two working days after their adoption.  She noted that the CU had a dedicated 
website and the date of publication of a measure on the website was considered to be the official WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 264 - 
 
  date for determining the date of entry into force of the measure.  Decisions of the CU Commission 
of a mandatory nature did not enter into force earlier than 30 calendar days after the date of their publication on the CU website.  She also stated that CU Parties were required to publish all 
decisions of the CU Commission in dedicated nati onal official journals, as well as the EurAsEC 
publications, stating the date of entry into force of a decision, the basis for which was the date of 
publication on the CU website. 
858.  Some Members expressed concern that CU treaties and decisions did not appear to provide 
the opportunity for Members to consult with or provide comments to the competent CU bodies on matters affecting trade, including where provisions of WTO Agreements specifically required 
Members to provide drafts of measures, receive comments from Members, consult on those 
comments, and take the comments and discussions into account.  These Members requested a 
commitment that Kazakhstan would make drafts of laws and other normative legal acts, as well as 
proposals/submissions to CU bodies that, if adopted, would have the effect of a normative legal act in Kazakhstan, available for interested persons, including Members, to provide comments prior to 
their adoption and that Kazakhstan and the comp etent bodies of the CU would comply with the 
transparency requirements of the WTO Agreements on matters within their respective competence. 
859.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 12 of the 
Agreement on Introduction and Implementation of Measures Concerning Trade in Goods in Respect 
of Third Countries on the Common Customs Territory of the CU of 9 June 2009, organizations or 
individual entrepreneurs of the CU Parties coul d provide comments, as provided for under the 
procedure of the development of draft decision on introduction, implementation and abolishment 
of non-tariff measure, concerning trade in goods with third countries.  Proposals on introduction, 
amendment or elimination of a measure were prepared by a CU Party, in accordance with its national legislation.  Interested stakeholders could provide comments on the draft proposal, in 
accordance with the national legislation of that CU  Party.  In addition, in cases where a CU Party 
had concluded an international treaty with a third country that provided for consultations, the 
Government of that country, organizations and entrepreneurs of that country could present their 
views with regard to the measure in compliance with the terms of the relevant treaty.   
860.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, all laws, 
regulations, decrees, decisions and administrative rulings of general application pertaining to or 
affecting trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, whether adopted or issued in the Republic of Kazakhstan or by a competent body  of the CU, would be published promptly in a 
manner that fulfils applicable requirements of the WTO Agreement, including those of Article X of 
the GATT 1994, GATS, and the WTO TRIPS Agreem ent.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that, from the date of accession, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the competent bodies 
of the CU would update published resources, incl uding websites, containing such measures, on a 
regular basis and make them readily available to WTO Members, individuals and enterprises.  
Such measures would be available while they were in effect and for a reasonable period after they WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 265 - 
 
  were no longer in effect.  She added that the Repu blic of Kazakhstan intended to post the contents 
of editions of Bulletin of Parliament, the Collection of Acts of the President and the Government, and in the Collection of Acts of the Central Ex ecutive and Other Central Executive State Bodies.  
Official publication of regulatory legal acts is carried out also by periodicals as "Yegemen 
Kazakhstan", "Kazakhstanskaya Pravda", on websites as well, and would keep them current.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.]   
861.  [The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, except in cases of emergency, 
measures involving national security, specific measures setting monetary policy, measures the publication of which would impede law enforcement, or otherwise be contrary to the public 
interest, or prejudice the legitimate commercial interest of particular enterprises, public or private, 
the Republic of Kazakhstan would publish all laws, regulations, decrees, decisions and 
administrative rulings of general application pertaining to or affecting trade in goods, services, or 
intellectual property rights, prior to their adoption and would provide a reasonable period of time, normally not less than 30 calendar days, for Members and interested persons to comment to the 
responsible authorities before the relevant measure was finalised or submitted to the competent 
CU bodies.  In cases where a CU body was responsible for proposing or adopting CU legal acts, including CU decisions, or other measures corresponding to those specified in the preceding 
sentence of this paragraph, the competent CU body would publish them before their adoption and 
a reasonable period would be provided for Members and interested persons to comment to the 
competent CU body.  Any comments received during the period for commenting, whether provided 
to the Republic of Kazakhstan or a competent body of the CU, would be taken into account.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
862.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, no law, 
regulation, decree, decision or administrative ruling of general application pertaining to or affecting trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, whether adopted or issued in the Republic 
of Kazakhstan or by a competent body of the CU, would become effective prior to publication, as 
provided for in the applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the GATT 1994, the 
WTO GATS Agreement, and the WTO TRIPS Agreemen t.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.] 
- Notifications 
863.  Some Members noted that all Members of the WT O were obliged to provide notifications to 
the various subsidiary bodies of the WTO, pursuant to the covered Agreements.  These Members requested a specific commitment that Kazakhstan would provide, as from the date of accession, 
initial notifications for all WTO Agreements, and that Kazakhstan would also comply with the 
notification requirements of the WTO Agreem ents with regard to CU agreements and 
CU Commission decisions, as well as domestic re gulations, decrees, decisions or administrative 
rulings of general application, subsequently ad opted by Kazakhstan, which implement any of the 
WTO Agreements. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 266 - 
 
  864.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, upon the date of accession, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan would submit all initial notifications required by any Agreement constituting part of the WTO Agreement[, except for the notifications set-out in Table 2, which 
would be submitted within the time-frame indicated in that Table].  After submitting its initial 
notifications, the Republic of Kazakhstan would su bmit subsequent notifications in conformity with 
the relevant provisions and procedures of the WT O Agreement.  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments.] 
Table 2 - Timeline for the Submission of Notifications  
Notification Requirement Type of Measure Deadline 
Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994 - Decision on checklist of issues Responses to the checklist of issues 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (ASCM) - Article 25.1 annual;  - GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 annual Any subsidy as defined in ASCM Article 1:1 which is 
specific within the meaning of ASCM Article 2 as well as any other subsidy which causes increased exports or decreased imports within the meaning of the GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 (Format:  G/SC) 180 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures - Article 5.1 Trade-related investment measures (TRIMs) which are 
inconsistent with the provisions of Article III or Article XI of the GATT 1994 and not justified under 
exceptions to the GATT (Format:  G/TRI) 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Import Licensing import licensing Procedures 
- Article 7.3 Replies to questionnaire on procedures 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Rules of Origin 
- Article 5:1; 
- Annex II, paragraph 4 Existing non-preferential rules of origin:  judicial 
decisions and administrative rulings of general 
application relating to non-preferential rules of origin 90 days after 
accession 
VIII. TRADE AGREEMENTS 
865.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan had free trade agreements with 
other CIS countries, Georgia and Serbia, and al ong with the Republic of Belarus and the 
Russian Federation had created a Customs Union.  At the moment these agreements included:  
bilateral Free Trade Agreements with CIS Parties; a bilateral Free Trade Agreement with Georgia; a bilateral Free Trade Agreement with the Republic  of Serbia; the Agreement on the Creation of 
Free Trade Area between CIS countries of 15 Ap ril 1994; the Agreement on Free Trade Area of 
18 October 2011, signed by eight CIS member-States
22; the Agreement on the Customs Union 
between the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian  Federation and the Republic of Belarus of 
20 January 1995; the Agreement on the Cust oms Union and Single Economic Space of 
26 February 1999 and the subsequent Treaty on the Establishment of the Eurasian Economic 
Community with the Russian Federation, the Republi cs of Belarus, the Republic of Tajikistan and 
the Kyrgyz Republic of 10 October 2000 (as amen ded by the Protocol of 6 October 2007); the 
Agreement on the Establishment of  the Single Economic Space with Ukraine, Belarus and the 
Russian Federation of 19 September 2003; the Tr eaty on the Establishment of Common Customs 
Territory and the Formation of the Customs Un ion of 6 October 2007 between the Republics of 
Belarus, Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation; and 17 agreements establishing a legal basis for 
                                               
 
22 The Agreement was signed by the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldov a, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan 
and Ukraine. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 267 - 
 
  the Single Economic Space (hereinafter – SES) be tween the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic 
of Belarus and the Russian Federation that  entered into force as of 1 January 2012. 
Implementation of the Treaty on the Estab lishment of Common Customs Territory and the 
Formation of the Customs Union of 6 October 2007 had been initiated on 1 January 2010 among 
the Republics of Kazakhstan, Belarus and the Russian Federation with the establishment of the Common External Tariff (CET), adoption of the Customs Union (CU) Customs Code and the 
establishment of the CU institutions.  The full list of Kazakhstan's trade agreements is contained in 
Annex 21. 
866.  With regard to the Customs Union between th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, and the Russian Federation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the first steps 
towards establishing this Customs Union had been  taken with the approval of the Agreement on 
the Customs Union between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus of 6 January 1995 
and the Agreement on the Customs Union between the Russian Federation and the Republics of 
Belarus and Kazakhstan of 20 January 1995.  In ad dition, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic 
of Belarus, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federa tion, and the Republic of Tajikistan had signed 
the Agreement on the Establishment of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space on 26 February 1999.  The Agreement foresaw th e gradual creation of free-trade area and 
Customs Union that would eventually cover not only trade in goods, but also services (national 
treatment with respect to access to services market s, including the gradual elimination of existing 
restrictions on juridical and natural persons) and the movement of capital.  In particular, the 
Agreement set the initial objective of the elimination of all customs tariffs and other restrictions related to trade in goods between the Parties, except those allowed under the WTO Agreement, 
and the establishment of a common external tariff.  
867.  In order to continue progress towards the establishment of the Customs Union and the 
Single Economic Space, the Agreement on the Es tablishment of the Eurasian Economic Community 
(EurAsEC) had been signed on 10 October 2000  and had entered into force on 30 May 2001.  
On 19 September 2003, the Presidents of the Repub lic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Russian Federation and Ukraine signed the Agreement on the Establishment of the Single 
Economic Space.  The Parties to the Agreement in tended to promote mutual trade and investment 
on the basis of fundamental principles and norms of international law, including WTO rules, and 
also to increase the competitiveness of their economies via, inter alia , the creation of a free trade 
area and, possibly, customs union.  According to the Agreement, the Single Economic Space would 
be created on a stage-by-stage basis, taking a ccount the possibility of different implementation 
speeds and levels of integration among the Parties.   Transition from one stage to another could be 
achieved by those members who had performed all th e measures envisaged in the previous stage.  
Each member would determine independently which integration measures it would adopt, as well 
as the rate and degree of such integration.  Howe ver, no specific follow-on agreements aimed at 
realisation of this four-party Single Economic Space had been concluded so far, and efforts to 
implement the Agreement were suspended. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 268 - 
 
  868.  To implement the tasks stipulated in the List  of Activities on Creating the Eurasian 
Economic Community for the years 2003-2006, th e Heads of Governments of the EurAsEC had 
authorised implementation of previously adopted decisions, conclusion of new international treaties 
and agreements, and the preparation of new docu ments.  On 6 October 2007, the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russi an Federation had concluded the Treaty on the 
Establishment of the Common Customs Territory and the Formation of the Customs Union of 
6 October 2007.  According to the Agreement, the Common Customs Territory would be 
established in several steps and completed by 1 July 2011 when the customs border between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation was to be eliminated.  Provisions of the 
agreements concluded earlier by the contracting pa rties and resolutions of governing bodies that 
did not conflict with the Agreement on the Establishm ent of the EurAsEC continued to be in force.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that these Agreements, and other acts subsequently 
agreed by the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Repub lic of Belarus and the Russian Federation through 
the end of 2009, finalized the legal basis for the Customs Union within EurAsEC and laid out a 
framework for progressively increasing economic cooperation between entities of member 
countries, starting with plans for the unification of foreign trade, customs policies and trade remedies; and initiating cooperation between the financial and banking systems; cooperation in 
social and humanitarian areas; and cooperation in  the field of legal regulation.  The two members 
of EurAsEC not parties to these Agreements (the Republic of Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic) 
were not members of the Customs Union established by the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation.  She added that while the ultimate goals of these Agreements had not been reached yet, progress towards a common economic space was 
continuing. 
869.  A Member noted that approximately 62% of the applied import tariffs of the EurAsEC 
members had been harmonized and asked when the rest of the tariff lines would be harmonized.  
This Member also inquired if there was a formal schedule for harmonization of the remaining tariff 
lines.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that as of today almost 100% of import tariffs in 
the CET had been gradually harmonized.  The exemptions granted to Kazakhstan were limited to 
72 tariff lines at 10-digit level out of 11,119 tariff lines at the applied CET.  By 2015 the import tariffs for those goods was planned to increase up to the levels set by the CET.  The exemptions 
from the CET were granted in the form of 0% for medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, 
polyethylene, greenhouses, aluminium foil and railway wagons (the list of tariff lines subject to exemptions from the CET, with respective transiti onal periods, is provided in Annex 10).  As for 
export tariffs, currently the Republic of Kazakhst an, the Russian Federation, and the Republic of 
Belarus applied separate export duty regimes vis-à-vis  third countries.  
870.  On 27 November 2009, the EurAsEC Interstate Council had also approved the Treaty on 
the Customs Union Customs Code that had entered into force in the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation on 1 July 2010 and in the Republic of Belarus – on 6 July 2010.  
The Agreements, Decisions and national complementary customs regulations related to the 
CU Customs Code were being developed.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, as laid WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 269 - 
 
  out in the Treaty on the Establishment of the Common Customs Territory and the Formation of the 
Customs Union of 6 October 2007, the Interstate Council would take a decision on the establishment of the common customs territory and the completion of the formation of the 
Customs Union after the tasks set-out in the Trea ty were completed.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan further noted that a detailed descript ion of the CU trade policies and regulations was 
provided for in the relevant sections of this Report. 
871.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that the Customs Union was moving forward with 
the establishment of its institutions, i.e., the Commission, the EurAsEC Court, and the Expert 
Council.  The institutional and legislative set-up of the CU was described in the section "Framework 
for Making and Enforcing Policies" to the extent it was relevant for the trade regime of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the implementation of its WTO commitments.  
872.  A Member asked for information on the establishment of the Single Economic Space 
between the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Repub lic of Belarus and the Russian Federation.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, on 1 January 2012, 17 agreements establishing a 
legal basis for the Single Economic Space (hereina fter – SES) between the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation  had entered into force.  She stated that the 
SES Agreements provided a legal framework for the harmonization of legislation of the SES Parties in the spheres of government support to industrial  and agricultural sectors, public procurement, 
access to services rendered by natural monopolies, provision of fair competition, trade in services, 
movement of natural persons, investments, etc. 
873.  She added that the Agreements were aimed at creating conditions for conducting a 
coordinated trade and economic policy between the SES Parties, with the overall objective to 
provide a level playing field for competition among businesses of the SES member-States.  Brief information on the key objectives of the SES Agreements was provided below: 
(i) The Agreement on Coordinated Macroeconomic Policy stipulated key principles and 
guidelines for conducting coordinated macroeconomic policies.  In particular, the 
Agreement established the following quantitative parameters that had to be followed by 
the SES Parties: 
- annual state budget deficit should not exceed 3% of GDP; 
- public debt should not exceed 50% of GDP; - inflation rate of the SES Party should not exceed 5 percentage points from the 
level of inflation rate of the other SES Party that had the lowest level of prices. 
(ii) The Agreement on Coordinated Principles of  Monetary Policy defined common principles of 
monetary policy and envisaged measures to be taken by the SES Parties to conduct 
coordinated monetary policy.  The purpose of the Agreement was to improve the efficiency 
of reciprocal payments in national currencies between the entities involved in foreign trade 
activity of the SES Parties, which would strengthen their national currencies and increase 
liquidity of the national currency markets. 
(iii) The Agreement on Common Rules and Principles of Competition established common WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 270 - 
 
  principles of competition to prevent and proh ibit anti-competitive agreements and unfair 
competition within the SES and violations of the common competition rules on transboundary markets.
23 
(iv) The Agreement on Common Rules for Granting Industrial Subsidies established uniform 
rules for granting subsidies in line with th e WTO norms.  The Agreement also stipulated 
procedures for approval of national government support programmes before their 
implementation by the EEC as of 2017.  
(v) The Agreement on Common Rules of State Su pport of Agricultural Sector provided rules 
for granting subsidies to producers of agricultural goods.  The Agreement established a 
classification of agricultural subsidies, whic h divided domestic support measures into three 
categories:  (a) subsidies that did not distort trade – the "green box" subsidies in the 
language of the WTO – were allowed without limitations; (b) subsidies that created serious 
trade distortion (export subsidies), stipulated in an illustrative list provided in the Annex to the Agreement, should be prohibited in mutual trade; (c) all measures of domestic support 
except the above mentioned measures fell under the "amber box".  The volume of these 
subsidies should not exceed 10% of gross value of agricultural production of the 
SES Party.  However, after the SES Party joined the WTO, its commitments within the 
WTO should prevail. 
(vi) According to the Agreement on State (Municipal) Procurement, the SES Party should 
accord national treatment in its public procurement to goods and services rendered by the 
other SES Parties.  The SES Parties had a right to impose exemptions from national treatment subject to the approval of the EEC.  The Russian Federation and the Republic of 
Belarus had offered national treatment to goods and services originating from their 
countries as of 1 January 2012.  The Republic  of Kazakhstan should provide national 
treatment to Russian and Belarusian suppliers on a reciprocal basis as of 1 January 2014. 
(vii) The Agreement on Common Principles of Re gulation in the Sphere of Protection of 
Intellectual Property Rights established common principles of copyright, trademark and 
patent regulation within the SES.  The Agreement was aimed at enhancing intellectual 
property protection within the SES and preventing trade in counterfeit products. 
(viii) According to the Agreement on Trade in Services and Investments the SES Parties should 
provide national treatment to services and in vestments of the other SES Parties except for 
those services, which they had listed in their Lists of Exemptions.  The Agreement established that the SES Parties should make efforts to harmonize their national legislation 
regulating services sectors and simplify licensing regime with objective to facilitate free 
movement of services and capital between the SES Parties. 
                                               
23 According to the Decision of the Supreme Eurasi an Economic Council No. 29 of 19 December 2012 the 
market was considered as a transboundary market if geog raphical boundaries of the market covered territories 
of two or more SES Parties. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 271 - 
 
  (ix) The Agreement on Free Movement of Capital established general principles for free 
movement of capital and was aimed at e nhancing information exchange between the 
SES Parties.  The Agreement was aimed at harmonization of national legislation of the 
SES Parties in the spheres of financial services, including banking, insurance, and service 
of the professional participants of securities market. 
(x) The Agreement on the Legal Status of Mi grant Workers and Members of Their Families 
regulated procedures related to labour activity of migrant workers, citizens of the 
SES Parties, and their social protection.  According to the Agreement migrant workers, 
citizens of the SES member-States did not require to obtain a work permit in the other 
SES Party.  The Agreement also stated that a migrant worker, citizen of the SES Parties, 
might postpone its migration registration in the other SES Party up to 30 days. 
(xi) The Agreement on Coordinated Principles on Counteraction to Illegal Labour Migration from 
Third Countries envisaged information exchange on detected illegal migrant workers and indicated channels of illegal labour migration, and exchange of national normative legal 
acts on counteraction to illegal labour migration from third countries.  The Agreement was 
aimed at improving efficiency of national migration services. 
(xii) The Agreement on Common Pr inciples and Rules of Regulation of Activities of Natural 
Monopolies defined basic principles and rules of regulation of activities of natural 
monopolies.  These rules provided for non-discriminatory access to services rendered by 
natural monopolies of the SES Party to consumers from the other SES Parties.  
The provisions of the Agreement covered services provided by natural monopolies, in particular, services of main railway networks, transportation services of oil and oil products 
by main pipelines, services of production and/ or distribution of electric power, including 
technical dispatching of delivery into the network and consumption of electric power. 
(xiii) The Agreement on Regulation of Access to the Services of Railway Transport, including 
Basics of Tariff Policy was aimed at providing non-discriminatory access for consumers of 
the other SES Parties to the railway transportation services of the SES Party and balancing 
economic interests of consumers and railway transportation service suppliers of the 
SES Parties.  As of 1 January 2015 the SES Parties should provide access to infrastructure for railway transportation service suppliers of the other SES Parties. 
(xiv) The Agreement on Uniform Rules and Principles of Technical Regulation envisaged 
development of common CU technical regulations that were directly applied on the entire CU customs territory.  According to the Agreement the SES Parties should ensure 
circulation of the products compliant with requirements of the CU technical regulations in 
their territories without application of additional mandatory requirements other than 
requirements stipulated in the CU technical regulations to such products and without any 
additional procedures of conformity a ssessment (confirmation).  The Agreement 
established a uniform list of products, for which mandatory requirements could be WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 272 - 
 
  established within the framework of the Customs Union.  The SES Parties obliged not to 
impose any mandatory requirements in relation to products not included in the uniform list. 
(xv) The Agreement on Rules of Access to Services of Natural Monopolies in the Sphere of 
Electro Energy, Including Basics of Pricing an d Tariff Policy established principles for 
providing access to services of natural monopolies producing and distributing electric 
energy and practical measures to ensure effective interstate transmission of electricity. 
(xvi) The Agreement on Organization, Manage ment, Functioning and Development of Common 
Markets of Oil and Oil Products stipulated basic principles and measures aimed at 
establishing common markets of oil and oil products of the SES Parties and promoting 
competition on those markets. 
(xvii) The Agreement on Rules of Access to the Services of Natural Monopolies in the Sphere of 
Gas Transportation, including Basics of Price and Tariff Formation envisaged principles and measures to be taken by the SES Parties to establish access to their gas transportation 
networks for the other SES Parties. 
874.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Customs Union and the Single Economic 
Space were open to accession of new partners, as provided for in the Treaty on the Establishment 
of the Eurasian Economic Community of 10 Octobe r 2000.  The EurAsEC membership was open to 
any State prepared to undertake the obligations an d fulfil the commitments called for in the Treaty 
and the other treaties in force within the Comm unity.  The EurAsEC members then had the option 
of adopting additional agreements and protocols establishing the Customs Union as a single undertaking. 
875.  Concerning the CIS countries, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that on 
15 April 1994, the CIS member-States had signed the multilateral Agreement on Establishing Free Trade Area.  This Agreement provided for gradual elimination of customs duties, taxes and charges 
and other barriers that impeded the free movement of goods.  The Agreement had not been fully 
implemented and had been further modified by the Protocol on Amending the Agreement on 
Establishing Free Trade Area of 2 April 1999.  Th e Protocol established that the Free Trade Area 
was to be implemented via existing or future b ilateral agreements and protocols on exemptions. 
876.  The Republic of Kazakhstan had concluded bilateral Free Trade Agreements with Georgia 
and all CIS countries (the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, 
the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan, and Ukraine) with th e exception of Turkmenistan.  These Agreements 
had established a regime of free trade among the Parties that had covered a substantial part of 
trade in goods between them.  Under these bila teral Free Trade Agreements, mutual trade in 
goods originating from these countries and impo rted to, or exported from, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was free from customs duties, except for the goods listed in appropriate schedules of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 273 - 
 
  exemptions, which were subject to normal customs duties, taxes and charges.  The lists of goods 
subject to restrictions from free trade regime were included in the Protocols on exemptions from free trade regime attached to the bilateral FTAs.  According to the relevant Protocols, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan had applied exemptions on import of alcoholic beverages (HS chapter 22, except, 
2201, 2202, 2209), and tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes (HS chapter 24) from Azerbaijan and Ukraine; specified alcoholic beverages (HS 2203, 2205, 2206, 2207), tobacco and 
manufactured tobacco substitutes (HS chapter 24) and white sugar (HS 1701 99 100) from 
Georgia.  Currently, the Republic of Kazakhstan  applied exemption on imports of rice (HS 1006), 
alcoholic beverages (HS chapter 22, except, 220 1, 2202, 2209), and tobacco and manufactured 
tobacco substitutes (HS chapter 24) originating from the Republic of Uzbekistan.  According to the 
respective Protocols, the Republic of Kazakhstan had reserved the right to apply duties on goods 
which were subject to export tariff regulation of the Republic of Kazakhstan when these goods 
were exported to the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic  of Moldova, and the Re public of Tajikistan.  
The goods, subject to export tariff regulation ha d been exempted from duty-free regime in trade 
between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russi an Federation (Protocol of 22 October 1992).  
However, those exemptions had never been used in practice, as the implementation of the Protocol had been suspended.  The Protocol had been revoked by signing on 20 January 1995 a 
new Protocol on Establishment of a Free Trade Regime without any exemptions. 
877.  A Member said that the phase-out schedule for the restrictions, such as exemptions from 
free trade regime, had already been planned with the Republic of Uzbekistan and asked if the 
schedule for phasing these restrictions with Georgi a, Ukraine, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and the 
Republic of Moldova was also planned or required further negotiations.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that, until now, there was no phase-out Protocol signed between the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Uzbekistan.  The phase-out Protocol had been signed with 
Georgia on 11 November 2004, based on which the exemptions from the free trade regime applied 
to imports from Georgia had been phased-out on 1 April 2005.  According to the Protocol signed 
with the Republic of Azerbaijan on 24 May 2005,  the exemptions of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
from a free trade regime for imports of alcoholic beverages, tobacco and manufactured tobacco 
substitutes from the Republic of Azerbaijan had been phased-out by 1 January 2012.  The Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Moldova had no t stipulated any import duty exemptions from a 
free trade regime, but had reserved the right to ap ply export duties in mutual trade.  She added 
that the Protocol on Exemptions had also been si gned between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Republic of Armenia.  This Protocol had been signed for a one year period and had not been 
extended.  
878.  The representative of Kazakhstan further informed Members that a multilateral Free Trade 
Area Agreement among the CIS countries had been signed on 18 October 2011 by the Republic of 
Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan and Ukraine.  The other CIS countries 
could join the Agreement later.  Upon its entry into force, the new Agreement would replace the 
bilateral FTAs between the CIS countries and the Re public of Kazakhstan, and establish a CIS-wide WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 274 - 
 
  preferential trade area.  In accordance with the new Agreement, the Republic of Kazakhstan would 
apply exemptions from a free trade regime for imports of sugar and vodka from Ukraine.  The exemption for Ukrainian vodka would be in force till 1 January 2015.  The exemption from a 
free trade regime for imports of sugar from  Ukraine would also be applied by the 
Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus.  In its turn, Ukraine would also apply import 
duties for sugar originating from the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and the 
Republic of Belarus.  Within the Agreement the Republic of Kazakhstan had also reserved the right 
to apply duties for soybeans, rape or colza seeds and sunflower seeds, crude oil, light, medium and heavy oils, bitumen, natural and coal gases, petroleum gases and other gaseous 
hydrocarbons, raw hides and skins of bovine, sheep and lambs, wool and animal hair, ferrous, 
copper, and aluminum waste and scrap, rail, crossing piece, iron/steel, part of railway locomotives, 
certain aluminum products (i.e. powders and flakes, bars and profiles, foil, tubes, pipes, etc.), 
listed in the Annex to the Agreement, when these products were exported to the other Parties of the Agreement, with the exception of the CU me mber-States.  The new Agreement would create a 
uniform legal structure based on WTO rules.  The Agreement envisaged provisions stipulating, 
inter alia , substantial reduction with subsequent elimination of import customs duties and 
restrictions in mutual trade, commitments regulati ng the levels and application of export duties, 
application of safeguard measures in mutual trade, competition and subsidies rules, technical 
barriers to trade, SPS measures, an effective mechanism for dispute settlement, etc.  
879.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify how the establishment of a uniform legal structure 
based on the WTO rules would be accomplished within the new Agreement of 18 October 2011.  This Member also asked Kazakhstan to clarify if the new Agreement of 18 October 2011 was 
considered an extension of the previous CIS-wi de FTA of 15 April 1994 and to inform about the 
status of the 1994 agreement in light of the new multilateral CIS FTA. 
880.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that the new CIS-wide FTA Agreement 
envisaged provisions confirming the obligations of the Parties of the Agreement to comply with the 
WTO rules.  Some provisions contained citati ons and references to the GATT and the other 
WTO Agreements related to trade in goods.  For instance, the Agreement stipulated the following 
key principles based on WTO rules:  
- provision of national treatment for goods imported from the other Parties; 
- provision of freedom of transit  through the territories of the Parties within the meaning of 
Article V of the GATT 1994;  
- general elimination of quantitative restrictions according to Article XI of the GATT 1994; - prohibition of subsidies contingent  upon export performance or the use of domestic over 
imported goods, and  
- application of trade remedies, SPS and TBT measures in accordance with the WTO rules, 
etc. 
881.  She added that most specifically, Article 5 of the Agreement stipulated that the Parties 
should provide each other national treatment according to Article III of the GATT 1994.  
In accordance with the Article, the Parties were committed to apply internal taxes, laws, regulation and requirements affecting the sale of imported products in a non-discriminatory manner to WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 275 - 
 
  prevent protection to domestically-produced good.  According to Article 10 of the Agreement, the 
Parties should not maintain or grant subsides prohibited under Article 3 of SCM Agreement.  
The Parties that maintained prohibited subsidies had committed to phase-out such measures after 
expiration of the transitional period, stipulated  in the Agreement.  She noted that under the 
Agreement, the Republic of Kazakhstan had rese rved the right to maintain its local content 
requirements in:  (i) purchases of subsoil users, and enterprises partially or fully controlled by the 
government, until these measures were phased out in accordance with Kazakhstan's commitments 
upon accession to the WTO; (ii) preferences granted under the free warehouse regime and special economic zones till 1 January 2017, and (iii) ta riff preferences granted under agreements on 
industrial assembly concluded in accordance with the Order of the Deputy Prime Minister and 
Minister of Industry and Trade No. 113 of 11 June 2010 – till 31 December 2020.  
882.  Concerning the status of the FTA Agreement of 15 April 1994 the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that the new Agreement of 18 October 2011 had been concluded with the view to replace previous CIS-wide multilateral FTA of 15 April 1994.  The Agreement of 15 April 1994 
had not been fully implemented, as the establishment of a CIS-wide free trade area had not been 
completed.  The 1994 Agreement had become an overall framework agreement, and the CIS member-States had built free trade areas based on bilateral agreements.  Therefore, the new 
Agreement had been signed in 18 October 2011 with objective to establish free trade among the 
CIS member-States, signatories to the Agreement, based on the principles and provisions of the 
WTO rules.  She further explained that according to Article 23 of the new Agreement, the 
1994 FTA Agreement had ceased to apply in relations between members of the new Agreement.  The bilateral agreements on free trade concluded between these members would be also replaced 
by the new Agreement of 18 October 2011.  However, the 1994 FTA Agreement as well as bilateral 
FTAs remained in force in trade relations between the Parties of the new Agreement of 18 October 2011 and the CIS member-States that had not signed the new Agreement, and those 
members that had signed but had not yet rati fied the new Agreement of 18 October 2011. 
883.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that in order to unify trade regimes with the 
Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, th e Republic of Kazakhstan had signed a bilateral 
Agreement on Free Trade with the Republic of Serbia on 7 October 2010 and was engaged in free 
trade negotiations with Montenegro.  In accordance with the Agreement on Free Trade with the 
Republic of Serbia, nearly all goods (including agricultural products) originating from the Republic 
of Serbia or the Republic of Kazakhstan would enjoy duty free regime when imported to the other country. 
884.  She added that the Republic of Kazakhstan al so hoped to conclude more agreements on 
trade liberalisation along with the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation.  Currently, 
New Zealand and EFTA member-States had started negotiations aimed at concluding FTAs with the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and its Customs Union partners. 
885.  A Member requested information on Kazakhstan's participation in the Economic 
Cooperation Organization (ECO) Trade Agreement (ECOTA), and on the plans of the Shanghai WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 276 - 
 
  Cooperation Organization (SCO) to establish a free trade arrangement among its members 
by 2020.  The representative of Kazakhstan replie d that the Republic of Kazakhstan had joined the 
ECO in November 1992, but was not a member to the ECO Trade Agreement (ECOTA) and 
provided an MFN-based trade regime to ECO member s.  In addition, four out of ECO's 10 members 
were beneficiaries of Kazakhstan's GSP system.  The Republic of Kazakhstan had concluded bilateral free trade agreements with the remaining four ECO members – the Republic of 
Azerbaijan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of  Tajikistan and the Republic of Uzbekistan.  
She added that, at present, no plans existed to conclude a free trade agreement within the SCO.  
886.  The representative of Kazakhstan also note d that the MFN regime was granted to all 
countries that concluded bilateral non-preferen tial trade agreements with the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  Moreover, the Republic of Kazakhstan  applied the MFN regime to all third countries 
regardless of the existence of a bilateral agreement with a particular country.  
887.  A Member enquired whether the Republic of Kazakhstan participated in the Production 
Co-operation Agreement signed by all CIS countries on 23 December 1993 in Ashkhabad and 
under what terms trade was conducted, and what portion of the Republic of Kazakhstan's trade 
was conducted under this agreement, in case the Republic of Kazakhstan participated in this Agreement.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Agreement on Common Rules and 
Mechanisms of Support for Production Cooperation Development of Enterprises and Industrial 
Sectors of CIS countries, signed by the Republic of Kazakhstan on 23 December 1993, had entered 
into force on 10 May 1995.  The agreement had been  signed in order to preserve and promote the 
development of existing and newly created technological and cooperative relationships between enterprises of all forms of ownership, and industrial complexes of the CIS countries on the basis of 
their direct production linkages occurring during  the period of USSR.  The Agreement envisaged 
non-application of import duties, taxes and quantita tive restrictions with respect to goods, supplied 
from the CIS customs territories within the cooperation
24 and within the framework of the customs 
regimes of processing25 and services rendered26.  The Agreement foresaw the conclusion of related 
inter-governmental, sectoral and inter-ministerial agreements.  Goods supplied within contracts 
concluded under the agreements could receive th e aforementioned preferences.  However, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan had not concluded such inter-governmental, sectoral and inter-ministerial agreements, and therefore had not implemented the Production Co-operation Agreement in 
practice. 
888.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession to the WTO 
Kazakhstan would observe relevant WTO provisions, including but not limited to Article XXIV of the 
GATT 1994 and Article V of the GATS, in its partic ipation in preferential trade Agreements, and 
would ensure that the provisions of the WTO Agreements for notification, consultation and other 
requirements concerning free trade areas and customs unions were met from the date of 
                                               
 24 Supplies within the cooperation means supplies of raw materials, components, intermediate product 
and other articles used in technologically  dependent productions of final goods. 
 25 Supplies within the frameworks of customs regimes of processing means supplies of goods in 
accordance with the customs legislation of the Parties to the Agreement.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 277 - 
 
  accession.  She confirmed that Kazakhstan would, upon accession, submit notifications and copies 
of its Free Trade Areas, of the Customs Unio n and its sub-agreements, and of the SES and 
EurAsEC and their sub-agreements to the Committ ee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA).  The 
Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
CONCLUSIONS 
[to be completed]  
 
 
                                                                                                                                               
 26 Services rendered means projects, repair and ma intenance services and technological operations.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 278 - 
 
  ANNEX 1 
Laws, regulations and other information provided to the Working Party 
Legislation of the Customs Union - Customs Code of the Customs Union; 
- Treaty "On Functioning of the Customs Union within the Multilateral Trade System" dated 
19 May 2011; 
- Treaty "On the Creation of the Common Customs Territory and Establishment of the 
Customs Union" dated 6 December 2007; 
- The List of International Treaties which Form Contractual and Legal Base of the 
Customs Union, ratified by the Decision of EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 14 dated 
27 November 2009;  
- Treaty on Judicial Recourse to the EurAsEC Court of the Economic operators on Disputes 
within the Framework of the CU and Peculiari ties of the Judicial Procedure on Them, 
Approved by the Decision of the Interstate Council of EurAsEC No. 534 dated 
9 December 2010;  
- Agreement on the Procedure for the Movement of Cash Monetary Funds and (or) Monetary 
Instruments by Individuals Across the Customs Border of the Customs Union dated 
5 July 2010; 
- Agreement on the Particularities of Customs Transit of Goods Transported by Rail within 
the Customs Territory of the Customs Union dated 21 May 2010; 
- Agreement on the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade dated 
9 July 2009; 
- Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Affecting Foreign Trade in 
Goods on a Common Customs Territory to  Third Countries dated 9 June 2009; 
- Agreement on Common Rules for Determining the Country of Origin of Goods dated 
25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Common Measures for Non-Tariff Regulation with Regard to the 
Third Countries dated 25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Common System of Customs and Tariff Regulation dated 25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Customs Valuation of Goods Transferred through the Customs Border of the 
Customs Union dated 25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on the Principles of Indirect Tax Collection at Export and Import of Goods, 
Performing Work and Rendering Services in the Customs Union dated 25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Regime and Implementation of Tariff Quota dated 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Rules of the Origin of Goods, Originating from Developing and 
Least-Developed Countries dated 12 December 2008; 
- CU Agreement on Common Rules of Stat e Support of Agriculture, dated 2010; 
- Protocol "On the Order of Levying of Indirect Taxes in View of Performance of Works and 
Rendering Services in the Customs Union" dated 11 December 2009; 
- Protocol "On the Procedure for Levying Indirect Taxes and the Mechanism of Control over 
their Payment for Exports and Imports of Goods in a Customs Union" dated 
11 December 2009; 
- Protocol "On Amending of the Agreement 'On the Principles of Levying Indirect Taxes on 
Exports and Imports of Goods, Works, Services in the CU'" dated 25 January 2008; 
- Protocol "On Amendments and Additions to  the Agreement on the Determination of 
Customs Value of Goods, Transferring across Customs Border of the Customs Union" dated 
25 January 2008; 
- Protocol "On Conditions and Procedure for Use in Exceptional Cases of the Rates of Import 
Customs Duties other than Common Customs Tariff Rates" dated 12 December 2008; 
- Protocol "On the Procedure of Entry into Force of International Treaties Aimed at 
Establishing the Contractual and Legal Framework of the Customs Union, Accession to them and Withdrawal from them" dated 6 October 2007; 
- Decision No. 18 "On Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the 
Republic of Belarus, Republic of Kazakhstan and Russian Federation" dated 
27 November 2009;  
- Decision of the EurAsEC Intergovernmental Council No. 15 Concerning the Issues of the 
Organization of Functioning of the Commission of the Customs Union dated 
27 November 2009; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 279 - 
 
  - Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Community approved by the Resolution of 
the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 122 of 27 April 2003; 
- CU Decision No. 130 "On Common Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union Between the 
Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Ka zakhstan and the Russian Federation" dated 
27 November 2009; 
- CU Decision No. 865 "On the List of Goods in  Respect of which from 1 January 2012, Tariff 
Rate Quotas as well as Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas are Established for Imports into the Territory of the Customs Union Member Countries" dated 18 November 2011;  
- Decision of the Customs Union Commission No. 308 on "Regulation on Introduction of 
Changes on Control Measures of Foreign Trade in the Customs Union Commission (as in 
Force on the Customs Union Commission No. 553 dated 2 March 2011)" dated 18 June 2010; 
- Agreement on the Basics of Harmonization of Technical Regulations of the Eurasian 
Economic Community Members, dated 24 March 2005; 
- The Procedure for Development of Technical Regulations of the Eurasian Economic 
Community, approved by the Decision of the Integration Committee of the Eurasian Economic Community No. 1175 dated 17 August 2010; 
- Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Council No. 48 "On Regulation on the 
Procedure for Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulation of the Customs Union", dated 20 June 2012; 
- Agreement on Unified Principles and Rules of Technical Regulation in the Republic of 
Belarus, Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, dated 18 November 2010; 
- Decision of the Customs Union Commission No. 620 "On the Unified List's Update with 
Regard to Products subject to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) within the F r a m e w o r k  o f  t h e  C U  w i t h  I s s u a n c e  of  S i n g l e  D o c u m e n t s ,  A p p r o v e d  b y  C U  C o m m i s s i o n  
Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" of 7 April 2011; 
- Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Council "On Amendments to the Decision of 
the Customs Union Commission No. 810 'On Exception in Application of Veterinary M e a s u r e s  w i t h  r e g a r d  t o  G o o d s  I n c l u d e d  into the Common List of Goods Subject to 
Veterinary Control (Supervision)' of 23 September 2011" of 2012; 
- Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Collegium "On Amendments to the Decision 
of the Customs Union Commission No. 810 'On Exception in Application of Veterinary M e a s u r e s  w i t h  R e g a r d  t o  G o o d s  I n c l u d e d  i n t o  t h e  C o m m o n  L i s t  o f  G o o d s  S u b j e c t  t o  
Veterinary Control (Supervision)' of 23 September 2011" of 2012; 
- Draft Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Collegium "On Amendments to the 
Common Veterinary (Veterinary and Sanitary) Requirements for Goods Subject to Veterinary Control (Supervision)"; and 
- Schedule for the Development of Top-priority Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, 
approved by the Decision of the Customs Union Commission No. 492 of 8 December 2010. 
Economic Policies - Law No. 57 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005; 
- Law No. 237 "On Payments and Money Transfers" of 29 June 1998; 
- Law "Concerning Currency Regulations" of 24 December 1996; - Law "Concerning Currency Regulation" of 14 April 1993; - Resolution of the Board of the National Ba nk No. 134 "On Approval of Rules of Currency 
Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 29 October 2005; 
- Edict No. 2155 "Concerning the National Bank" of 30 March 1995; - Edict No. 2196 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 2 August 1995; - Edict No. 2227 "Concerning Securities and Stock Exchange" of 21 April 1995; 
- Regulations of the Board of the National Ba nk "Concerning the Settlements with Cheques" 
of 15 November 1994 (Meeting minutes No. 22); 
- Instruction No. 127 "On Settlement, Current and Budget Accounts Opened in the Bank 
Institutions of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 23 June 1993 approved by the Board of the 
National Bank on 23 June 1993 (Protocol No. 16); 
- Instructions of the Board of the National Bank No. 188 "Rules for Conducting Currency 
Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 24 November 1994; 
- Temporary Regulation on Clearing (submitted in September 1996); 
- Law No. 266-XIII "Concerning Foreign Investments" of 27 December 1994; 
- Law No. 373 "On Investments" of 8 January 2003; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 280 - 
 
  - Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 136 Co ncerning Pension Support in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan dated 20 June 1997; 
- Law No. 527-IV "On National Security of the Republic of Kazakhstan" dated 
6 January 2012; 
- Law No. 178-II "On Development Bank of Kazakhstan" of 25 April 2001; 
- Resolution No. 1219 "On Approval of the Plan of  Activities on Development of Stock Market 
and Increasing Investment Activeness of the Population on Stock Market for the year 2008" of 11 December 2007; 
- Resolution No. 483 "On Some Issues of republican State Ownership" of 11 June 2007; 
- Decree of the President No. 1096 "On Strategy for Industrial and Innovation Development 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2003-2015" of 17 May 2003; 
- Decree No. 1815 "On Establishment of the Stat e Export-Import Bank of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1994; 
- Edict No. 2717 "Concerning Land" of 22 December 1995;  
- Resolution No. 1587 "On the Schedule of Non-Privatisable State Property" of 
24 October 2000 (amended as of 18 December 2003); 
- Law No. 156-XIII "Concerning Transport" of 21 September 1994; 
- Law No. 9-III 3RK "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on the Activity of Subjects of Natural Monopolies" of 9 December 2004; 
- Law "Concerning Development of Competition and Restriction of Monopoly Activities" of 
11 July 1991; 
- Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies" of 9 July 1998 (also submitted as Law No. 272 
"Concerning Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets"); 
- Law No. 232-1 "On Unfair Competition" of 9 June 1998; - Resolution No. 1171 "On Price Regulation for Products of Business Entities, Recognized as 
Natural Monopolists" of 19 October 1994; 
- Order No. 375-OD of the Acting Chairman of the Agency "On Regulation of Natural 
Monopolies and Protection of Competition" of 8 September 2004; 
- Edict No. 2255 "Concerning Business Partnerships" of 2 May 1995; 
- Law "Concerning the protection of the natural environment" of 18 June 1991; 
- Resolution No. 637 "On Approval of the Provisions on the State Ecological Expertise in 
Kazakhstan" of 25 October 1991; 
- Draft Law "On Joint-Stock Companies" of 4 June 1997; and 
- Draft Law "On Limited Liability Partnerships" of 25 March 1997. 
Sub-surface Use - Law No. 291-IV "On Subsoil and Subsoil Use" of 24 June 2010; 
- Law No. 68 "On Production Sharing Agreements in Offshore Oil Operations" of 8 July 2005; 
- Law No. 2350 "On Oil" of 28 June 1995; 
- Decree No. 2828 (having the force of a Law) "On Subsoil and Subsoil Use" of 
27 January 1996; 
- Resolution No. 969 "On Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Production 
Sharing Agreements in Offshore Oil Operations'" of 16 September 2004; and 
- Regulation "On Approval of Rules of Purcha sing of Goods, Services and Works for Oil 
Operations" approved by Resolution No. 1034 of 8 December 1992. 
Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies 
- Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 September 1995;  
- Law No. 23-III ZRK "On International Commercial Arbitration" of 28 December 2004; and - Code "Concerning Administrative Violations" of 22 March 1984 (as amended on 
1 April 1995). 
Taxation 
- Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99 Concerning Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget (the Tax Code) dated 10 December 2008; 
- Tax Code of 12 June 2001; 
- Tax Code Articles 3 and 4 (submitted in February 1997); 
- Tax Code Section VI. Taxation of Subsur face Users (submitted in February 1997); WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 281 - 
 
  - Law No. 11-III ZRK "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Taxation" of 13 December 2004; 
- Resolution No. 1075 "On Approval of the List of Taxpayers who Benefit from VAT 
Exemptions on Import of Goods within the Framework of Contract for Subsoil Use on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 11 November 2006; 
- Edict No. 2703 "Concerning the Introduction of  Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts 
and Edicts" of 21 December 1995; 
- Edict No. 2827 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments to Edict "Concerning Taxes 
and Other Compulsory Payments to the Budget"" of 26 January 1996; 
- "Concerning the introduction of addition to Edict 'Concerning Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget'"; 
- Order of the Customs Committee No. 131 "Concerning the Procedure for Application of 
Value Added Tax and Excise Duties to Goods which Are Imported into the Customs 
Territory of Kazakhstan" of 29 September 1995; 
- Resolution No. 1035 "On Amendments to the Reso lution of the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 137 of 28 January 2000  'On Excise Rates on Excised Goods Produced in the Republic of Kazakhstan and Imported to  the Customs Territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, Sold on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and on Gambling 
Industry'" of 15 October 2005; 
- Decree No. 1439 "Concerning the Rates of Exci se Duties on Certain Types of excisable 
goods Imported to the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 2 November 1995; 
- Resolution No. 960 "Concerning the Rates of Excise Duties on Imported Excisable Goods 
and the Quotas of Transfer by Natural Persons through the Customs Boundary of Kazakhstan of Excisable Goods which Are not Subject to Excise Duties" of 13 July 1995; 
- Decree No. 1397 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments and Additions to Resolution 
No. 960 of 13 July 1995" of 30 October 1995; 
- Resolution No. 974 "Concerning the Rates of Excise Duties on Excisable Goods 
Manufactured in Kazakhstan and the Gambling Business" of 14 July 1995; 
- Decree No. 1487 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments and addi tions to Resolution 
No. 974 of 14 July 1995" of 8 November 1995; 
- Resolution No. 341 "On Introduction of Changes and Amendments to some Decisions of 
the Government" of 25 March 1996; and 
- Resolution No. 608 (Appendix 1) "Excise Taxes for the Excisable Goods Imported to the 
Customs Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 26 June 1998. 
Customs Regulations - Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV Concerning the Customs Business in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan dated 30 June 2010; 
- Customs Code of 5 April 2003; 
- Customs Code (Law No. 2368) as amended by 1 January 2001; - Customs Code Articles 115, 116, 122-133 (submitted in February 1997); - Customs Code Chapter 7:  Determination of  Country of Origin of Goods (submitted in 
July 2004); 
- Customs Code Chapter 12 (submitted in February 1997); - Customs Code Chapter 23 "Temporary Import of Goods and means of Transport" 
(submitted in May 2006); 
- Customs Code Chapter 31 (On Free Warehouse) (submitted in May 2006); 
- Customs Code Chapter 36 "Conveyance of Goods by Individual Categories of foreign 
Persons" (submitted in May 2006); 
- Customs Code Chapter 39: Determination of  the Customs Value of Goods (submitted in 
July 2004); 
- Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 221 "O n Order of Review of Requests of Natural and 
Juridical Persons" dated 12 January 2007; 
- Law No. 211 "On Amendments to the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
8 January 2007; 
- Law No. 62-III "On Amendments and Addenda to the Customs Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 20 June 2005; 
- Decree No. 810 "Concerning the introducti on of amendment to Decree No. 299 of 
12 March 1996" of 28 June 1996; 
- Decree No. 2369 "Concerning the Implementa tion of Edict Concerning the Customs 
Business in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 July 1995; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 282 - 
 
  - Edict No. 2370 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments to certain legislative acts and 
edicts concerning customs issues" of 20 July 1995; 
- Resolution No. 24 "On Approval of the Rates of Customs Fees Collected by Customs 
Bodies" dated 21 January 2011; 
- Resolution No. 355 "On Approval of the List of Kazakh Commodities Determined in 
accordance with Customs Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Produced on the 
Territory, with "Free Warehouse" Regime, and Selling on other Part of the Customs Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Sale Turnover of which is Free from VAT" of 14 April 2005; 
- Resolution No. 202 "On Amendments to Resolution No. 669 of 8 July 2003 'On Adoption of 
Rates of Customs Fees, Charges and Payments Levied by Customs Bodies'" of 24 March 2006; 
- Resolution No. 669 "On Adoption of the Customs Charges, Fees and Payments Levied by 
the Customs Bodies" of 8 July 2003; 
- Resolution No. 1009 "Concerning the Approval of  the List of Countries which Are Users of 
the Preference Schedule of Kazakhstan" of 20 July 1995; 
- Resolution No. 1125 "Concerning the Rates of Customs Duties on Imported Goods" of 
15 August 1995; 
- Resolution No. 1479 "On Rates of Customs Payments" of 7 November 1995; - Resolution No. 891 Annex on "Rates of Customs Duties on Imported Goods" of 
29 June 2001 
- Commodity Nomenclature and Customs Import Tariffs;  
- i) Section 5:  Preliminary Operations, Customs Operations and Procedures Relating to 
 the Conveyance of Goods and Means of Transport; 
- ii) Chapter 10:  Conveyance of Goods and Means of Transport across the Customs 
  Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and 
- Draft Customs Code. 
Import/Export Regulations - Law No. 45-III LRK "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Licensing" of 15 April 2005; 
- Law "On Export Control of Armaments, Military Technology and Production of Double 
Application" of 18 June 1996; 
- Law No. 2198 "On State Registration of Juridical Persons and Statistical Registration of 
Branches and Representative Offices" of 17 April 1995; 
- Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 269 "On Certain Issues of 
Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat" dated 24 March 2011; 
- Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 336 "On Certain Issues of 
Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat among Participants of Foreign Trade Activity for 2012" dated 15 March 2012; 
- Government Resolution No. 1334 "On Amendments to the Resolution of the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 100 'On Approv al of Licensing Fee Rates for the Right to 
Perform Certain Types of Activities' of  24 January 2002" of 31 December 2005; 
- Resolution No. 524 "On Approval of the List of Goods Transported Through the Territory of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan with Obligatory Securing of Payment of Customs Duties and 
Taxes" of 4 June 2003; 
- Resolution No. 1324 "On Amendments into the Resolution of the Government of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1660 'On Approval of Fee Rates for State Registration of Juridical Persons of 19 December 2001'" of 30 December 2005; 
- Resolution No. 298 "On the Procedure for Export and Import of Public Goods (Works, 
Services) in Kazakhstan" of 12 March 1996; 
- Resolution No. 342 "List of Goods Allowed and not Allowed to the Regime of Temporary 
Import and Export" of 25 March 1996; 
- Resolution No. 1035 "Concerning the Approval of the List of Exchange Commodities" of 
28 July 1995; 
- Resolution No. 304 "On Introduction of Amen dments and Additions to Resolution No. 1035 
of 28 July 1995" of 13 March 1996; 
- Resolution No. 984 "On Prohibition of Export and Import Barter Operations" of 
17 July 1995; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 283 - 
 
  - Resolution No. 1200 "On Introduction of Changes to Resolution No. 984 "On Prohibition of 
Export and Import Barter Operations"" of 29 August 1995; 
- Edict No. 2200 "Concerning Licensing" of 17 April 1995; - Decree No. 1894 "Concerning the Implementati on of Decree of the President No. 2201 of 
17 April 1995" of 29 December 1995; 
- Edict No. 2720 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments to Certain Edicts" of 
23 December 1995; 
- Decree of the President No. 2198 "On State Registration of Juridical Persons" of 
17 April 1995; 
- List of Goods Subject to Non-Tariff Measures (submitted in August 2004); and 
- Order No. 24-OD of the Chairman of the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies, 
Protection of Competition and Support of Small Businesses "On Adoption of the Rules for Introduction and Discontinuation of Decreasing  Coefficients for Tariffs on Regulated Rail 
Freight" of 12 December 1999; and 
- Draft Law "On Licensing". 
Trade Remedies - Law No. 114-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Subsidies, Countervailing and Antidumping Measures" of 9 January 2006; 
- Law No. 337-I "On Safeguard Measures of the Domestic Market in Importation of Products 
(of 28 December 1998)" as amended by the Law No. 59-III of 16 June 2005; 
- Law "On Antidumping" (submitted in November 1999); 
- Law No. 4414 "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" of 16 July 1999; 
- Law No. 337-1 "On Safeguard Measures to Protect the Domestic Market" of 
28 December 1998; 
- Resolution No. 1374 "On Approval of the Rules for Conducting Examinations, Preceding 
Imposition of Safeguard, Countervailing or Antidumping Measures" of 9 September 2000; 
- Draft Law "On Antidumping"; - Draft Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures"; and - Draft Law "On Safeguard Measures".  
Standards, Certification, Technical Regulations 
- Law No. 603-II "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004; 
- Law No. 306 "On Toys Safety" of 21 July 2007; - Law No. 302 "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007; 
- Law No. 305 "On Safety of Machinery and Equipment" of 21 July 2007; 
- Law No. 209 "On Introduction of Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan Concerning the Issues of Technical Regulation" of 29 December 2006; 
- Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Separation of Authorities between the Levels of State Governance and Budget Relations (in connection with amendments made in Laws "On Plants Quarantine" and "On Veterinary")"; 
- Decree No. 367 "List of Products and Services Subject to Compulsory Certification" of 
20 April 2005; 
- Law No. 433-1 "On Standardisation" of 16 July 1999; - Law No. 434-1 "On Certification" of 16 July 1999; 
- Law "On Standardization and Certification" of 18 January 1993; 
- Law "Concerning the Protection of Consumer Rights" of 5 June 1991; - Resolution No. 718 " On Approval of the Rule s of Creation and Operation of the Enquiry 
Point for Technical Barriers to Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" of 
11 July 2005; 
- Decree No. 64-p of the Prime Minister "On Im plementation Measures of the Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Technical Regulating'" of 25 March 2005; 
- Decree No. 225 "Concerning the Committee for Standardization, Metrology and 
Certification" of 21 February 1996; 
- Order No. 136 of the Chairman of the Committ ee on Technical Regulating and Metrology of 
the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On Approv al of the Regulations on Conducting Works 
with Participation of the State Authorities, Technical Committees on Standardization and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 284 - 
 
  the Conformity Verification Agencies in the field of Conformity Verification and 
Accreditation" of 13 May 2005; 
- Order No. 135 of the Chairman of the Committ ee on Technical Regulating and Metrology of 
the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On Approv al of the Regulations of Registration and 
Implementation of the International, Regional, National Standards, Classifiers of Technical 
and Economic Information, Regulations and Recommendations of the Foreign States in the 
Field of Standardization, Conformity Verification and Accreditation Within the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 13 May 2005; 
- Order No. 119 approved by the Chairman of  the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of 22 April 2005: 
a. "On Rules of Suspension or Cancellation of the Validity of Issued Certificates of 
Conformity or the Validity  of Registration of Conformity Declarations"; 
b. "On Rules of Conducting Inspections by the Accredited Conformity Assessment 
Body"; 
c. "On Rules of Recognition of Foreign Certificates of Conformity, Conformity Marks, 
Testing Reports, and Other Documents in  the Field of Conformity Assessment"; 
- Order No. 118 of the Chairman of the Committ ee on Technical Regulating and Metrology of 
the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On Appr oval of the Regulations of Training and 
Attestation of the Experts-auditors on Stan dardization, Conformity Verification and 
Accreditation" of 22 April 2005; 
- Order No. 107 of the acting Chairman of  the Committee on Technical Regulating and 
Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On approval of the Regulations on 
Publication and Providing of Users with the Standards and Normative Instruments in the 
Field of Standardization, Metrology, Certification, Accreditation, Catalogues and Directories of Standards and Information About Them" of 15 April 2005; 
- Order No. 106 of the acting Chairman of  the Committee on Technical Regulating and 
Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On approval of the Regulations of 
Elaboration and Approval of Plans and Programs of the State Standardization" of 15 April 2005; 
- Order No. 98 of the Chairman of the Committ ee on Technical Regulating and Metrology of 
the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On Appr oval of the Regulations of Elaboration, 
Co-ordination, Registration, Approval, Examination, Alteration, Annulment and Implementation of the State Standards and Classifiers of Technical and Economic 
Information" of 4 April 2005; 
- Order No. 99 of the Chairman of the Committ ee on Technical Regulating and Metrology of 
the Ministry of Industry and Trade "On appr oval of the Regulations of Establishment, 
Operation and Liquidation of the Technical Committees on Standardization" of 
4 April 2005; 
- Ordinance No. 94 of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulating and 
Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Tr ade "On Approval of the Form, Regulations of 
Filling in and Submission of Notifications of the Informational Centre on Technical Bars in 
Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" of 1 April 2005; 
- Order "Of customs control over production of compulsory certification" of January 1994; - Resolution No. 411 "On Stage-by-Stage Introduction of Compulsory Certification of 
Products (Works, Services) in Kazakhstan" of 20 May 1993; 
- Government Regulation No. 1112 "On Approval of List of Goods (Works, Services) Subject 
to Mandatory Certification for Conformity to Obligatory Requirements of Standards or Other Documents for Guarantee of Safety of Life and Health of Citizens, Property of 
Citizens, and Environment" of 15 July 1997 (Excerpt); 
- National Certification System No. ST RK 3.10-97 "The Order of the Examination of 
Appeals" of 1 July 1999; 
- Statute of the Committee on Technical Regu lating and Metrology of the Ministry of 
Industry and Trade approved by Resolution No. 1237 of 26 November 2004;  
- Gosstandart Ordinance No. 156 "State Standard of the Republic of Kazakhstan National, 
Certification System; Procedure for Processing of Appeals ST RK 3.10-97" of 1 July 1999; 
- List of organs for certification of similar products and accredited testing laboratories 
(centres), registered at the State Register of the State Certification System of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, 1 January 1998; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 285 - 
 
  - The List of Products (Works, Services) that are Subject to Mandatory Certification as to the 
Conformity with Requirements of Standards or other Codes that ensure the Safety for Life, Health of People, Property of Citizens, and Environment; 
- Draft Law "On Electromagnetic Compatibility"; - Draft Law "On Toys Safety"; 
- Draft Law "On Certification"; and 
- Draft Law "On Standardisation". 
SPS Measures - Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 132 "On Approval of 
Rules for Issuance of Permit for Exportation, Importation and Transit of Transferred 
(Transported) Objects Taking into Account the Assessment of Epizootic Situation of the Relevant Territory" of 19 January 2012;  
- Resolution of the Government of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan No. 1295 "On Approval of the 
List of Quarantine Objects, Alien Species and Extremely Dangerous Pests" of 
10 December 2002; 
- The List of Extremely Dangerous Animal Diseases for which Mandatory Removal and 
Destruction of the Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin specially 
Dangerous for the Health of Animals and human  Are Required, approved by the Resolution 
of the Government of the Republic of Kaza khstan No. 407 "On Approval of Regulatory 
Legal Acts in the Field of Veterinary" of 28 April 2003; 
- Law No. 361 "On Sanitary-Epidemiological Welf are of Population" of 4 December 2002;  
- Law No. 301 "On Safety of Food Products" of  21 July 2007; 
- Law No. 334-1 "On Plant Quarantine" of 11 February 1999 as amended on 
20 December 2004; 
- Law No. 422 -1 "On Legal Protection of Selective Breeding Achievements" of 13 July 1999; 
- Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002; 
- Law No. 430-II "On Health Care System" of 4 June 2003; - Law No. 361 "On Sanitary and Epidemiological Well-Being of the Population" of 
4 December 2002; 
- Law No. 331-II "On Plants Protection" of 3 July 2002; 
- Law No. 111-1 "On Protection of the Health of Citizens in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
19 May 1997; 
- Law No. 8-III 3PK "On Amendments and Addenda to the Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan 'On Environment Protection' on Industrial and Consumption Waste" of 
1 January 2005; 
- Law No. 160-1 "On Environment Protection" of 15 July 1997; - Resolution No. 1891 "On approval of the order of destruction or further reprocessing 
products in the case of their recognition as not suitable for sale and consumption" of 
29 December 1995; 
- Ordinance No. 166 of the Minister of Agricult ure "On Approval of the Nomenclature of the 
Basic Quarantine Products, subject to Phytosanitary Control under Plants Quarantine" of 
30 May 2002; and 
- Draft Law "On Legal Protection of Selective Breeding Achievements". 
Trade-Related Investment Measures - Order No. 113 of the deputy Prime Minister an d Minister of Industry and New Technologies 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Certain Issues on Concluding, Conditions and Model 
Form of the Agreement on Industrial Assemb ly of Motor Vehicles with Legal Entities 
Residents of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 11 June 2010. 
Special Economic Zones 
- Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Areas in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007; 
- Law No. 2823 "On Special Economic Zones" of 26 January 1996; and - Edict No. 2824 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments to Certain Laws and Edicts" of 
26 January 1996. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 286 - 
 
  Government Procurement 
- Resolution No. 586 "On Public Procurement of Goods" of 13 May 1996; and 
- The Law No. 303-III "on Government Procurement" of 21 July 2007. 
Agriculture 
- Law No. 66 "On State Regulation of Agricultural and Industrial Complex and Rural 
Territories Development" of 8 July 2005. 
Intellectual Property Protection - Civil Code (Table of Contents); 
- Articles 184, 199 and 200 of the Criminal Code, concerning intellectual property 
(submitted in September 1997); 
- Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 10 June 1996; - Law "Concerning Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods" of 
18 January 1993; 
- Law No.456-1 "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places of Origin of 
Goods" of 26 July 1999; 
- Law "Concerning the copyright and allied rights" of 10 June 1996; 
- Patent Law No. 1422-XII of 24 June 1992; 
- Patent Law of 16 July 1999; - Law No. 217 of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Legal Protection of Layout Design of 
Integrated Microcircuits"; 
- Resolution No. 508 "On the Establishment of State Agency for Copyright and Related 
Rights" of 8 July 1992; 
- Decree No. 622 "Concerning the National Patent Department Attached to the Cabinet of 
Ministers" of 21 July 1992; 
- Decree of the President No. 806 "On National Patent Office" of 23 June 1992; 
- Decree No. 949 "Concerning the Approval of Procedure for Issuing the Protection 
Documents on Inventions, Industrial Samples, Trademarks and Service marks" of 11 November 1992; 
- Order No. 201 "Rules on Keeping Register of Intellectual Property related Products, and 
Sharing it with Customs Bodies and Applicants" of 13 May 2003; 
- Resolution No. 926 "On Rules of Public Demonstration of Cine-video Production" of 
5 July 1995; 
- Resolution No. 266 "On Procedure of Payments and Amounts of Duties for Foreign 
Applicants for Legal Actions Connected with Protection of Industrial Property Objects within the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 6 April 1993; 
- Resolution No. 889 "On the Procedure of Paym ent and Amounts of Duties for Patenting of 
Inventions, Industrial Samples and Utility Models, Registration of Trademarks and Service 
Marks, Registration and Submitting the Right of Using the Name of the Place of Goods' 
Origin" of 20 October 1992; 
- Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 896 "On Approval of the Regulation on  
Employee's Inventions, Utility Models and Indu strial Designs Created in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 11 August 1994; 
- Regulation on the National Patent Office under the Cabinet of Ministers (with amendments 
in accordance with Resolution No. 1369 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 5 December 1994) approved by Resolution No. 877 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 16 October 1992; 
- "Rules for Filing and Submission of Application for Registration of a Trademark" No. 226 of 
30 April 1997; 
- Declaration of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the International Treaties in the Field of the 
Protection of Industrial Property of 5 February 1993; 
- Draft Patent Law (submitted April 1999); and 
- Draft Law "On Amendments and Additions to  Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan Concerning Intellectual Property issues". 
Services Regulations 
- Law "Concerning Auditing" of 18 October 1993; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 287 - 
 
  - Law No. 567 Concerning Communications dated 5 July 2004; 
- Government Resolution No. 1064 "On Approval of Nomenclature of Telecommunication 
Services and Telecommunication Technologically Related Services with Governmentally Regulated Prices" of 15 October 2004; 
- Edict No. 2329 "Concerning Medical Insurance of Citizens" of 15 June 1995; 
- Edict No. 2330 "On Measures for Implementati on of the Edict 'On Medical Insurance of 
Citizens'" of 15 June 1995; 
- Edict No. 2444 "Concerning Banks and Ba nking Activity" of 31 August 1995; 
- Decree No. 2445 "Concerning the Efforts for the Implementation of Edict 'Concerning 
Banks and Banking Activity'" of 31 August 1995; 
- Edict No. 2475 "Concerning Insurance" of 3 October 1995; - Edict No. 2697 "Concerning the Utilization of Airspace and Activities of Aviation" of 
20 December 1995; 
- Decree No. 1803 "Issues of the State Insurance Monitoring" of 19 December 1995; and 
- Resolution No. 478 "On the Approval of the Regu lation on Licensing of Insurance Activities 
on the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 19 April 1996. 
Trade Agreements 
- Decree No. 2461 of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Ratification of 
the Agreement 'Concerning the Customs Union' between the Government of the Republic of Belorussia, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 15 September 1995; 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between the Russian Federation, the Republic of 
Belorussia and the Republic of Kazakhstan of 20 January 1995; 
- Agreement between the Government of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Government of 
the Russian Federation on the Uniform Procedure for Regulating Foreign Economic 
Activities of 20 January 1995; 
- Resolution of the Intergovernmental Belorussian - Kazakh - Russian Commission "Terms of 
Formation of the Customs Union" of 22 November 1995; 
- Protocol "On Introduction of Free Trade Regime Without Exceptions and Restrictions 
Between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 20 January 1995; 
- Protocol between the Government of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Government of 
the Kyrgyz Republic and the Government of Uz bekistan Concerning Discussion of Issues of 
Participation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the Customs Union between Belorussia, 
Kazakhstan and Russia of July 1995; 
- Protocol between the Government of the Republic of Belorussia, the Government of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Russian Federation Concerning Completion of the First Stage of Enforcement of the Treaty on the Customs Union of 
22 November 1995; 
- Agreement on Free Trade between the Gove rnment of the Kyrgyz Republic and the 
government of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 22 June 1995; and 
- Agreement between the Government of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Government of 
the Republic of Moldova on Free Trade of 26 May 1995. 
Miscellaneous - Kazakhstan Economic Trends - First Quarter 1996; 
- Kazakhstan Economic Trends - February 1996; and 
- Kazakhstan Economic Trends - Monthly update. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 288 - 
 
  ANNEX 2 
List of Priority Activities, on the Level of th e Classifier of Sub-types of Activity, for which 
Investment Preferences Are Granted 
No. Name of section Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 
01 Plant cultivation and 
livestock farming, hunting and provision of services in these fields 01.11 Growing of cereals crops (except for rice), leguminous plants 
and oil seed  
01.12  Cultivation of rice 
01.13 Cultivation of vegetables and gourds, root crops and tuber 
crops 
01.14 Growing of sugarcane 
01.16 Growing of fibrillose fibre crops 
01.19 Growing of other seasonal cu lture, except for growing of 
flowers, production of flowers and cultivation of flowers seed 
01.21 Growing of grapes 
01.22 Cultivation of tropical and subtropical fruits 
01.23 Cultivation of citrus fruits 
01.24 Cultivation of large fruits  
01.25 Cultivation of other types of fruit tree  
01.26 Growing of oily fruits 
01.27 Growing of croppers for drinks production  
01.29 Growing of other perennial crops 
01.30 Manufacturing of farm production 
01.41 Breeding of livestock dairy breed   
01.42 Breeding of other breeds of livestock and buffalos  
01.43 Breeding of horses and other hoofed breeds 
01.44 Breeding of camels and camelids 
01.45 Breeding of sheep and goats  
01.46 Breeding of pigs and piglet 
01.47 Poultry breeding 
01.49 Breeding of other types of animals 
01.64 Processing and preparation of seeds for  breeding 
03 Fishery and aquaculture  03.21 Marine aquaculture 
03.22 Fresh water aquaculture  
10 Food production  
10.11 Processing and preservation of meat  
10.12 Processing and preservation of meat of poultry   
10.13 Production of products made by meat and meat of poultry   
10.20 Processing and preservation of fish, shellfish 
10.31 Processing and canning of potatoes 
10.32 Production of fruit and vegetable juices  
10.39 Processing and canning of fruit  and vegetables, not included in 
other groups 
10.41 Production of fat and oil 
10.42 Production of margarine and butter 
10.51 Processing of milk and cheese production 
10.52 Ice-cream production 
10.61 Production of flou r-and-cereals industry 
10.62 Production of starch and starch products  
10.71 Production of bread; prod uction of fresh confectionery 
products, cakes and pastry WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 289 - 
 
  No. Name of section Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 
10.72 Production of dried bread and cookies; production 
confectionery products, cakes, pastry and biscuits intended for long-term storage  
10.73 Production of macaroni foods 
10.81 Production of sugar 
10.83 Manufacture of tea and coffee 
10.84 Manufacture of spices and seasonings 
10.85 Manufacture of prepared food and in-process foods 
10.86 Manufacture of baby food  and dietetic foodstuffs 
10.89 Manufacture of other foodstuffs  not entered in other groups  
10.91 Manufacture of prepared foodst uff for animals that keeping in 
farms 
10.92 Manufacture of ready-ma de foodstuff for animals 
11.06 Manufacture of malt 
11.07 Manufacture of mineral wa ter and other non-alcoholic 
beverages 
13 Manufacture of textile 
articles 13.10 Spinning, weaving and finishing industry 
13.20 Manufacture textile articles 
13.30 Manufacture ready-made textile articles 
13.91 Manufacture of textile fabric 
13.92 Manufacture ready-made textil e articles, except for clothes 
13.93 Manufacture of carpets and carpet articles 
13.94 Manufacture of cordage, ropes, binder and nets 
13.95 Manufacture of non-woven textil e materials, except for clothes  
13.96 Manufacture of other engin eering and manufacturing textile 
articles 
13.99 Manufacture of other textile articles not entered in other 
groups  
14 Manufacture of clothes,  14.11 Ma nufacture of clothes of leather  
14.12 Manufacture of working clothes 
14.13 Manufacture of outerwear  
14.14 Manufacture of underwear  
14.19 Manufacture of other clothes and accessories  
14.20 Manufacture of fur articles  
14.31 Manufacture of knitted hosiery goods  
14.39 Manufacture of other knitted goods 
15 Manufacture of leather, 
articles of leather  15.11 Hardening and currying of leather; dressing and dyeing of fur  
15.12 Manufacture paper bags and la dies bags, harness articles  
15.20 Manufacture of footwear 
16 Manufacture of wood 
and cork articles, other  than furniture; manufacture articles made from straws and articles for platting    16.10 Manufacture wood-sawing and joiner blade 
16.21 Manufacture of scale wood, plywood, slab and board 
16.22 Manufacture of ready-cut parquet coverage 
16.23 Manufacture of other wood building constructions and millwork  
17 Manufacture of pulp, 
paper, cardboard and articles of it 17.11 Manufacture of wood  pulp and cellulose 
17.12 Manufacture of paper and cardboard 
17.21 Manufacture of corrugated ca rdboard, paper and cardboard 
tare 
17.22 Manufacture of paper articl es of household and sanitary-
hygienic designation 
17.23 Manufacture of writing paper articles 
17.24 Manufacture of wallpaper 
17.29 Manufacture of other arti cles of paper and cardboard 
19 Manufacture of charred 
cool and products of  oil refining 19.10 Manufacture of products of coke oven 
19.20 Manufacture of produc ts of oil refining  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 290 - 
 
  No. Name of section Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 
20 Chemical industry 
 20.11 Manufacture of industrial gas 
20.12 Manufacture of colours and pigments 
20.13 
 Manufacture of other general inorganic (chemical) matters 
20.14 Manufacture of other general organic (chemical) matters,  
20.15 Manufacture of fertilisers and nitrogen compounds 
20.16 Manufacture of plastics in primary forms 
20.17 Manufacture of synthetic caoutchouc in primary forms 
20.20 Manufacture of pesticides  and other agricultural chemical 
products 
20.30 Manufacture of paints, lacquers and analogous coatings, 
typographic paints and mastics 
20.41 Manufacture of soap and washing, cleansing and polishing 
matters 
20.42 Manufacture of perfume  and cosmetic matters 
20.51 Manufacture of explosive materials 
20.52 Manufacture of glues  
20.53 Manufacture of essences 
20.59 Manufacture of other chemical products not included in other 
categories 
20.60 Manufacture of artificial fibres 
21 Manufacture of general 
pharmaceutical products 21.10 Manufacture of general pharmaceutical products  
21.20 Manufacture of l pharmaceutical products  
22 Manufacture of rubber 
and plastic articles 22.11 Manufacture of rubber tire s and automobile inner tube; 
retreading of rubber tires     
22.19 Manufacture of othe r rubber articles  
22.21 Manufacture of plastic shee ts, automobile inner tube and 
profile  
22.22 Manufacture of plastic packages for goods 
22.23 Manufacture of constructional plastic articles 
22.29 Manufacture of other plastic articles  
23 Manufacture of other 
non-metal mineral products 23.11 Manufacture of plate glasses  
23.12 Forming and handling of plate glasses 
23.13 Manufacture of hollow glass articles  
23.14 Manufacture of glass fibre  
23.19 Manufacture and processing of other glass articles  
23.20 Manufacture of refractory products 
23.31 Manufacture of building articles of clay 
23.32 Manufacture of bricks, tiles and other building articles of burnt 
clay 
23.41 Manufacture of household and decorative ceramic articles  
23.42 Manufacture of ceramic sa nitary-technical articles  
23.43 Manufacture of ceramic electr ic insulators and insulating 
accessories 
23.44 Manufacture of other technical ceramic articles 
23.51 Manufacture of cement including clinker 
23.52 Manufacture of gypsum arti cles for use in  construction 
23.61 Manufacture of construction articles of concrete 
23.62 Manufacture of gypsum articl es for construction purposes 
23.63 Manufacture of concrete ready for use  
23.64 Manufacture of dry concrete mixtures 
23.65 Manufacture of articles of as bestos cement and fibrous cement 
23.69 Manufacture of other  concrete articles construction gypsum 
and cement 
23.70 Cutting, treatment and finish ing of decoration of  stone 
23.91 Manufacture of abrasive articles  
23.99 Manufacture of other non-metal mineral products not entered 
in other groups 
24 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles 24.10 Manufacture of iron, st eel and ferrous alloys  
24.20 Manufacture of tubes, pipeline , section material, fittings made 
by steel 
24.31 Manufacture of cold drawing 
24.32 Cold rolling of ribbons and ridges 
24.33 Cold moulding and folding 
24.34 Manufacture of wires made by cold extension  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 291 - 
 
  No. Name of section Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 
24.41 Production of precious metals  
24.42 Manufacture of aluminium  
24.43 Manufacture of lead, zinc and tin 
24.44 Manufacture of copper 
24.45 Manufacture of ot her ferrous metals 
24.46 Nuclear-fuel reprocessing 
24.51 Casting of pig-iron  
24.52 Casting of steel 
24.53 Casting of light metals 
24.54 Casting of other non-ferrous metals 
25 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles, except for machinery and equipment 25.11 Manufacture of cisterns, basin and containers 
25.12 Manufacture of metallic doors and windows 
25.21 Manufacture of radiators an d boilers for central heating 
25.29 Manufacture of metallic cisterns, basin and containers 
25.30 Manufacture of steam boilers 
25.40 Manufacture of weapons and ammunition 
24.50 Hammering, pressing, stampi ng and shaping of metal sheet 
made by rolling manner  
25.61 Metal working  and applying coat on metals 
25.62 Automatic development; processing and covering of metals  
25.71 Manufacture of other metallic articles 
25.72 Manufacture of key locks, loop and hinges 
25.73 Manufacture of instruments 
25.91 Manufacture of other metallic drums and similar container 
25.92 Manufacture of packing materials of light metals  
25.93 Manufacture of articles of wire 
25.94 Manufacture of fastening articles 
25.99 Manufacture of other ready-ma de metal articles not included 
to this category 
26 Manufacture of 
computers, electronic and optical products 26.11 Manufacture of electronic details 
26.12 Manufacture of electronic details 
26.20 Manufacture of computers and off-line equipment  
26.30 Manufacture of communication equipment 
26.40 Manufacture electric appliances for users 
26.51 Manufacture of instruments and equipment for measuring, 
testing and navigation 
26.60 Manufacture of illuminating, electro-medical and 
electrotherapy equipment 
26.70 Manufacture of optical  and photographic equipment 
26.80 Manufacture of magnetic and optical transmission facility 
27 Manufacture of electric 
equipment 27.11 Manufacture of electric moto rs, generators and transformers 
27.12 Manufacture of electric distributing and controlling equipment 
27.20 Manufacture of radiators and accumulators 
27.31 Manufacture of fibre-optic cable 
27.32 Manufacture of other types of electric line and cable  
27.33 Manufacture of electric appliances 
27.40 Manufacture of electric lighting equipment 
27.51 Manufacture of no electric household appliances  
27.52 Manufacture of other electric equipment  
27.90 Manufacture of other electric equipment  
28 Manufacture of 
machines and equipments, not included to other categories 28.11 Manufacture of engines and turbines, except for aviation, 
machinery and  motorcycle engines 
28.12 Manufacture of hydraulic equipment 
28.13 Manufacture of other pumps, compressors, thimbles and 
valves 
28.14 Manufacture of ot her valves and vents 
28.15 Manufacture of bearings, gear s, elements of tooth gear and 
gear-drive 
28.21 Manufacture of slabs, stoves and kiln burner 
28.22 Manufacture of elevating and shipping equipment 
28.23 Manufacture of office equipmen t, office appliances (except for 
computers and peripheral equipment) 
28.24 Manufacture of manual electric tools 
28.25 Manufacture of industrial c ooling and ventilating equipment WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 292 - 
 
  No. Name of section Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 
  28.29 Manufacture of other machines and general-purpose 
equipment, not included to other categories 
28.30 Manufacture of agricultural  and forestry-b ased machines 
28.41 Manufacture of metal fabrication machinery  
28.49 Manufacture of other metal-working machine 
28.91 Manufacture of machinery and equipment for metallurgy 
28.92 Manufacture of machinery for mining industry, underground 
operations and construction  
28.93 Manufacture of facilities for production, processing of 
foodstuff, beverages and tobacco 
28.94 Manufacture of facilities for textile, needle, fur and leather 
articles 
28.95 Manufacture of machines  for paper and paperboard 
28.96 Manufacture of equipment for processing rubber, plastics and 
other polymeric materials 
28.99 Manufacture of other machin es and equipment of special 
purposes, not included to other categories 
29 Manufacture of cars, 
trailers and semi-trailers 29.10 Manufacture of transportations 
29.20 Manufacture of bodies for transportations, trailers and 
semi-trailers 
29.31 Manufacture of electric and electronic equipment for 
transportations 
29.32 Manufacture of parts and materials for transportations and 
their engines  
30 Manufacture of other 
transportations 30.11 Building of ships and floating structures 
30.12 Building of pleasure and sporting boats 
30.20 Manufacture of railway locomotives and rolling stocks 
30.30 Manufacture of air and space and etc. equipment 
30.40 Manufacture of military transportation facilities 
30.91 Manufacture of motorcycles 
30.92 Manufacture of bicycle and invalid's wheel chair/armchairs 
31 Manufacture of furniture 31.01 Manufactu re of office and studio furniture 
31.02 Manufacture of kitchen furniture 
31.03 Manufacture of mattress 
31.09 Manufacture of other furniture 
32 Manufacture of other 
ready-made articles 32.50 Manufacture of medical and de ntal facilities  and articles 
33 Mending and 
assembling of machinery and equipment 33.11 Mending ready-made metallic materials 
33.12 Mending of machinery and equipment 
33.13 Mending of electronic and optical equipment 
33.14 Mending of electric equipment 
33.15 Mending, servicing of vessels and ships 
33.16 Mending, servicing of aeri al vehicles and spacecrafts  
33.17 Mending, servicing of other ty pes of transportation facilities 
33.19 Mending of other types of transportation facilities 
33.20 Assembling of industrial  engineering and equipment 
35 
 Electricity and gas 
supply, air-conditioning  35.11 Production electrical energy 
35.12 Supply of electrical energy 
35.13 Distribution of electrical energy 
35.14 Sales of electrical energy to consumer 
35.21 Production of gaseous fuel 
35.22 Distribution of gase ous fuel via pipelines 
35.23 Sales of gaseous fuel via pipelines 
35.30 System for delivering pair and conditioned air 
36 Collection, processing 
and distribution of water 36.00 Collection, processing and distribution of water 
38 Collection, processing, 
elimination and recycling of wastes 38.12 Collection of hazardous wastes 
38.21 Processing and elimination of non-hazardous waste 
38.32 Recycling of sorted materials 
42 
 Civil engineering 
 42.11 Construction of roads and highway 
42.12 Construction of railways and metro 
42.13 Construction of bridges and tunnels 
42.21 Construction of distri butive engineering project 
42.22 Construction of distribu tive engineering project for 
electric-light and telecommunication services WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 293 - 
 
  No. Name of section Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 
42.91 Construction of water facilities 
42.99 Construction of other civil engineering projects, not entered in 
other groups 
49 Land transport and 
transportation by pipelines 49.10 Railway transport for passengers 
49.20 Railway transport for cargo-carrying 
49.31 Urban and suburban ground passengers transport 
49.39 Other ground transport for pa ssengers, not entered in other 
categories 
49.41 Freight traffic by highway transportation 
49.50 Transportation by pipelines 
50 Water transport  50.10 Marine an d riverside passenger's transport 
50.20 Marine and riverside cargo's transport 
50.30 River transport for passengers 
50.40 River transport for cargo  
51 
 Air transport  51.10 Air passenger transport 
51.21 Air cargo transport 
51.22 Transport of space system 
52 Warehousing and 
auxiliary and additional transport activity   52.21 Services in the area of land transport 
52.22 Services rendered in a water transport 
52.23 Services rendered in air transport 
52.24 Handling services  
55 Rendering of services by 
hotels 55.10 Rendering of services by hotels 
55.10 Rendering of services by hotels 
55.30 Tourist camps, parks and entertainments 
61 
 Telecommunication 61.20 Wireless communications 
61.30 Activities in the sphere of satellite telecommunications 
68 Real estate operations 68.20 Renting and us ing of personal or rental real estate 
85 
 Education 
 85.10 Preschool education 
85.20 Primary education  
(first level) 
85.31 Fundamental and general secondary level education  
85.32 Technical and professional secondary level education 
85.41 After secondary-level education 
85.42 Higher education 
86 Activity in the field of 
health care 86.10 Activity of medical institutions 
93 Activity for organization 
of leisure and entertainment, culture and sport 93.11 Activity of sporting institutions 
93.29 Other types of activities for organization of leisure and 
entertainment 
Source :  Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 as amended by Government Resolution No. 809 of 
6 August 2010  
   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 294 - ANNEX 3(A) 
Progress in Privatization of State Property within 1991-2012  
(in units)  
Year 1991-1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010  2011 2012 
Number of 
privatized 
entities of 
State ownership 4,771 154 2,646 3,630 4,442 7,004 3,240 2,624 1,859 2,205 1,823 2,106 2,094 1,239 654 945 846 1,241 651 658 799 
Privatized 
State shares in JSC and LLP - - - 385 889 1,315 513 162 93 146 67 65 58 16 1 - - 3 3 1 5 
Privatized 
individual projects - 1 1 6 27 48 11 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Privatized 
property complexes, immovable property objects, 
incomplete 
construction, transportation and other objects 4,771 153 2,645 3,239 3,526 5,641 2,716 2,462 1,766 2,059 1,756 2,041 2,036 1,223 653 945 846 1,238 648 657 794 
Source :  Adapted from the data provided by State Property and Privatization Committee,  Ministry of Finance. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 295 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(B) 
Progress in Privatization of St ate Property within 2000-2012 
(in units)  
Area of activity 2000-2012 
1. Privatized State shares in JSC and LLP, total  458  
Including:  
- Industry 136 
- Construction 26 
- Agriculture 50 
- Transportation and communication 54 
- Trade in and repair of household goods 28  
- Finance 8 
- Health care 27 
- Education 15 
- Other objects 114 
2. Privatized property complexe s, immovable property objects, 
incomplete construction, transportation and other objects  16,662  
Total 17,120  
Source : Adapted from the data provided by State Property an d Privatization Committee, Ministry of Finance.  
 
ANNEX 3(C) 
The Number of State Enterprises by Spheres of Economic Activity in 2009-2011 
  State enterprises  
01.01.2009  01.01.2010  01.01.2011  
  RSEs* CSEs† RSEs CSEs RSEs CSEs 
Non-production sector  243 3,867 270 4,596 281 4,851 
Industry and construction  17 50 11 61 5 61 
Agriculture  13 70 13 53 13 70 
Transport and communications  7 23 7 26 7 17 
Other 14 223 23 203 23 10 
Total 294 4,090 324 4,799 329 5,009  
Source : Adapted from the data provided by State Property an d Privatization Committee, Ministry of Finance.  
 *  RSEs – Republican State Enterp rises, property of which is  in republican ownership. 
 † CSEs – Communal State Ente rprises, property of which is in municipal ownership. 
ANNEX 3(D) 
The Number of Joint-stock Companies with State Participation by Types of Economic 
Activity in 2008-2011 
 Joint-Stock Companies with State Participation (number)  
01.01.2008  01.01.2009  01.01.2010  01.01.2011  
Non-production sector  43 38 33 39 
Industry and construction  6 7 5 4 
Agriculture  8 8 8 7 
Transport and Communications  5 5 5 6 
Forestry  1 1 1 1 
Other 68 70 65 61 
Total 131 129 117 118 
Source : Adapted from the data provided by State Property  and Privatization Committee under Ministry of 
Finance. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 296 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(E) 
The Allotment of State Share Holding in Joint-Stock Companies 
Share of State 
participation Number of Joint-Stock Companies 
01.01.2008 01.01.2009 01.01.2010 01.01.2011 01.01.2012 01.01.2013 
100% 94 94 78 88 103 106 
50% to 100% 17 14 18 10 9 8 
25% to 50% 13 14 15 11 9 10 
less than 25% 7 7 6 9 7 6 
Total 131 129 117 118 128 130 
Source : Adapted from the data provided by State Property  and Privatization Committee under Ministry of 
Finance. 
ANNEX 3(F) 
Share of State Property in Gross Value Added in Specific Areas in 2005-2011 
 Share of State Property in Gross Valu e Added, by Sectors of Economy (%) 
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 
Total 8.7 8.2 8.4 7.6 8.9 9.3 9.6 
Agriculture, forestry 
and fishery 7.3 6.8 7.1 6.7 5.9 6.1 6.8 
Industry 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 
Construction  0.9 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.2 
Trade 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 
Transport and 
Communications  3.4 5.0 3.9 3.4 4.0 6.6 8.0‡ 
Other Types of 
activities 25.1 23.3 23.2 22.2 24.8 25.5 26.2‡ 
Source : the Statistics Agency. 
‡ data submitted in accordance with the State General Classifier of Types of Economic Activity 03-2007.  
ANNEX 3(G) 
Share of State Property in Gross Value Added in Specific Areas in 2005-2011 
 Share of State Property in Gross Valu e Added, by Sectors of Economy (%) 
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 
Total 8.7 8.2 8.4 7.6 8.9 9.3 9.6 
Agriculture, forestry and fishery  7.3 6.8 7.1 6.7 5.9 6.1 6.8 
Industry  0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 
Services*  12.7 12.0 11.9 11.4 13.2 14.3 14.8 
Source : the Statistics Agency 
* Services include all sectors of services and construction. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 297 - 
 
  ANNEX 4 
List of Services Provided by Natural Monopolies 
No. Types of activities referred to the sphere of 
natural monopoly in accordance with the Law 
of the Republic of Kazak hstan (hereinafter RK) 
"On Natural Monopolies and Regulated 
Markets" Regulated types of services 
1. Transportation of oil and/or oil products by 
main pipelines   1) operating of centralized routing;  
 2) Transportation of oil via main pipeline system; 
 
 3) Unloading of oil from railway tanks;   4) Loading of oil into railway tanks;   5) Loading of oil into tankers;   6) Unloading of oil from vehicle tankers;   7) Loading of oil into vehicle tankers;   8) Storage of oil;   9) Trans-shipment (conveyance) of oil; and  10)  Mixture of oil. 
2. Storage and transportation of gas and/or gas 
condensate by main and/or distribution pipelines, operating of ga s distribution facilities 
and connected gas dist ribution pipelines  
 - Transportation of natural gas by main pipelines; 
- Transportation of natu ral gas by distribution 
pipelines for consumers of  the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- Transportation of liquefied hydrocarbon gas via 
gas pipelines from group reservoirs to consumers; and 
- Storage of natural gas. 
3. Delivery and/or distribution of electric power  Delivery and/or distribution of electric power. 
4. Production, delivery, distribution and/or supply 
of heating energy   - Production of heating energy; 
- Delivery and/or distribution of heating energy; - Supply of heating energy; - Production, delivery and distribution of heating 
energy; and 
- Production, delivery, distribution and/or supply of 
heating energy.  
5.  6. Technical dispatching of delivery into the 
network and consumption of electric power  Balancing of production and consumption of electric power. Technical dispatching of delivery into the network and 
consumption of electric power.  Balancing of production and consumption of electric power.  
7.    8. Services of main railway network  
   Services of railways equipped with railway transportation facilities in accordance with concession agreements  - Use of main railway network,  
- Management of passage of rolling equipment by 
main railway network,  
- Use of main railway network and management of 
passage of rolling equipment by main railway network; and 
- Use of railways equipped with railway 
transportation facilities in accordance with concession agreements.   
9. Approaching railway services   - A pproaching railway services for rolling 
equipment provided there was no competing approaching railway, 
- Approaching railway services for manoeuvring 
operations, loading and unloading, other technological operations of transportation process as well as for lay-over of rolling equipment not provided in technological operations of transportation process when there was no competing approaching railway. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 298 - 
 
  No. Types of activities referred to the sphere of 
natural monopoly in accordance with the Law 
of the Republic of Kazak hstan (hereinafter RK) 
"On Natural Monopolies and Regulated 
Markets" Regulated types of services 
10. Aero-navigation services 
 - Aero-navigation services within airspace of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan except for aero-navigation services of airlines operating international flights, 
- Aero-navigation services in the area of 
aerodrome, except for aero -navigation services of 
airlines operating international flights 
11. 12. Maritime port services 
Airport services  - Loading and unloading conducted by facilities of 
maritime ports; 
- Vessel calls for loadin g and others purposes. 
- Services in take-off and landing except for 
servicing of transits with non-commercial technical landing; 
- Services in providing aviation safety except for 
servicing of transits with non-commercial technical landing; 
- Providing parking space for aircraft (i) for 
passenger planes for longer than 3 hours after landing and (ii) for cargo certified aircrafts having cargo (mail) subject to unloading in the airport of landing - for longer than 6 hours; 
- Providing parking space for aircraft in the base 
airports; and 
- Providing of workbench (area) to passenger 
registration. 
13. Telecommunication services under conditions 
of absence of  competing operators for the reason of technological infeasibility or commercial inexpediency   (1) Connection to  public landline network: 
- network of local telecommunication 
operators; 
- facilities (access po ints) of IP-operators 
(Internet Telephony) at the international level.  
 (2) Leap by connecting telecommunication operator 
of: - local telephone traffic from the networks of 
operators being connected; 
- telephone traffic from/to facilities (access 
points) of IP-operators (Internet Telephony) being connected.   
14. Leasing or use of cable channels and other 
basic facilities technologically related to connecting telecommunication networks with telecommunications of common use:  Granting use of telephone channels (underground 
conduits). 
15. Water management and sewerage system 
services   Water management sewera ge system services:  
- Regulation of surface-water flow by water control 
structures; 
- Supply of water by main networks; - Supply of water by di stribution networks; 
- Supply of water by channels.  Sewerage system services: - Drainage of sewage water; - Cleaning of sewage water. 
16. Public mail services  
  - Mailing of ordinary letters; 
- Mailing of post cards; - Mailing of postal wrappers. 
Source :  Government Resolution No. 155 of 14 March 2006. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 299 - 
 
  ANNEX 5(A)  
Requirements, Terms and Fees Applied for Registration of Various Legal Forms of 
Juridical Persons 
Legal forms List of documents 
to submit for State 
registration State 
registration 
terms Registration fee 
amount in 2013 
Limited Liability Partne rship is a partnership 
founded by one or several individuals, registered 
capital of which is separated into shares in the amounts determined by th e founding documents.  
The participants of LLP take none of the company's liabilities and share its risks only within the limits of the contributions made, except for the cases provided by the legislation.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Receipt or a 
copy of remittance order on payment of the registration fee.  1 business 
day 11,252 tenge 
For small businesses: 
 
3,462 tenge  
Joint Stock Company - juridical person, issuing 
shares with the purpose to attract funding for performance of their activity.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Founding 
charter if a JSC does not operate on the basis of the Model Charter; 
3. Protocol of the 
meeting of founders; 
4. Receipt or a 
copy of remittance order on payment of the registration fee. 10 working 
days 11,252 tenge 
 
Production Cooperative – a voluntary association 
of individuals on the basis of a membership for 
joint entrepreneurial activity, based on their personal working participation and unification of the participants' contributions.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Receipt or a 
copy of remittance order on payment of the registration fee. 1 business 
day 11,252 tenge 
For small businesses:
 
3,462 tenge   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 300 - 
 
  ANNEX 5(B) 
Calculation Methodology for Import/Export Licensing Fees and for Registration of 
Juridical Persons 
1. General Provisions  Rates of fees for licensing of goods exportation and importation and for registration of 
juridical persons are calculated in accordance wi th Article VIII of the GATT 1994.  The fee rates 
shall be fixed and their amounts shall equal to the amount of actual costs incurred by the governmental bodies during registering the juridi cal person and issuing the licence.  The fee rates 
shall be quoted in the national currency. 
2. Main Costs to be Included into Rates Calculation 
1. For licensing of export/import of goods and State registration of juridical persons:  
 - utilities cost;  
 - communication services cost; 
 - transport services cost; 
 - electric power cost;  - heating cost; 
- maintenance, servicing and repair of buildings, premises, equipment and other 
capital assets; 
 - rent of offices;  - other services and works directly related to the process of rendering services;  - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services; 
- other current costs (data traffic, seasons, and international standards) the process 
of rendering services. 
2. For issuing duplicates and re-registering of  export and import of goods and the duplicate 
for of the certificate on State registration (re-registration) of juridical persons, and 
branches and representatives thereof: 
 - rent of offices; 
 - electric power cost;  - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services. 
3. For State (statistical) re-registration and ce asing of the activity of juridical persons and 
branches and representatives thereof: 
 - utilities cost; 
 - communication services cost; 
 - transport services cost; 
 - electric power cost;  - heating cost; 
- maintenance, servicing and repair of buildings, premises, equipment and other 
capital assets; 
 - rent of offices;  - other services and works directly related to the process of rendering services;  - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services; 
- other current costs (data traffic, seasons, and international standards) the process 
of rendering services. 
3. Fee Rates Calculation Algorithm All actually incurred (or due) expenses under paragraph 2 herein shall be calculated per one State 
employee.  The amount of these expenses sha ll be the basis for the fee rates calculation. 
Depending on the inflation the fee rates may be adjusted. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 301 - 
 
  4. Conclusion 
Governmental bodies use the methodology to calculate the fee rates for the licensing of goods 
exportation and importation and for the State registration of juridical persons within their authority. 
Source : Order No. 105 of the Ministry of Econom y and Budget Planning of 27 August 2005. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 302 - 
 
  ANNEX 6 
List of Sensitive Products, where Decision on  the Level of Import Duties shall be Taken 
by CU Commission Parties Consensus1
                                               
 1 Not all 10 digit HS codes within a 4 digit HS subgroup may be included in the list. CET Code  Description of products  
0201 Meat of bovine animal s, fresh or chilled.  
0202 Meat of bovine animals, frozen.  
0203 Meat of swine, fresh, chilled, or frozen.  
0207 Meat and edible offal, of the poultry of Heading N° 0105, fresh, chilled, or frozen.  
0301 Live fish.  
0302 Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat of Heading 0304.  
0303 Fish, frozen, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat of Heading 0304.  
0304 Fish fillets and other fish meat (whether or not minced), fresh, chilled or frozen.  
0401 Milk and cream, not concentrated nor contai ning added sugar or other sweetening matter.  
0402 Milk and cream, concentrated or containing added sugar or other sweetening matter.  
0403 Buttermilk, curdled milk and cream, yogurt, kephir and other fermented or acidified milk and 
cream, whether or not concentrat ed or containing added sugar or other sweetening matter or 
flavoured or containing added fruit, nuts or cocoa.  
0405 Butter and other fats and oils derived from milk; dairy spreads.  
0406 Cheese and curd. 
0407 00  Birds eggs, in shell, fre sh, preserved or boiled  
0408 Birds' eggs, not in shell and egg yo lks, fresh, dried, cooked by st eaming or by boiling in water, 
moulded, frozen, or ot herwise preserved, whether or not containing added sugar or other 
sweetening matter.  
0602 Other live plants (including their roots), cuttings and slips; mushroom spawn.  
0701 Potatoes, fresh or chilled.  
0703 Onions, shallots, garlic, leeks and other alliaceous vegetables, fresh or chilled.  
0704 Cabbages, cauliflowers, kohlrabi, kale and si milar edible brassicas, fresh or chilled.  
0706 Carrots, turnips, salad beetroot, sals ify, celeriac, radishes and simila r edible roots, fresh or chilled.  
0707 00  Cucumbers and gherkins, fresh or chilled.  
0808 Apples, pears and quinces, fresh.  
0810 Other fruit, fresh.  
1002 
00 000 0  Rye. 
1003 00  Barley.  
1006 Rice. 
1101 00  Wheat or wheat-rye flour.  
1102 Cereal flours other than of wheat or meslin.  
1103 Cereal groats, me al and pellets.  
1104 Cereal grain otherwise worked (for  example, hulled, rolled, flaked, pearled, sliced or kibbled), 
except rice of Heading 1006; germ of cereals, whole, rolled, flaked or ground.  
1107 Malt, whether or  not roasted.  
1108 Starches; inulin.  
1507 Soya-bean oil and its fractions, whether or not refined but not chemically modified.  
1511 Palm oil and its fractions, whether or no t refined, but not chemically modified.  
1512 Sunflower-seed, safflower or cotton-seed oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or not refined but not 
chemically modified.  
1513 Coconut (copra), palmkernel or babassu oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or not refined but not 
chemically modified.  
1514 Rape, colza or mustard oil and fractions thereof,  whether or not refine d, but not chemically 
modified.  
1517 Margarine; edible mixtures or preparations of anim al or vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of 
different fats or oils of this Ch apter, other than edible fats or oils or their fractions of Heading 
1516. 
1601 00  Sausages and similar products from meat, meat su b-products or blood; finished food products, 
made on the basis thereof.  
1701 Cane or beet sugar and chemically  pure sucrose, in solid form.  
1704 Sugar confectionery (including whit e chocolate), not containing cocoa.  
1806 Chocolate and other food preparations containing cocoa.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 303 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
1901 Malt extract; food preparations of flour, meal, starch or malt extract, not containing cocoa or 
containing less than 40% by weight of cocoa calc ulated on a totally defatted basis, not elsewhere 
specified or included; food preparations of goods of Headings 0401 to 0404, not containing cocoa or containing less than 5% by weight of coco a calculated on a totally defatted basis, not 
elsewhere specified of included.
 
1905 Bread, pastry, cakes, biscuits and other bake rs' wares, whether or not containing cocoa; 
communion wafers, empty cachets of a kind suitable  for pharmaceutical use,  sealing wafers, rice 
paper, and similar products.  
2001 Vegetables, fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, prepared  or preserved by vinegar or acetic 
acid. 
2005 Other vegetables prepared or preserved otherwis e than by vinegar or acetic acid, not frozen, 
other than products of Heading 2006.  
2007 Jams, fruit jellies, marmalades, fruit or nut puree, and fruit or nut pastes, being cooked 
preparations, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter.  
2008 Fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, ot herwise prepared or preserved, whether or not 
containing added sugar or other sweetening matter  or spirit, not elsewhere specified or included.  
2009 Fruit juices (including grape must) and vegetabl e juices, unfermented and not containing added 
spirit, whether or not containing adde d sugar or other sweetening matter.  
2102 Yeasts (active or inactive); other single-cell micro-organisms, dead (but not including vaccines of 
Heading 3002); prepared baking powders.  
2207 Undenatured ethyl alcohol of an alcoholic strength  by volume of 80% or higher; ethyl alcohol and 
other spirits, denatured, of any strength.  
2208 Undenatured ethyl alcohol of an alcoholic strength  by volume of less than 80%; spirits, liqueurs 
and other spirituous beverages.  
2304 00 000
 Millcake and other solid wastes from extracts of soy oil, milled or not milled, granulated or not 
granulated.  
2522 Quicklime, slaked lime and hydraulic lime, othe r than calcium oxide and hydroxide of Heading 
2825. 
2523 Portland cement, aluminous cement, slag cement , super-sulphate cement and similar hydraulic 
cements, whether or not coloured  or in the form of clinkers.  
2615 Niobium, tantalum, vanadium or zirconium ores and concentrates.  
2620 Ash and residues (other th an from the manufacture of iron or st eel), containing arsenic, metals or 
metal compounds.  
2707 Oils and other products of the distillation of high temperature coal tar; similar products in which the weight of the aromatic constituents exce eds that of the non-aromatic constituents.
 
2708 Pitch and pitch coke, obtained from co al tar or from other mineral tars.  
2710 Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous  minerals, other than crude; preparations not 
elsewhere specified or included, containing by weig ht 70% or more of petroleum oils or of oils 
obtained from bituminous minerals, these oils being the basic constituents of the preparations; used oils.
 
2711 Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons.  
2712 Petroleum jelly; paraffin wax, microcrystalline pe troleum wax, slack wax, ozokerite, lignite wax, 
peat wax, other mineral waxes, an d similar products obtained by sy nthesis or by other processes, 
whether or not coloured.  
2713 Petroleum coke, petroleum bitumen and other residues  of petroleum oils or of oils obtained from 
bituminous minerals.  
2801 Fluorine, chlorine, bromine and iodine.  
2802 00 000 0
 Sublimed or precipitated sulphur; colloidal sulphur.  
2803 00  Carbon.  
2804 Hydrogen, rare gases and other non-metals.  
2805 Alkali or alkaline-earth metals; rare-earth metals, scandium and yttrium, whether or not 
intermixed or interalloyed; mercury.  
2806 Hydrogen chloride (hydrochloric acid); chlorosulphuric acid.  
2807 00  Sulphuric acid, oleum.  
2808 00 000 0
 Hydrogen nitrate; sulpho-nitrogen acids.  
2809 Diphosphorus pentaoxide; phosphor ic acid and polyphosphoric acids, whether or not chemically 
defined.  
2810 00  Boric oxides, boric acids.  
2811 Other inorganic acids and other inorganic oxygen compounds of non-metals.  
2812 Halides and halide oxides of non-metals.  
2813 Sulphides of non-metals; commercial phosphorus trisulphide.  
2814 Ammonia, anhydrous or in aqueous solution.  
2815 Sodium hydroxide (caustic soda); potassium hydrox ide (caustic potash); peroxides of sodium or 
potassium.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 304 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
2816 Hydroxide and peroxide of magnes ium; oxides, hydroxides and pero xides, of strontium or barium.  
2817 
00 000 0  Zinc oxide; zinc peroxide.  
2818 Artificial corundum, whether or not chemically defined; aluminium oxide; aluminium hydroxide.  
2819 Chromium oxides and hydroxides.  
2820 Manganese oxides.  
2821 Iron oxides and hydroxides; earth colours containi ng 70% or more by weight of combined iron 
evaluated as Fe 2O3. 
2822 00 000 0
 Cobalt oxides and hydroxides; technical cobalt oxides.  
2823 00 000 0
 Titanium oxides.  
2824 Lead oxides; red lead and orange lead.  
2825 Hydrazine and hydroxylamine and their inorganic sa lts; other inorganic bases; other metal oxides, 
hydroxides and peroxides.  
2826 Fluorides; fluorosilicates, fluoroamin ates and other complex fluorine salts.  
2827 Chlorides, chloride oxides and chloride hydrox ides; bromides and bromide oxides; iodides and 
iodide oxides.  
2828 Hypochlorites; commercial calcium hy pochlorite; chlorites; hypobromites.  
2829 Chlorates and perchlorates; bromates an d perbromates; iodates and periodates.  
2830 Sulphides; polysulphides whether or not chemically defined.  
2831 Dithionites and sulphoxylates.  
2832 Sulphites; thiosulphates.  
2833 Sulphates; alums; peroxosulpohates (persulphates).  
2834 Nitrites; nitrates.  
2835 Phosphinates (hypophosphites), phosphonates (phosphites), phosphates  and polyphosphates 
whether or not chemically defined.  
2836 Carbonates; peroxocarbonates (percarbonates);  commercial ammonium carbonate containing 
ammonium carbamate.  
2837 Cyanides, cyanide oxides, and complex cyanides.  
2839 Silicates; commercial alkali metal silicates.  
2840 Borates; peroxoborates (perborates).  
2841 Salts of oxometallic or peroxometallic acids.  
2842 Other salts of inorganic acids or peroxacids (inclu ding aluminosilicates whether or not chemically 
defined), other than azides.  
2843 Colloidal precious metals; inorganic or organic compounds of precious metals, whether or not chemically defined; amalgams of precious metals.
 
2844 Radioactive chemical elements and radioactive isotopes (including the fissile or fertile chemical elements and isotopes) and their compounds; mixtures and residues containing these products.
 
2845 Isotopes other than those of Heading 2844; compou nds, inorganic or organic, of such isotopes, 
whether or not chemically defined.  
2846 Compounds, inorganic or organic, of  rare-earth metals, of yttrium or of scandium or of mixtures of 
these metals.  
2847 00 000 0
 Urea hydrogen peroxide or non-urea hydrogen peroxide  
2848 00 000 0
 Phosphides of defined or undefined chemical  composition, except for ferrophosphorus.  
2849 Carbides, whether or not chemically defined.  
2850 00  Hydrides, nitrides, azides, silicides , borides, of defined or undefine d chemical composition, except 
for chemical compounds which are carbides under HS code 2849.  
2852 00 000
 Mercuric compounds, inorganic or orga nic compounds, except for amalgams.  
2853 00  Other inorganic compounds (including distilled or conductivity water and water of the same 
cleanness); liquid air with or without inactive  gas); compressed air; amalgams, except for 
precious metals amalgams.  
2901 Acyclic hydrocarbons.  
2902 Cyclic hydrocarbons.  
2903 Halogenated derivative s of hydrocarbons.  
2904 Sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivative s of hydrocarbons, whether or not halogenated.  
2905 Acyclic alcohols and their halogented, sulpho nated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2906 Cyclic alcohols and their halogenated, sulpho nated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2907 Phenols; phenol-alcohols.  
2908 Halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosat ed derivatives of phenols or phenol-alcohols.  
2909 Ethers, ether-alcohols, ether phen ols, ether-alcohol-phenols, alco hol peroxides, et her peroxides, 
ketone peroxides (whether or not chemically defined), and their halo genated, sulphonated, 
nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 305 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
2910 Epoxides, epoxyalcohols, epoxyphenols, and epoxy ethers, with a three-member ring and their 
halogented, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2911 00 000 0
 Acetals and semiacetals containing or not contai ning other acid-containin g functional group and 
their halogenated, sulfonated, nitrated or nitrozated derivatives.  
2912 Aldehydes, whether or not with  other oxygen function; cycl ic polymers of aldehydes; 
paraformaldehyde.  
2913 00 000 0
 Halogented, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosat ed derivatives of compounds under HS code 2912.  
2914 Ketones and quinones, whether or not with other oxygen function, and their halogenated, 
sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2915 Saturated acyclic monocarboxylic acids and their anhydrides, halides, pe roxides and peroxyacids; 
their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2916 Unsaturated acyclic monocarboxylic acids, cyclic monocarbolic acids, their anhydrides, halides, peroxides, and peroxyacids; their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
 
2917 Polycarboxylic acids, their anhydrides, halides,  peroxides and peroxyacids; their halogenated, 
sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2918 Carboxylic acids with additional oxygen function and their anhydrides, halides, peroxides and peoxyacids; their halogenated, sulphonate d, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
 
2919 Phosphoric esters and their salts, including lactophosphates; their halogenated, sulphonated, 
nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2920 Esters of other inorganic acids (excluding este rs of hydrogen halides) and their salts; their 
halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2921 Amine-function compounds.  
2922 Oxygen-function amino-compounds.  
2923 Quaternary ammonium salts and hydroxides ; lecithins and other phosphoaminolipids.  
2924 Carboxyamide-function compounds; amide- function compounds of carbonic acid.  
2925 Carboxyimide-function compounds (including sa ccharin and its salts) and imine-function 
compounds.  
2926 Nitrile-function compounds.  
2927 00 000 0
 Diazo-, azo- or azoxy compounds.  
2928 00  Organic hydrazine or hydroxylamine derivatives.  
2929 Compounds with other nitrogen function.  
2930 Organo-sulphur compounds.  
2931 00  Other organic-inorganic compounds.  
2932 Heterocyclic compounds with oxygen hetero-atom(s) only.  
2933 Heterocyclic compounds with nitrogen hetero-atom(s) only.  
2934 Nucleic acids and their salts whether or not chemically defined; other heterocyclic compounds.  
2935 00  Sulfonamides.  
2936 Provitamins and vitamins, natural or repr oduced by synthesis (including natural 
concentrates),derivatives thereof used primarily as  vitamins, and intermixtures of the foregoing, 
whether or not in any solvent.  
2937 Hormones, prostaglandins, thromboxanes and leukot rienes, natural or repr oduced by synthesis; 
derivatives and structural analogues thereof, incl uding chain modified polypeptides, used primarily 
as hormones.  
2938 Glycosides, natural or reproduced by synthesi s and their salts, ethe rs, esters and other 
derivatives.  
2939 Vegetable alkaloids, natural or reproduced by sy nthesis and their salts, ethers, esters and other 
derivatives.  
2940 00 000 0
 Chemically clean sugars, except for saccharose, la ctose, maltose, glucose,  fructose; sugar ethers, 
sugar acetals, sugar esters, their salts, except for products under HS codes 2937, 2938 or 2939.  
2941 Antibiotics.  
2942 00 000 0
 Other organic compounds.  
3001 Glands and other organs for organo-therapeutic us es, dried, whether or not powdered; extracts of 
glands or other organs or of their secretions fo r organo-therapeutic uses; heparin and its salts; 
other human or animal substances prepared for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not elsewhere 
specified or included.  
3002 Human blood; animal blood prepared for therapeuti c, prophylactic or diagnostic uses; antisera 
and other blood fractions and modified immunolo gical products, whether or not obtained by 
means of biotechnological processes; vaccines, to xins, cultures of micro organisms (excluding 
yeasts) and similar products.  
3003 Medicaments (excluding goods of Headings 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of two or more constituents which have been mixed together for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not put up in measures doses or in forms or packings for retail sale.
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 306 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
3004 Medicaments (excluding goods of Heading 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of mixed or unmixed 
products for therapeutic or prophy lactic uses, put up in measured doses (including those in the 
form of transdermal ad ministration systems) or in forms or packings for retail sale.  
3005 Wadding, gauze, bandages and similar articles (for example, dressings, adhesive plasters, 
poultices),impregnated or coated with pharmaceutic al substances or put up in forms or packings 
for retail trade for medical, surgic al, dental or veterinary purposes.  
3006 Pharmaceutical goods specified in Note 4 to this Chapter.  
3202 Synthetic organic tanning substances; inorgani c tanning substances; tanning preparations, 
whether or not containing natural tanning subs tances; enzymatic preparations for pre-tanning.  
3204 Synthetic organic colouring matter, whether or not chemically defined; preparations as specified 
in Note 3 to this Chapter based on synthetic or ganic colouring matter; sy nthetic organic products 
of a kind used as fluorescent brightening agents  or as luminophores, wh ether or not chemically 
defined. –synthetic organic colour ing matter and preparations based thereon as specified in Note 
3 to this Chapter.  
3209 Paints and varnishes (including enamels and lacquers) based on synthetic polymers or chemically modified natural polymers, dispersed or dissolved in an aqueous medium.
 
3215 Printing ink, writing or drawing ink, and other inks, whether or not concentrated or solid.  
3302 Mixtures of odoriferous substances and mixtures (i ncluding alcoholic solutions) with a basis of one 
or more of these substances, of a kind used as  raw materials in industry; other preparations 
based on odoriferous substances, of a kind  used for the manufacture of beverages.  
3307 Pre-shave, shaving or after-shave preparatio ns, personal deodorants, bath preparations, 
depilatories and other perfumery, cosmetic or toilet preparations, not elsewhere specified or 
included; prepared room deodorizers, whether or not perfumed or having disinfectant properties.  
3401 Soap, organic surface-active products and preparat ions for use as soap, in the form of bars, 
cakes, moulded pieces or shapes , whether or not containing soap; organic surface-active agents 
and washing preparations for leather in the form of liquid or cream, in packings for retail sale, 
whether or not containing soap; paper, wadding,  felt and nonwovens, impregnated, coated or 
covered with soap or detergent.  
3402 Organic surface-active agents (other than soap); surface-active pr eparations, washing 
preparations (including auxiliary washing preparat ions) and cleaning preparations, whether or not 
containing soap, other than those of Heading 3401.  
3507 Enzymes; prepared enzymes not elsewhere specified or included.  
3602 00 000 0
 Finished explosives, except for gunpowder.  
3603 00  Safety fuses, detonating cords, percussion  or detonating caps, igniters, detonators.  
3805 Gum, wood or sulphate turpentine and other terpen ic oils produced by the distillation or other 
treatment of coniferous woods; crude dipenten e; sulphite turpentine and other crude para-
cymene; pine oil containing alpha-terpineol as the main constituent.  
3806 Rosin and resin acids, and derivatives thereo f; rosin spirit and rosin oils; run gums.  
3808 Insecticides, rodenticides, fungicides, herbicides, anti-sprouting products and plant-growth 
regulators, disinfectants an d similar products, put up in forms or packings for retail sale or as 
preparations or articles (for example, sulphur- treated bands, wicks and candles, and fly-papers).  
3901 Polymers of ethylene, in primary forms.  
3902 Polymers of propylene or of other olefins, in primary forms.  
3903 Polymers of styrene, in primary forms.  
3904 Polymers of vinyl chloride or of othe r halogenated olefins, in primary forms.  
3905 Polymers of vinyl acetate or of other vinyl este rs, in primary forms; other vinyl polymers in 
primary forms.  
3906 Acrylic polymers in primary forms.  
3907 Polyacetals, other polyethers and epoxide resins, in primary forms; polycarbonates, alkyd resins, 
polyallyl esters and other po lyesters, in primary forms.  
3908 Polyamides in primary forms.  
3909 Amino-resins, phenolic resins, and polyurethanes, in primary forms.  
3911 Petroleum resins, coumarone-indene resins, polyterpenes, polysulphides, polysulphones and other 
products specified in Note 3 to this Chapter, not elsewhere specified or included, in primary forms.  
3912 Cellulose and its chemical derivatives, not else where specified or included, in primary forms.  
3913 Natural polymers (for example, alginic acid) and modified natural polymers (for example, 
hardened proteins, chemical derivatives of natural rubber), not elsewhere specified or included, in primary forms.
 
3914 00 000 0
 Ion-exchange resins, extracted from polymers under HS code 3901-3913, in primary forms.  
3915 Waste, parings and scrap, of plastics.  
3916 Monofilament of which any cross-sectional dimension exceeds 1 mm, rods, sticks and profile shapes, whether or not surface-worked bu t not otherwise worked, of plastics.
 
3917 Tubes, pipes, and hoses, and fittings therefore (for example, joints, elbows, flanges), of plastics.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 307 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
3918 Floor coverings of polymer materials, whether or not self-adhesive, in rolls or in the form of tiles; 
wall or ceiling coverings of polymers, as  defined in Note 9 to this Chapter.  
3919 Self-adhesive plates, sheets, film, foil, tape, stri p and other flat shapes, of polymer materials, 
whether or not in rolls.  
3920 Other plates, sheets, film, foil an d strip, of polymer materials, non-cellular and not reinforced, 
laminated, supported or similarl y combined with other materials.  
3921 Other plates, sheets, film, foil an d strip, of polymer materials.  
3922 Baths, shower-baths, wash-basins, bidets, lavatory pans, seats and covers, flushing cisterns and 
similar sanitary wa re, of plastics.  
3923 Articles for the conveyance or packing of good s, of plastics; stoppers , lids, caps and other 
closures, of plastics.  
3924 Tableware, kitchenware, other household articles and toilet articles, of plastics.  
3925 Builders' ware of plastics, not elsewhere specified or included.  
3926 Other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of Headings 3901 to 3914.  
4001 Natural rubber, balata, gutta-percha, guayule, ch icle and similar natural gums, in primary forms 
or in plates, sheets or strip.  
4011 New pneumatic tyres, of rubber.  
4104 Leather or leather crust of bovine (including buffa lo), or equine animals, without hair on, whether 
or not split, but not further prepared.  
4202 Trunks, suit-cases, vanity-cases, executive-cases, brief-cases, school satchels, spectacle cases, 
binocular cases, camera cases, musical instrument cases, gun cases, holsters and similar containers; travelling-bags, toilet bags, rucksack s, handbags, shopping-bags, wallets, purses, 
map-cases, cigarette-cases, tobacco-pouches, to ol bags, sports bags, bottle-cases, jewellery 
boxes, powder-boxes, cutlery cases and similar contai ners, of leather or of composition leather, of 
sheeting of polymer or textile mate rials, of vulcanized fibre or of paperboard, or wholly or mainly 
covered with such materials or with paper.
 
4303 Articles of apparel, clothing accesso ries and other articles of fur skin.  
4410 Particle board, oriented strand board (OSB) and similar board (for example, waferboard) of wood 
or other ligneous materials, wh ether or not agglomerated with resins or other organic binding 
substances.  
4411 Fibreboard of wood or other ligneous materials,  whether or not bonded with resins or other 
organic substances.  
4412 Plywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood.  
4418 Builders' joinery and carpentry of wood, including cellular wood panels, assembled parquet panels, 
shingles and shakes.  
4801 00 000 0
 Newsprint paper rolled or in sheets  
4803 00  Paper napkins or face napkins, paper towels or paper diapers and other kinds of paper for household or sanitary-hygienic purposes, cellulose cotton and sheet of cell ulose fibre, full-creped 
or not creped, corrugated or not corrugated, embossed or not embossed, perforated or not 
perforated, with coloured or uncoloured surfac e, printed or unprinted, in rolls or sheets.
 
4808 Paper and paperboard, corrugated (with or withou t glued flat surface sheets), creped, crinkled, 
embossed or perforated, in roll s or sheets, other than  paper of the kind described in Heading 
4803. 
4814 Wallpaper and similar wall coverings; window transparencies of paper.  
4818 Toilet paper and similar paper, ce llulose wadding or webs of cellulose fibres, of a kind used for 
household or sanitary purposes, in rolls of a widt h not exceeding 36 cm, or cut to size or shape; 
handkerchiefs, cleansing tissues, towels, tableclo ths, serviettes, napkins for babies, tampons, bed 
sheets and similar household, sanitary or hospital articles, articles of apparel and clothing accessories, of paper pulp, pa per, cellulose wadding or webs of cellulose fibres.
 
4819 Cartons, boxes, cases, bags and other packing containers, of pape r, paperboard, cellulose wading 
or webs of cellulose fibres; box files, letter trays,  and similar articles, of paper or paperboard, of a 
kind used in offices, shops or the like.  
4820 Registers, account books, note books, order b ooks, receipt books, le tter pads, memorandum 
pads, diaries and similar articles , exercise-books, blotting pads, binders (loose-leaf or other), 
folders, file covers, manifold business forms, interleaved carbon sets and other articles of 
stationery, of paper or paperboard; albums for samples or for collections and book covers, of 
paper or paperboard.  
5001 00 000 0
 Silk cocoon, good for reeling  
5002 00 000 0
 (Thrown) raw silk  
5003 00 000 0
 Silk wastes (including cocoons, not good for r eeling, cocoon thread wastes and unravelled raw 
silk) 
5004 00  Silk thread (except for yarn from silk wastes), not packed for retail sale.  
5005 00  Yarn from silk wastes, not packed for retail sale.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 308 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5006 00  Silk thread and yarn from silk wastes, packed for retail sale, fibre from silk moth fibroin  
5007 Woven fabrics of silk or of silk waste.  
5101 Wool, not carded or combed.  
5102 Fine or coarse animal hair, not carded or combed.  
5103 Waste of wool or of fine or coarse animal hair , including yarn waste but excluding garnetted stock.  
5104 
00 000 0  Unravelled wool or fine or coarse animal hair  
5105 Wool and fine or coarse animal hair, carded or  combed (including combed wool in fragments).  
5106 Yarn of carded wool, not put up for retail sale.  
5107 Yarn of combed wool, not put up for retail sale.  
5108 Yarn of fine animal hair (carded or combed), not put up for retail sale.  
5109 Yarn of wool or of fine animal hair, put up for retail sale.  
5110 00 
000 0 Yarn of coarse animal hair or horse hair (inclu ding gimp thread from horse hair), packed or not 
packed for retail sale.  
5111 Woven fabrics of carded wool or of carded fine animal hair.  
5112 Woven fabrics of combed wool or of combed fine animal hair.  
5113 00 000 0
 Fabric from coarse animal hair or horse hair  
5201 00  Cotton fibre, not carded or combed  
5202 Cotton waste (including yarn waste and garnetted stock).  
5203 00 
000 0 Cotton fibre, carded or combed  
5204 Cotton sewing thread, whether or  not put up for retail sale.  
5205 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread), containing 85% or more by weight of cotton, not put up 
for retail sale.  
5206 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread), containing less than 85% by weight of cotton, not put up for retail sale.
 
5207 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread) put up for retail sale.  
5208 Woven fabrics of cotton containing 85% or more by weight of cotton, weighing not more than 
200 g/m2. 
5209 Woven fabrics of cotton containing 85% or more  by weight of cotton , weighing more than 
200 g/m2. 
5210 Woven fabrics of cotton, containing less than 85%  by weight of cotton, mixed mainly or solely 
with man-made fibres, weighing not more than 200 g/m2. 
5211 Woven fabrics of cotton, containing less than 85%  by weight of cotton, mixed mainly or solely 
with man-made fibres, weighing more than 200 g/m2. 
5212 Other woven fabrics of cotton.  
5301 Flax, raw or processed but not spun; flax tow and waste (including yarn waste and garnetted 
stock).  
5302 True hemp (Cannabis sativa L.), raw or proces sed but not spun; tow and waste of true hemp 
(including yarn waste and garnetted stock).  
5303 Jute and other textile bast fibres  (excluding flax, true hemp and ramie), raw or processed but not 
spun; tow and waste of these fibres (inc luding yarn waste and garnetted stock).  
5305 00 
000 0 Fibre of coconut, abacus ( Musa textilis Nee ), rami and other plant textile fibres, not named or not 
included under other tariff lines, raw or processe d, but not spinned; combings and wastes from 
these fibres (including spinning wastes and unravelled raw fibres)   
5306 Flax yarn.  
5307 Yarn of jute or of other textile bast fibres of Heading 5303.  
5308 Yarn of other vegetable textile fibres; paper yarn.  
5309 Woven fabrics of flax.  
5310 Woven fabrics of jute or of other textile bast fibres of Heading 5303.  
5311 00  Fabrics of other plant textile fibres; fabrics of spun cotton  
5401 Sewing thread of man-made filaments, whether or not put up for retail sale.  
5402 Synthetic filament yarn (other than sewing thread ), not put up for retail sale, including synthetic 
monofilament of less than 67 decitex.  
5403 Artificial filament yarn (other than sewing thread ), not put up for retail sale, including artificial 
monofilament of less than 67 decitex.  
5404 Synthetic monofilament of 67 decitex or more and of which no cross– sect ional dimension exceeds 
1 mm; strip and the like (for example, artificial stra w) of synthetic textile ma terials of an apparent 
width not exceeding 5 mm.  
5405 00 000 0
 Monofilament of 67 decitex or more and of which no cross– sectional dimension exceeds 1 mm; strip and the like (for example, artificial straw) of  artificial textile materi als of an apparent width 
not exceeding 5 mm.
 
5406 00 000 0
 Chemical filament yarn (e xcept for sewing threads), packed for retail sale.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 309 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5407 Woven fabrics of synthetic filament yarn, incl uding woven fabrics obtained from materials of 
Heading 5404.  
5408 Woven fabrics of artificial fila ment yarn, including woven fabr ics obtained from materials of 
Heading 5405.  
5501 Synthetic filament tow.  
5502 00  Man-made filament tow.  
5503 Synthetic staple fibres, not carded, comb ed or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5504 Artificial staple fibres, not carded, comb ed or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5505 Waste (including noils, yarn waste and garnetted stock) of man-made fibres.  
5506 Synthetic staple fibres, carded, combed  or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5507 00 
000 0 Man-made fibres, carded, combed or processed differently for spinning.  
5508 Sewing thread of man-made staple fibres , whether or not put up for retail sale.  
5509 Yarn (other than sewing thread) of syntheti c staple fibres, not put up for retail sale.  
5510 Yarn (other than sewing thread) of artifici al staple fibres, not put up for retail sale.  
5511 Yarn (other than sewing thre ad) of man-made staple fibr es, put up for retail sale.  
5512 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containi ng 85% or more by weig ht of synthetic staple 
fibres. 
5513 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containing  less than 85% by weight  of such fibres, mixed 
mainly or solely with cotton, of a weight not exceeding 170 g/m2. 
5514 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containing  less than 85% by weight  of such fibres, mixed 
mainly or solely with cotton, of a weight exceeding 170 g/m2. 
5515 Other woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres.  
5516 Woven fabrics of artificial staple fibres.  
5601 Wadding of textile materials and articles thereof; textile fibres, not exceeding 5 mm in length (flock), textile dust and mill neps.
 
5602 Felt, whether or not impregnated, coated, covered or laminated.  
5603 Nonwovens, whether or not impregnated, coated, covered or laminated.  
5604 Rubber thread and cord, textile covered; textile yarn and strip and the like of Heading 5404 or 
5405, impregnated, coated, covered or sheathed with rubber or plastics.  
5605 00 0  Gimped or not gimped metallic thread, which is a te xtile thread or flat or similar thread under HS 
codes 5404 or 5405, mixed with metal in the form of a thread, plate or powder, or covered with metal.
 
5606 00  Thread gimped and flat and similar thread unde r HS codes 5404 or 5405, gimped thread (except 
for thread under HS code 5605 and gimped thread  from horse hair); chenille yarn (including 
flocked chenille); fancy loop yarn.  
5607 Twine, cordage, ropes and cables, whether or  not plaited or braided and whether or not 
impregnated, coated, covered or sheathed with rubber or plastics.  
5608 Knotted netting of twine, cordage of rope; made up fishing nets an d other made up nets, of textile 
materials.  
5609 00 000 0
 Products from threads or yarn, flat or simila r threads under HS codes 5404 or 5405, twine, 
cordage of rope, not named or  no t included under other tariff lines.  
5701 Carpets and other textile floor covering s, knotted, whether or not made up.  
5702 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, woven, not tufted or flocked, whether or not made up, 
including "Kelem", "Schumacks", "Karamanie" and similar hand-woven rugs.  
5703 Carpets and other textile floor covering s, tufted, whether or not made up.  
5704 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, of felt, not tufted or flocked, whether or not made up.  
5705 00  Carpets and other textile floor coverings, whether or not made up.  
5801 Woven pile fabrics and chenille fabrics, other than fabrics of Heading 5802 or 5806.  
5802 Terry towelling and similar woven terry fabrics, other than narrow fabrics of Heading 5806; tufted 
textile fabrics, other than products of Heading 5703.  
5803 00  Leno fabrics, except for narrow fabrics under HS code 5806.  
5804 Tulles and other net fabrics, not including woven, kn itted or crocheted fabrics;  lace in the piece, in 
strips or in motifs, other than fabrics of Headings 6002– 6006.  
5805 00 000 0
 Hand-made tapestry similar to Belgian, Aubusson,  Beauvais or similar tapestry and embroidered 
tapestry (for example, cross-stitched or satin-stitched), whether or not made up.  
5806 Narrow woven fabrics, other than goods of Heading 5807; narrow fabrics consisting of warp 
without weft assembled by means of an adhesive (bolducs).  
5807 Labels, badges, and similar articles of textile materials, in the piece,  in strips or cut to shape or 
size, not embroidered.  
5808 Braids in the piece; ornamental trimmings in the piece, without embroidery, other than knitted or crocheted; tassels, pompons and similar articles.
 
5810 Embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs.  
5811 00 
000 0 Quilted textile fabrics in piece, consisting of one or a few layers of textil e materials, sewed with a 
soft layer or  connected in another way, except for embroidery under HS code 5810.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 310 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5901 Textile fabrics coated with gum or  amylaceous substances, of a kind  used for the outer covers of 
books or the like; tracing cloth; prepared painti ng canvas; buckram and si milar stiffened textile 
fabrics of a kind used for hat foundations.  
5902 Tyre cord fabric of high-tenacity yarn of nylon or other polyamides, polyesters or viscose rayon.  
5903 Textile fabrics impregnated, coat ed, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of 
Heading 5902.  
5904 Linoleum, whether or not cut to shape; floor coveri ngs consisting of a coating or covering applied 
to a textile backing, whether or not cut to shape.  
5905 00  Wall carpets from textile products  
5906 Rubberized textile fabrics, other than those of Heading 5902.  
5907 00  Textile products saturated or covered in anothe r way; painted fabrics for theatrical scenery, 
background scenery for art studios or similar fabrics.  
5908 00 
000 0 Textile wicks, woven, braided or knitted for lamps, oil cooking stoves, lighters, candles or similar products; gas mantle and tubular textile fabr ic for gas mantles, coated or not coated
 
5909 00  Textile hoses and similar textile tubes with pads, trimming or accessories from other materials or 
without thereof  
5910 00 000 0
 Conveyor belt or drive belt or belting from textile materials, coated or not coated, covered or not 
covered, laminated  with plastics or not lamina ted, or armoured with metal or other material  
5911 Textile products and articles, for technical uses, specified in Note 7 to this Chapter.  
6001 Pile fabrics, including "long-pile" fabri cs and terry fabrics, knitted or crocheted.  
6002 Knitted or crocheted fabric s, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, cont aining by weight 5% or more of 
elastomeric yarn or rubber thread, other than fabrics of Heading 6001.  
6003 Knitted or crocheted fabrics, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, other than fabrics of Headings 6001 
or 6002.  
6004 Knitted or crocheted fabric s, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, cont aining by weight 5% or more of 
elastomeric yarn or rubber thread, other than fabrics of Heading 6001.  
6005 Raschel lace (including croche ted fabrics for manufacture of lace), other than fabrics of 
Headings 6001– 6004.  
6006 Other knitted or crocheted fabrics.  
6101 Men's or boys' overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks , anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, 
wind-jackets and similar articles, knitted or crocheted, other than those of Heading 6103.  
6102 Women's or girls' overcoats, car-coats, cape s, cloaks, anoraks (including ski-jackets), 
wind-cheaters, wind-jackets and si milar articles, knitted or crochete d, other than those of Heading 
6104. 
6103 Men's or boys' suits, ensembles, jackets, blazer s, trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and 
shorts (other than swimwear), knitted or crocheted.  
6104 Women's or girls' suits, ensembles, jackets, blaze rs, dresses, skirts, divided skirts, trousers, bib– 
and-brace overalls, breeches and shorts (oth er than swimwear), knitted or crocheted.  
6105 Men's or boys' shirts, knitted or crocheted.  
6106 Women's or girls' blouses, shirts, and shirt– blouses, knitted or crocheted.  
6107 Men's or boys' underpants, briefs, nightshirts, pyjamas, bathrobes, dres sing gowns and similar 
articles, knitted or crocheted.  
6108 Women's or girls' slips, petticoats, briefs, pant ies, nightdresses, pyjamas, negliges, bathrobes, 
dressing gowns and similar ar ticles, knitted or crocheted.  
6109 T–shirts, singlets and other vests, knitted or crocheted.  
6110 Jerseys, pullovers, cardigans, waistcoats and similar articles, knitted or crocheted.  
6111 Babies' garments and clothing ac cessories, knitted or crocheted.  
6112 Track suits, ski suits and swimwear, knitted or crocheted.  
6113 00  Clothes from textile machine or hand-knitted fabric  
6114 Other garments, knitted or crocheted.  
6115 Pantyhose, tights, stockings, socks and other ho siery, including graduated compression hosiery 
(for example, stockings for varicose veins) an d footwear without appl ied soles, knitted or 
crocheted.  
6116 Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted, or crocheted.  
6117 Other made up clothing accessories, knitted or cr ocheted; knitted or croc heted parts of garments 
or of clothing accessories.  
6201 Men's or boys' overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks , anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, 
wind-jackets and similar articles, other than those of Heading 6203.  
6202 Women's or girls' overcoats, car-coats, capes,  cloaks, anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-
cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles, other than those of Heading 6204.  
6203 Men's or boys' suits, ensembles, jackets, blazer s, trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and 
shorts (other than swimwear).  
6204 Women's or girls' suits, ensembles, jackets, blaze rs, dresses, skirts, divided skirts, trousers, bib 
and brace overalls, breeches and shorts (other than swimwear).  
6205 Men's and boys' shirts.  
6206 Women's or girls' blouses, shirts and shirt-blouses.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 311 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
6207 Men's or boys' singlets and other vests, underp ants, briefs, nightshirts,  pyjamas, bathrobes, 
dressing gowns and similar articles.  
6208 Women's and girls' singlets and other vests, sl ips, petticoats, briefs, panties, nightdresses, 
pyjamas, negliges, bathrobes, dres sing gowns and similar articles.  
6209 Babies' garments and clothing accessories.  
6210 Garments, made up of fabrics of Headings 5602, 5603, 5903, 5906 or 5907.  
6211 Track suits, ski suits and swimwear; other garments.  
6212 Brassieres, girdles, corsets, braces, suspenders, garters and similar articles and parts thereof, 
whether or not knitted or crocheted.  
6213 Handkerchiefs.  
6214 Shawls, scarves, mufflers, mantillas, veils and the like.  
6215 Ties, bow ties and cravats.  
6216 00 000 0
 Gloves and mittens.  
6217 Other made-up clothing accessories ; parts of garments or of clothing accessories, other than 
those of Heading 6212.  
6301 Blankets and travelling rugs.  
6302 Bed linen, table linen, toilet linen and kitchen linen.  
6303 Curtains (including drapes) and interi or blinds; curtain or bed valances.  
6304 Other furnishing articles excluding those of Heading 9404.  
6305 Sacks and bags, of a kind used for the packing goods.  
6306 Tarpaulins, awnings and sunblinds; tents; sails fo r boats, sailboards or landcraft; camping goods.  
6307 Other made-up articles, including dress patterns.  
6308 
00 000 0  Sets of fabrics and yarn or threads with accesso ries or without thereof,  for carpets, tapestry, 
embroidered table clothes or na pkins or similar textile products, packed for retail sale.  
6309 
00 000 0  Used clothes and other used products  
6310 Used or new rags, scrap twine, cordage, rope and cables and worn out articl es of twine, cordage, 
rope or cables, of textile materials.  
6403 Footwear with outer soles of rubbe r, plastics, leather or compositio n leather and uppers of leather.  
6404 Footwear with outer soles of rubbe r, plastics, leather or compositio n leather and uppers of textile 
materials.  
6405 Other footwear.  
6806 Slag wool, rock wool and similar mineral wools; exfoliated vermiculite, expanded clays, foamed 
slag and similar expanded mineral materials; mixtures and articles of heat-insulating, 
sound-insulating or sound-absorbing mineral materi als, other than those of Heading 6811 or 6812 
or of Chapter 69.  
6907 Unglazed ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall tiles; unglazed ceramic mosaic cubes and the like, whether or not on a backing.
 
6908 Glazed ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall tiles; glazed ceramic mosaic cubes and the like, whether or not on a backing.
 
6909 Ceramic wares for laboratory, chemical or other te chnical uses; ceramic trou ghs, tubs and similar 
receptacles of kind used in agriculture; ceramic po ts, jars and similar articles of kind used for the 
conveyance or packing of goods. ceramic wares  for laboratory, chemical or other technical uses.  
6910 Ceramic sinks, wash basins, wash basin pedestals, baths, bidets, water closet pans, flushing 
cisterns, urinals and similar sanitary fixtures.  
6911 Tableware, kitchenware, other household articles  and toilet articles, of porcelain or china.  
7005 Float glass and surface ground or polished glass, in sheets, whether or not having an absorbent, 
reflecting or non-reflecting la yer, but not otherwise worked.  
7009 Glass mirrors, whether or not frame d, including rear-view mirrors.  
7010 Carboys, bottles, flasks, jars, pots, phials, ampoules  and other containers, of glass, of a kind used 
for the conveyance or packing of goods; preser ving jars of glass; st oppers, lids and other 
closures, of glass.  
7013 Glassware of a kind used for table, kitchen, toil et, office, indoor decorati on or similar purposes 
(other than that of Heading 7010 or 7018).  
7016 Paving blocks, slabs, bricks, squares, tiles and ot her articles of pressed or  moulded glass, whether 
or not wired, of a kind used for building or co nstruction purposes; gla ss cubes and other glass 
small wares, whether or not on a backing, for mosaics or similar decorative purposes; leaded 
lights and the like; multicellular or foam glass in  blocks, panels, plates, shells or similar forms.  
7019 Glass fibres (including glass wool) and articles  thereof (for example, yarn, woven fabrics).  
7105 Dust and powder of natural or synthe tic precious or semi-precious stones.  
7204 Ferrous waste and scrap; remelting scrap ingots of iron or steel.  
7209 Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy stee l, of a width of 600 mm or more, cold-rolled 
(cold-reduced), not clad , plated or coated.  
7210 Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel,  of a width of 600 mm or more, clad, plated or 
coated.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 312 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
7213 Bars and rods, hot-rolled, in irregularly wound coils, of iron or non-alloy steel.  
7214 Other bars and rods of iron or non-alloy steel,  not further worked than forged, hot-rolled, hot-
drawn or hot-extruded but including those twisted after rolling.  
7216 Angles, shapes, and sections of iron or non-alloy steel.  
7219 Flat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of 600 mm or more.  
7220 Flat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of less than 600 mm.  
7225 Flat-rolled products of other alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more.  
7227 Bars and rods, hot-rolled, in irregula rly wound coils, of other alloy steel.  
7228 Other bars and rods of other allo y steel; angles, shapes and sections, of other alloy steel; hollow 
drill bars and rods, of alloy or non-alloy steel.  
7303 00  Tubes, pipes and hollow pr ofiles, of iron casting.  
7304 Tubes, pipes and hollow profil es, seamless, of iron (other than cast iron) or steel.  
7305 Other tubes and pipes (for example, welded, ri veted or similarly closed), with circular 
cross-sections and external diameter of which exceeds 406.4 mm, of iron or steel.  
7306 Other tubes, pipes and hollow prof iles (for example, open seam or welded, riveted, or similarly 
closed), of iron or steel.  
7404 00  Copper wastes and scrabs.  
7408 Copper wire.  
7410 Copper foil (whether or not printed or backed with  paper, paperboard, plastics or similar backing 
materials) of a thickness (excluding any backing) not exceeding 0.15 mm.  
7606 Aluminium plates, sheets and strip, of a thickness exceeding 0.2 mm.  
7607 Aluminium foil (whether or not printed or backed  with paper, paperboa rd, plastics or similar 
backing materials), of a thickness (exclu ding any backing) not exceeding 0.2 mm.  
7608 Aluminium tubes and pipes.  
8104 Magnesium and articles thereof, including waste and scrap.  
8302 Base metal mountings, fittings and similar articl es suitable for furnitur e, doors, staircases, 
windows, blinds, coachwork, saddlery, trunks, ches ts, caskets or the like; base metal hat-racks, 
hat-pegs, brackets and similar fixtures; castors with mountings of base metal; automatic door closers of base metal.
 
8309 Stoppers, caps and lids (includi ng crown corks, screw caps and pouring stoppers), capsules for 
bottles, threaded bungs, bung covers, seals, and other packing accessories, of base metal.  
8407 Spark-ignition reciprocating or rotary  internal combustion piston engines.  
8408 Compression-ignition, internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel engines).  
8415 Air conditioning machines, comprising a moto r-driven fan and elements for changing the 
temperature and humidity, including those machines in which humidity cannot be separately regulated.
 
8418 Refrigerators, freezers and other refrigerating or  freezing equipment, electric or other; heat 
pumps other than air conditioning machines of Heading 8415.  
8424 Mechanical appliances (whether or not hand-ope rated) for projecting, dispersing or spraying 
liquids or powders; fire extinguishers, whether or  not charged; spray guns  and similar appliances; 
steam or sand blasting machines an d similar jet projecting machines.  
8428 Other lifting, handling, loading or unloading machin ery (for example, lifts, escalators, conveyors, 
teleferics).  
8432 Agricultural, horticultural or fo restry machinery for soil preparat ion or cultivation; lawn or 
sports-ground rollers.  
8433 Harvesting or threshing machinery, including straw or fodder balers; grass or hay mowers; 
machines for cleaning, sorting or grading eggs, fru it or other agricultural  produce, other than 
machinery of Heading 8437.  
8434 Milking machines and dairy machinery.  
8443 Printing machinery used for printing by means of  plates, cylinders and other printing components 
of Heading 8442; other printers, copying machines and facsimile machines, whether or not combined; parts and accessories thereof.
 
8450 Household or laundry-type washing machines, in cluding machines which both wash and dry.  
8451 Machinery (other than machines of Heading 8450) for washing, cleaning, wringing, drying, 
ironing, pressing (including fusing presses), bl eaching, dyeing, dressing, finishing, coating or 
impregnating textile yarns, fabrics, or made up  textile articles and machines for applying the 
paste to the base fabric or other support used in the manufacture of floor coverings such as 
linoleum; machines for reeling, unreeling, folding, cutting or pinking textile fabrics.  
8452 Sewing machines, other than book-sewing machines of Heading 8440; furniture, bases and covers specially designed for sewing machines; sewing machine needles.
 
8455 Metal-rolling mills and rolls therefore.  
8456 Machine-tools for working any materi al by removal of material, by laser or other light or photon 
beam, ultrasonic, electro-discharge, electro-chemical, electron beam, ion-beam or plasma arc processes.
 
8457 Machining centres, unit construction machines (single station) and multi-station transfer machines for working metal.
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 313 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
8458 Lathes (including turning ce ntres), for removing metal.  
8459 Machine-tools (including way-type unit head machines) for drilling, boring, milling, threading or 
tapping by removing metal, other than lathes (including turning centres) of Heading 8458.  
8460 Machine-tools for deburring, sharpening, grinding, honing, lapping, polishing or otherwise finishing 
metal or cermets by means of grinding stones, ab rasives or polishing products, other than gear 
cutting, gear grinding or gear finishing machines of Heading 8461.  
8461 Machine-tools for planing, shaping, slotting, broa ching, gear cutting, gear grinding or gear 
finishing, sawing, cutting-off an d other machine-tools working by removing metal or cermets, not 
elsewhere specified or included.  
8462 Machine-tools (including presse s) for working metal by forging, hammering or die-stamping; 
machine-tools (including presses) for working metal by bending, folding, st raightening, flattening, 
shearing, punching or notching; presses for work ing metal or metal carbides, not specified above.  
8474 Machinery for sorting, washing, crushing, grinding, mixing or kneading earth,  stone, ores or other 
mineral substances, in solid (including powder or paste) form; machinery for agglomerating, 
shaping or moulding solid mineral fuels, ceramic paste, unhardened cements, plastering materials 
or other mineral products in powder or paste fo rm; machines for forming foundry moulds of sand.  
8481 Taps, cocks, valves and similar app liances for pipes, boiler shells, ta nks, vats or the like, including 
pressure-reducing valves and thermostatically controlled valves.  
8482 Ball or roller bearings.  
8501 Electric motors and generators  (excluding generating sets).  
8502 Electric generating sets and rotary converters.  
8504 Electrical transformers, static converters  (for example, rectifiers) and inductors.  
8505 Electro-magnets; permanent magn ets and articles intended to become permanent magnets after 
magnetisation; electro-magnetic  or permanent magnet chucks, clamps and similar holding 
devices; electro-magnetic couplings, clutches and brakes; electro-magnetic lifting heads.  
8507 Electric accumulators, including separators ther efore, whether or not rectangular (including 
square).  
8508 Vacuum cleaners.  
8516 Electric instantaneous or storage water heaters and immersion heaters; electric space heating apparatus and soil heating apparatu s; electro-thermic hair-dressing apparatus (for example, hair 
dryers, hair curlers, curling tong heaters) an d hand dryers; electric smoothing irons; other 
electro-thermic appliances of a kind used for dome stic purposes; electric heating resistors, other 
than those of Heading 8545.
 
8517 Telephone sets, including telephones for cellular  networks or for other wireless networks; other 
apparatus for the transmission or reception of voic e, images or other data , including apparatus for 
communication in a wired or wireless network (suc h as a local or wide area network), other than 
transmission or reception apparatus of Heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528.  
8519 Sound recording or sound  reproducing apparatus.  
8521 Video recording or reproducin g apparatus, whether or not incorporating a video tuner.  
8525 Transmission apparatus for radio-broadcasting or television, whether or not incorporating 
reception apparatus or sound recording or reprod ucing apparatus; television cameras, digital 
cameras and video camera recorders.  
8528 Monitors and projectors, not incorporating televisi on reception apparatus; reception apparatus for 
television, whether or not incorporating radio-broa dcast receivers or sound or video recording or 
reproducing apparatus.  
8529 Parts suitable for use solely or principally with the apparatus of Headings 8525 to 8528.  
8537 Boards, panels, consoles, desks, cabinets and other bases, equippe d with two or more apparatus 
of Heading 8535 or 8536, for electric control or distribution of electricity, including those incorporating instruments or apparatus of Chap ter 90, and numerical co ntrol apparatus, other 
than switching apparatus of Heading 8517.
 
8539 Electric filament or discharge lamps, including sealed-beam lamp units and ultra-violet or infra-red lamps; arc-lamps.
 
8542 Electronic integrated circuits.  
8544 Insulated (including enamelled or anodised) wire , cable (including co-axial cable) and other 
insulated electric conductors, whether or not fitted  with connectors; optical fibre cables, made up 
of individually sheathed fibres, whether or not as sembled with electric cond uctors or fitted with 
connectors.  
8545 Carbon electrodes, carbon brushes, lamp carbons,  battery carbons and other articles of graphite 
or other carbon, with or without metal, of a kind used for electrical purposes.  
8603 Self-propelled railway or tramway coaches, vans and trucks, other than those of Heading 8604.  
8605 00 
000 Passenger non-self-propelled railway or tram cars ; baggage, mail o other specialized railway or 
tram non-self-propelled cars (except for included under tariff lines 8604).  
8701 Tractors (other than tractors of Heading 8709).  
8702 Motor vehicles for the transport of ten or more persons, including the driver.  
8703 Motor cars and other motor vehicles principally de signed for the transport of persons (other than 
those of Heading 8702), including station wagons and racing cars.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 314 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
8704 Motor vehicles for the transport of goods.  
8705 Special purpose motor vehicles, other than those pr incipally designed for the transport of persons 
or goods (for example, breakdown lorries, crane lo rries, fire fighting ve hicles, concrete-mixer 
lorries, road-sweeper lorries, spraying lorries, mo bile workshops, mobile  radiological units).  
8708 Parts and accessories of the motor vehicles of Headings 8701 to 8705.  
8716 Trailers and semi-trailers; other vehicles, not mechanically propelled; parts thereof.  
8802 Other aircraft (for example, he licopters, aeroplanes ); spacecraft (inclu ding satellites) and 
suborbital and spacecraft launch vehicles.  
9001 Optical fibres and optical fibre bundles; optical fibre cables other than those of Heading 8544; sheets and plates of polarising material; lenses  (including contact lenses), prisms, mirrors and 
other optical elements, of any material, unmounted, other than such elements of glass not optically worked.
 
9003 Frames and mountings for spectacles, go ggles or the like and parts thereof.  
9006 Photographic (other than cinematographic) ca meras; photographic flashlight apparatus and 
flashbulbs other than discharge lamps of Heading 8539.  
9013 Liquid-crystal devices not constituting articles pr ovided for more specifically in other headings; 
lasers, other than laser diodes; other optical appliances and instruments, not specified or included elsewhere in this Chapter.
 
9016 00  Weight scale with balance sensitivity of 0,05 grams or more, with weights or without thereof.  
9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, othe r electro-medical apparatus an d sight-testing instruments.
 
9022 Apparatus based on the use of X-rays or of alph a, beta or gamma radiations, whether or not for 
medical, surgical, dental or veterinary uses, in cluding radiography or ra diotherapy apparatus, 
X-ray tubes and other X-ray gene rators, high-tension generators , control panels and desks, 
screens, examination or treatment tables, chairs and the like.– apparatus based on the use of 
X-rays, whether or no t for medical, surgical, dental or vete rinary uses, including radiography or 
radiotherapy apparatus.  
9025 Hydrometers and similar floating instrument s, thermometers, pyro meters, barometers, 
hygrometers and psychrometers, recording or not and any combination of these instruments.  
9028 Gas, liquid or electricity supply or production  meters, including calibr ating meters therefore.  
9401 Seats (other than those of Heading 9402), whether or not convertible into beds, and parts 
thereof.  
9402 Medical, surgical, dental or ve terinary furniture (for example, operating tables, examination 
tables, hospital beds with mechan ical fittings, dentists ' chairs); barbers' chairs and similar chairs, 
having rotating as well as both reclining and elev ating movements; parts of the foregoing articles.  
9403 Other furniture and parts thereof.  
9406 00  Assembled building construction.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 315 - 
 
  ANNEX 7 
List of Developing Countries Beneficiarie s of the Tariff Preferences System of the 
Customs Union 
1. Albania 
2. Algeria 
3. Anguilla 
4. Antigua and Barbuda 
5. Argentina 
6. Aruba 
7. The Bahamas 
8. Bahrain 
9. Barbados 
10. Belize 
11. Bermuda 
12. Bolivia 
13. Bosnia and Herzegovina 
14. Botswana 
15. Brazil 
16. British Virgin Islands 
17. Brunei Darussalam 
18. Cameroon 
19. Cape Verde, Republic of 
20. Cayman Islands 
21. Chile 
22. China 
23. Colombia 
24. Cook Islands 
25. Costa Rica 
26. Côte d'Ivoire 
27. Croatia 
28. Cuba 
29. Democratic Republic of the Congo 
30. Dominica 
31. Dominican Republic 
32. Ecuador 
33. Egypt 
34. Fiji 
35. Gabon 
36. Ghana 
37. Grenada 
38. Guatemala 
39. Guyana 
40. Honduras 
41. Hong Kong, China 
42. India 
43. Indonesia 
44. Iran, Islamic Republic of 
45. Iraq 
46. Jamaica 
47. Jordan 
48. Kenya 
49. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 
50. Korea, Democratic People's Republic 
of 
51. Korea, Republic of 
52. Kuwait 
53. Lebanon 
54. Libya 
55. FYROM 
56. Malaysia 57. Marshall Islands 
58. Mauritius 
59. Mexico 
60. Micronesia, Federative States of 
61. Mongolia 
62. Montenegro 
63. Montserrat 
64. Morocco 
65. Namibia 
66. Nauru, Republic of 
67. Netherlands Antilles 
68. Nicaragua 
69. Nigeria 
70. Niue 
71. Oman 
72. Pakistan 
73. Panama 
74. Papua New Guinea 
75. Paraguay 
76. Peru 
77. Philippines 
78. Qatar 
79. Saint-Helena 
80. Salvador 
81. Serbia 
82. Seychelles 
83. Singapore 
84. South Africa 
85. Sri Lanka 
86. St. Kitts and Nevis 
87. St. Lucia 
88. St. Vincent and the Grenadines 
89. Suriname 
90. Swaziland 
91. Syria 
92. Thailand 
93. The Turks and Caicos Islands 
94. Tokelau 
95. Tonga 
96. Trinidad and Tobago 
97. Tunisia 
98. Turkey 
99. United Arab Emirates 
100.  Uruguay 
101.  Venezuela  
102.  Viet Nam 
103.  Zimbabwe WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 316 - 
 
  ANNEX 8 
List of Least-developed Countries Beneficiar ies of the Tariff Preferences System of the 
Customs Union 
1. Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of 
2. Angola, Republic of 
3. Bangladesh 
4. Benin, Republic of 
5. Bhutan 
6. Burkina Faso 
7. Burundi 
8. Cambodia 
9. Central African Republic 
10. Chad 
11. Comoros, Union of the 
12. Congo, Democratic Republic of 
13. Djibouti, Republic of 
14. Equatorial Guinea 
15. Eritrea 
16. Ethiopia   
17. Gambia 
18. Guinea 
19. Guinea Bissau 
20. Haiti 
21. Kiribati, Republic of 
22. Lao People's Democratic Republic 
23. Lesotho 
24. Liberia 
25. Madagascar 
26. Malawi 
27. Mauritania 
28. Mozambique 
29. Myanmar, Union of 
30. Nepal 
31. Niger 
32. Rwanda 
33. Samoa, Independent State of 
34. Sao Tomé and Principe  
35. Senegal, Republic of 
36. Sierra Leone 
37. Solomon Islands 
38. Somalia 
39. Sudan 
40. Tanzania 
41. Timor-Leste 
42. Togo 
43. Tuvalu 
44. Uganda 
45. Vanuatu 
46. Yemen, Republic of 
47. Zambia WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 317 - 
 
  ANNEX 9 
List of Goods Originating and Imported from  Developing and Least-Developed Countries 
Subject to Tariff Preferences 
HS Code  Name of goods *  
02 Meat and meat by-products  
03 (except 0305)  Fish and shellfish, clams and other sea invertebrate animals (except for sturgeon 
and salmon fish, and their caviar)  
04 Milk products; birds eggs; natural honey; f oodstuffs of animal origin not named or 
included in other positions  
05 Foodstuffs of animal origin not na med or included in other positions  
06 Trees and other plants; bulb, roots and other parts of plants; cut flowers and 
decorative plants  
07 Vegetables and certain edible root and tuber crops  
08 Edible fruit and nuts; citr us peel or melon peel  
09 Coffee, tea, mate or Paraguayan tea, and spices  
1006 Rice 
11 Products of flour-and-cereals industry ; grist; farina; inulin; wheat gluten  
12 Olive seeds and fruits; other seeds, fruits and grain; herbs and plants for technical 
purposes; straw and forage  
13 Lac; gums, resins and other plant sap and extracts  
14 Plant materials for braiding; other products of vegetable origin, not named or included in other positions 
 
15 (except 1509, 1517 – 1522 00)
 Fats and oils of animal or vegetable origin   and their split products; finished edible 
fats; waxes of animal or vegetable origin  
16 Finished products of meat, fish or she llfish, clams and other sea invertebrate 
animals  
1801 00 000 0  Cacao-beans, whole or granulated, unroasted or roasted  
1802 00 000 0  Husks, peel and other waste products of cacao  
20 (except 2001 10 000 0, 2009 50, 2009 71, 2009 79)
 Processed products of ve getables, fruit, nuts or  other parts of plants  
2103 Products for sauce making and ready sauc es; flavoring agents and mixed spices; 
ground mustard and ready mustard  
2104 Soups and ready-to-use stocks, homoge nized ingredients of food products  
2401 Tobacco plants; tobacco wastes  
25 (except 2501 00 91, 
2529 21 000 0, 2529 22 000 0)
 Salt; sulphur; soils and stones; plastering materials, lime and cement  
26 Ores, slag and cinders  
3003 Pharmaceutical products (except for goods of position 3002, 3005 or 3006), consisting of mixtures of two or more components, for therapeutic and preventive 
purposes, but not packaged in dosage forms or packaged for retail sale
 
32 Tannic and dye extracts; tannins and their derivatives; coloring substances; paints and lacquers; filling paints and ot her kinds of mastic; printing ink 
 
3301, 3302  Volatile oils; resinoids; mixtures of aromatic substances  
3402 Surface-active organic substances (except soap); Surface-active substances, 
detergents (including secondary detergents) and cleaners, that contain or do not contain soap (except goods of position 3401)
 
35 Protein substances; modified starch; glue; ferments  
3923 Products for transportation or packaging of goods, made of plastic; corks, caps and 
other closure items  
4001 Natural rubber, balata, gutta-percha, guayule,  chicle and the like natural resins in 
original form or in the form of plates or strips  
4403 41 000 0, 4403 49  Rough timber of exotics  
4407 21 – 4407 29  Ripped timber of exotics  
4420 Mosaic and enchased wood work; wooden caskets and boxes for jewelry or cutlery or the like tools; wooden statuettes and other decorations; wooden furniture, not 
indicated in group 94
 
4421 Other wooden work  
45 Cork and items made of cork  
46 Items made of straw and other ma terials for platting; wickerwork  
50 Silk 
5101 Wool, not carded or combed  
5201 00  Cotton fiber, not carded or combed  
53 Other plant textile fibers; span cotton and span cotton tissues  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 318 - 
 
  HS Code  Name of goods *  
56 Cotton, felt and unwoven textile; specia l yarn; twines, cords, ropes, tows and 
items made of them  
5701 Knotted carpets and other textile floor  carpets, finished or unfinished  
5702 10 000 0   "Kilim", "Sumakh", "Kermani" carpets and the like hand-made carpets  
5705 00 800 0  Carpets and other textile floor carpets, finish ed or unfinished, made of wool or thin 
animal hair**, ***  
5808 Nubbly braid; nubbly trimmings without embroidery, except hand-knitted and 
machine-knitted; tassels, pompons and the like items  
6702 90 000 0  Artificial flowers, leaves an d fruits and their parts; products of artificial flowers, 
leaves or fruits, made  of other materials  
68 Products made of  stone, plaster, cement, asbestos, mica or the like materials  
6913 Statuettes and other ceramic decorations  
6914 Other ceramic products  
7018 10  Glass beads, pearl-like products, precious or semi-precious stones and the like 
products of glass  
7117 Imitation jewellery  
9401 51 000 0, 9401 59 000 0
 Seat furniture made of reed, willow, bamboo or the like materials  
9403 81 000 0, 9403 89 000 0
 Furniture made of other materials, including reed, willow, bamboo or the like materials 
 
9403 90 900 0  Parts of furniture made of other materials  
9601 Finished and good for carving of ivory, bo ne, tortoise shell, antler, staghorn, coral 
and other materials of animal origin and products made of these materials 
(including molded products)  
9602 00 000 0  Finished materials of vegetable or minera l origin, good for carving, and products 
made of these materials; molded or carved  wax, stearine, natural resins or natural 
rubber products and other molded or carved  products, not indicated or included in 
other positions; processed uncured gelati n (except gelatin of position 3503) and 
products of uncured gelatin  
9603 Brooms, brushes (including brushes that are parts of mechanisms, devices or vehicles), mechanical hand brush for fl oor cleaning, mops and feather dusters; 
bundles for making brooms or brushes; pa ds and rollers for paint; rubber mops 
(except rubber rollers for moisture removal)
 
9604 00 000 0  Cribbles and hand sieves  
9606 Buttons, snaps, button mould and other parts of these items  
9609 Pencils (except indicated in position 9608), color pencils, pencil lead, crayons, 
charcoal pencils, chalk for writ ing or drawing and tailors chalk  
9614 00  Smoking pipes (including cup-shaped part s), cigar-holders an d cigarette-holders 
and their parts  
9615 11 000 0  Ebonite or plastic combs and the like items  
9617 00 000 0  Thermos and other vacuum vessels assembled; their parts, except glass bulbs  
97 Artwork, collection items and antiques  
* Goods in this list are defined only by HS codes; names of goods are given fo r convenience.      
** Tariff preferences are granted only for hand-made carpets. *** It is necessary to follow both the customs commodity code, and name of the goods.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 319 - ANNEX 10 
List of Goods and Rates which Are Subject to  Application of Import Customs Duty Rates 
Different from the CET of the CU by One of th e CU Parties during the Transitional Period 
HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3001 
 Glands and other organs for organo-therapeutic uses, dried, whethe r or not powdered; extracts of glands or other organs or of t heir secretions for organo-therapeutic 
uses; heparin and its salts; other human or animal substances prepared for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not elsewhere spec ified or included: 
3001 20 - extracts of glands or othe r organs or of their secretions: 
3001 20 100 0 - - of human origin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3001 20 900 0 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3001 90 - other: 
3001 90 200 0 - - of human origin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3001 90 980 0 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 
 Human blood; animal blood prepared for therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic uses; antisera and other blood fractions and mod ified immunological products, whether 
or not obtained by means of biotechnological processes; vaccines , toxins, cultures of microorganisms (excluding yeasts) and sim ilar products: 
3002 10 - antisera and other blood fractions and modified immunolo gical products, whether or not obtained by means of biotechno logical processes: 
3002 10 100 - - antisera: 
3002 10 100 1 - - - antisera against serpent's 
poison 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 10 100 9 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3002 10 910 0 - - - haemoglobin, blood globulins 
and serum globulins 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - - other: 
3002 10 950 - - - - of human origin: 
3002 10 950 1 - - - - - factors of coagulation of 
human blood 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 10 950 9 - - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 10 990 0 - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 - vaccines for human medicine: 
3002 20 000 1 - - - vaccines against German 
measles 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 2 - - - vaccines against Hepatitus of 
form B 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 9 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 30 000 0 - vaccines for veterinary medicine 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 - other: 
3002 90 100 0 - - human blood 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 300 0 - - animal blood prepared for 
therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic uses 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 500 0 - cultures of microorganisms 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 900 0 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 Medicaments (excluding goods of Heading 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of mixed or unmixed products for therapeutic or pro phylactic uses, put up in measured doses 
(including those in the form of transdermal administrati on systems) or in forms or packings for retail sale: 
3004 10 000 - containing penicillins or derivatives thereof, with a penicillanic acid structure, or streptomicins or their deri vatives:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 320 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3004 10 000 1 - - containing as active substances, 
only ampicillinetryhydratem or ampicilline-sodium salt or salts of benzylpenicillin and compounds or karbenicillin or oxacillin or phenoxymethylpenicillin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - put up in measured doses or in fo rms but not in packings for retail sale: 
3004 10 000 2 - - - containing as active 
substances, only streptomicin sulphate  0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 10 000 3 - - - - other 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3004 10  000 9 - - other:  0 0 5 CET duty rate 
3004 20 000 - containing other antibiotics: 
3004 20 000 1 - - - containing as active 
substances, only amickacin or gentamicin or grizeofulvin or doxycyklin or doksorubycin or 
kanamycin or fusidin acid and its 
sodium salt or laevomycetin (chloramphenicol) and its salts or lincomycin or methacyclin or nistatin or rifampicin or cephazolin or cep 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 20 000 2 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3004 20 000 3 - - - containing as active 
substances only  erytromicin or kanamicin sulphate 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 20 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 -Containing hormones or other 
compounds under tariff line 2937 
but not containing antibiotics     
3004 32 000 - - containing adrenal cortical hormones, derivatives thereof: 
3004 32 000 1 - - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail: 0 0 5 CET duty rate 
3004 32 000 9 - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 39 000 0 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 40 000 - containing alkaloids or derivatives thereof but no t containing hormones, other products of heading 2937 or antibi otics: 
3004 40 000 1 - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail:- - - koffein- benzoat of sodium or nikotinat of csantinol or papaverin or pilokarpin or teobromin or teophillamin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 40 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 50 000 - other medicaments containing vi tamins or other produc ts of Heading 2936:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 321 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3004 50 000 1 - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail: - - - other medicaments containing ascorbini acid (vitamin C) or nicotin acid or cokarboxilase or nikotinamid or piridoxin or tiamin and its salts (vitamin B1) or cianokobalamin 
(vitamin B12) 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 50 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 90 000 0 other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 Pharmaceutical goods specified in Note 4 to this Chapter: 
3006 10 - sterile surgical catgut, similar sterile suture materials (including sterile absorbable surgical or dental yarns) and  sterile tissue adhesives for surgical wound closure; 
sterile laminaria and sterile laminaria tents; sterile absorbable surgical or dental haemostatics; sterile surgical or dental a dhesion barriers, whether or not absorbable: 
3006 10 100 0 - - sterile surgical catgut 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3006 10 300 0 - - sterile surgical or  dental  
adhesion barriers, whether or not 
absorbable 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 10 900 0 - - other 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3006 20 000 0 - blood- grouping reagents 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 30 000 0 - opacifying preparations for X-ray 
examinations; diagnostic reagents designed to be administered to the patient 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 40 000 0 - dental cements and other dental 
fillings; bone reconstruction 
cements 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 50 000 0 - first-aid boxes and kits 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 60 - chemical contraceptive preparations based on horm ones, other compounds of heading 2937 or spermicides:  
3006 60 100 0 - - based on hormones or other 
compounds of heading 2937 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 60 900 0 - - based on spermicides 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 70 000 0 - gel preparations designed to be 
used in human or veterinary medicine as a lubricant for parts of the body for surgical operations or physical examinations or as a coupling agent between the body and medical instruments 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
 - other: 
3006 92 000 0 - - waste pharmaceuticals 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3901 Polymers of ethylene, in primary forms: 
3901 20 - polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.94 or more: 
3901 20 900 0 - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
7607 Aluminium foil (whether or not printed or backed with pape r, paperboard, plastics or similar backing materials), of a thic kness (excluding any backing) not exceeding 
0.2 mm: 
  - not backed: 
7607 20 - backed: 
7607 20 100 0 - - of a thickness (excluding any 
backing) of less than 0.021 mm 5 CET duty rate 
 - - of a thickness (excluding any backing) of not less than 0.021 mm but not more than 0.2 mm  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 322 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
8603 Self- propelled railway or tramway coaches, vans  and trucks, other than those of Heading 8604: 
8603 10 000 - powered from an external source of electricity: 
8603 10 000 8 - - other 0 CET duty rate  
8603 90 000 0  - other 0 CET duty rate  
8604 00 000 0 Railway or tramway maintenance 
or service vehicles, whether or not self- propelled (for example, workshops, cranes, ballast tampers, trackliners, testing 
coaches and track inspection 
vehicles) 5 CET duty rate  
8605 00 000  Railway or tramway passenger coaches, not self- prop elled; luggage vans, post office coaches and other special pur pose railway or tramway co aches, not self- propelled 
(excluding those of heading 8604) 
- other 
8605 00 000 8 - other 5 CET duty rate  
8606 Railway or tramway goods vans and wagons, not self- propelled: 
8606 10 000 0 - tank wagons and the like 5 CET duty rate  
8606 30 000 0 - self- discharging vans and 
wagons, other than those of subheading Nos. 8606 10 or 8606 20 5 CET duty rate  
 - other: 
8606 91 - - covered and closed: 
8606 91 100 0 - - - specially designed for the 
transport of highly radioactive materials 5 CET duty rate  
8606 91 800 0 - - - other 5 CET duty rate  
8606 92 000 0 - - open, with non- removable 
sides of a height exceeding 60 cm 5 CET duty rate  
8606 99 000 0 - - other 5 CET duty rate  
9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental  or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, ot her electro-medical apparatus and sight-testing 
instruments: 
  - electro-diagnostic apparatus (including apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological para meters): 
9018 11 000 0 - - electro-cardiographs 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 19 - - other: 
9018 19 100 0 - - - monitoring apparatus for 
simultaneous monitoring of 2 or 
more parametres 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 - - syringes, with or without needles: 
9018 31 100 - - - of plastics: 
9018 31 100 1 - - - - for insulin of volume not 
exceeding 2 ml 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 100 9 - - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 900 - - - other: 
9018 31 900 1 - - - - for insulin of volume not 
exceeding 2 ml 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 900 9 - - - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 32 - - tubular metal needles and needles for sutures: 
9018 32 100 0 - - - tubular metal needles 0 0 CET duty rate   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 323 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
9018 32 900 0 - - - needles for sutures 0 0 CET duty rate  
 - dental devices and appliances, 
other:    
9018 49 - - other: 
9018 49 100 0 - - - chisel, disks, drills, brushes 
used in dental drill engines 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 - other instruments and appliances: 
9018 90 200 0 - - endoscopes 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 500 - - transfusion apparatus: 
9018 90 500 1 - - - apparatus for taking and 
transfusion of blood, blood substitute and infusion solutions 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 840 --other    
9018 90 840 1 - - - ultrasonic lithotripters 0 0 CET duty rate  
9022 Apparatus based on the use of X- rays or of alpha, beta or gamma radiations, whether or not for medical, surgical, dental or veterinary uses, including radiography or 
radiotherapy apparatus, X- ray tubes and other X- ray generators , high-tension generators, contro l panels and desks, screens, e xamination or treatment tables, chairs 
and the like:  
 - apparatus based on the use of X- rays, whether or not for medical, surgical, dental or veterinary uses, including radiograph y or radiotherapy apparatus: 
9022 14 000 0 - - for medical, surgical, dental or 
veterinary uses 0 0 CET duty rate  
9406 00 Prefabricated buildings: 
 --from ferrous metals     
9406 00 310 0 - - - greenhouse 0 CET duty rate 
9406 00 800  - - from other materials     
9406 00 800 9 - - - other 0 CET duty rate 
 
 
 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 324 - 
 
  ANNEX 11 
Formulae for Allocation of TR Qs Volumes between Suppliers* 
1. Formulae for allocation of 25% of the established TRQs volumes among suppliers:  
 a)   
 
 where q
9 is the TRQ volume of the supplier determined at Stage 1;  
Q is the TRQ volume; 
 b)   
 
 
where S 9  is the supplier's share (in percentage terms); 
VI is the supplier's volume for the fi rst year of the previous period; 
VII-9 is the supplier's volume for 9 months of the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; 
V'I is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of  for the  first year of the previous period; 
V'II-9 is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of for 9 months of the year prior to the year of 
TRQ establishment. 
2. Formulae for allocation of 100% of the established TRQ volumes among suppliers (after 
deduction of volumes calculated in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Annex): 
 a)          
  
where q
12 is the TRQ volume established for the supplier determined at stage 2;  
Q is the volume of the established TRQ;  b) 
 
 where S
12 is the share of the supplier (in percentage terms); 
VI is the supplier's volume for the first year of the previous period;  
VII is the supplier's volume for the second year of the previous period; 
V'I is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of for the first year of the previous period;   
V'II is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of for the second year of the previous period. 
*Source : Resolution of the Government of No.269 "On Cert ain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas 
Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat" of 24 March 2011. q9= 0,25Q × S 9 
100% 
S9= VI + V II-9 
× 100 
V'I + V' II-9 
q12= Q × S 12 
–  q 9,  
100% 
S12= VI + V II 
× 100, 
V'I + V' II  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 325 - ANNEX 12 
Methodology of Calculation of Cust oms Fee Rates for Customs Escort 
 
No. Number of 
kilometres  Number of 
days spent 
in customs 
export (with 
average 
travelling of 
300 km).  Quantity of fuel 
used (in litres), 
was calculated 
pursuant to Rules 
on Standards for 
Use of Fuel (Order 
of Ministry of 
Transports of 
20 July 2001)  Cost of fuel, 
in KZT (the 
average cost 
of 1 litre of 
fuel is taken 
as KZT 88 
as of 
3 Nov 2010)  Cost for cargo 
escort including 
travel allowances 
(per diem  and 
accommodation) 
and depreciation  Costs of the 
second officer 
conducting 
escort 
(per annum and 
accommodation 
allowances)  Costs for return 
travel 
(fuel + 
depreciation) 
KZT The 
exchange 
rate – KZT 
per € as of 
3 Nov 2010  Total Costs 
(in €) 
1. 0-50 - 6 511  1,103  - 1,103  205.96  11  
2. 50-100  - 12 1,022  1,614  - 1,614  205.96  16  
3. 100-200  - 23 2,044  2,636  - 2,636  205.96  26  
4. 200-400  1.5 46 4,088  13,158  8,478  4,680  205.96  128  
5. 400-600  2.0 70 6,133  18,620  11,304  6,725  205.96  178  
6. 600-800  3.0 93 8,177  29,734  19,782  8,769  205.96  283  
7. 800-1,000  3.5 116 10,221  40,257  28,260  10,813  205.96  385  
8. 1000-1,500  5.0 174 15,332  55,029  36,738  15,924  205.96  523  
9. 1,500-2,000  7.0 232 20,442  78,279  53,694  21,034  205.96  743  
10. 2,000-2,500  8.5 290 25,553  92,459  62,172  26,145  205.96  878  
 Calculation of depreciation was based on the widely used "Niva" automobile: - Average price of the car – KZT 1,440,000; - Per annum  depreciation rate – 15%; 
- 1,440,000*15/100 = 216,000; and - 216,000/365days = KZT 592 per day.  Pursuant to limits established in the 2006 Republican budget: 
- Per diem  = KZT 2,826 ; and 
- Accommodation = KZT 5,652.  Source :  Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption of Customs Fee Rates Levied by Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 326 - 
 
  ANNEX 13(A) 
Goods (works, services) with sales turn over exempt from the payment of VAT 
Sales turnover of the following goods, works, and se rvices shall be exempt from value-added tax:   
1. State marks of postal payment; 
2. Excise tax stamps (accounting and control st amps intended for marking excisable goods in 
accordance with Article 653 of this Code); 
3. Services rendered by authorised State bodies in connection with which the State duty is 
collected; 
4. Property purchased for public use in accord ance with the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan; 
5. Main assets, investments in real estate, intangible and biological assets which are 
transferred on the gratuitous basis to a stat e-owned institution or State-owned enterprise 
in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
6. Ritual services of funeral bureaus, services of cemeteries and crematoria; 7. Lottery tickets, except for services of their distribution; 
8. Services for providing information and technological cooperation between participants of 
settlements, including provision of services for collecting, processing and dissemination of 
information to participants in settlements relating to transactions with payment cards; 
9. Services related to processing and (or) repair  of goods imported in the customs territory of 
the Customs Union in accordance with the customs procedure for processing on the 
customs territory;  
10. Works and services related to transportation which is recognised as international in 
accordance with Article 244 of this Code, namely:  works and services of loading, 
unloading, re-loading (discharge-loading), forwarding of goods, including mail, exported 
from the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan , imported into the territory of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, as well as freights  in transit; technical and air navigation services, airport 
activity; services of sea ports related to servicing international lines; 
11. Services related to management, maintenance and operation of housing resources; 
12. Banknotes and coins of the national currency; 
13. Goods, works, services, except for sales turnover of goods, works, services from 
commercial and intermediary activities and production turnover from manufacture and 
sales of excisable goods, public associations of disabled persons, as well as manufacturing 
organizations if such associations and organizations meet the following conditions: 
 Disabled persons represent not less than 51 % of the total number of employees of such 
manufacturing organizations; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 327 - 
 
   Costs of employment of disabled persons are not less than 51% (at specialised 
organizations at which disabled persons with  hearing, speech, sight loss work - not less than 35%) of total labour costs; 
14. Works, services related to free repair and (or) technical maintenance of goods during the 
warranty period specified in the transaction, including costs of spare parts and their components, where terms of transaction provid e for provision of the quality assurance of 
sold goods, works and services by the taxpayer; 
15. Refined precious metals - gold, platinum manufactured of raw materials of its own 
production; 
16. Investment gold provided the number of conditions specified in the Article are met; 
17. Services for the activities specified in Articles 411 and 420 of the Code; 
18. Which are specified in Articles 249-254 of the Code; 
19. Services rendered when performing  notarial acts, advocate activity; 
20. Borrowing transactions in a monetary form on terms of chargeability, timeliness and 
repayment which are carried out as follows: 
 - by a national managing holding company; 
- by legal persons in which 100% of voting shares are held by a national managing 
holding company.  The list of such le gal persons shall be approved by the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
21. Goods placed under the duty free customs procedure; and 
22. Services of a non-resident which are fina nced from the grant within the framework of 
inter-governmental Agreement to which the Republic of Kazakhstan is a party, that is 
aimed at supporting (rendering the assistance to) low-income citizens in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  
Source :  Article 248 of Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV of 10 December 2008. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 328 - 
 
  ANNEX 13(B) 
Applied Unified Excise Tax Ra tes, as of 1 January 2012 
No. HS Code 
(EurAsEC)  Types of excisable goods  Rates of excise duties 
(in tenge per unit of measurement)  
1. from 2402  Cigarettes with a filter  1,250 tenge /1,000 pieces  
2. from 2402  Cigarettes without a filt er, cigarettes with a 
cardboard holder  750 tenge / 1,000 pieces  
3. from 2402  Cigarillos  1,530 tenge / 1,000 pieces  
4. from 2402  Cigars 120 tenge / piece  
5. from 2403  Tobacco for pipes, smoking, chewing, sucking, snuffing, for hookah and other, packed in a consumer pack and designated for final consumption, except for pharmaceutical products, which contain nicotine
 1,550 tenge / kilogram  
Note:  According to the Tax Code excise rates for tobacco were to be increased annually up to 2014. 
No. HS Code 
(EurAsEC)  Categories of excisable goods  Excise duty rates 
(tenge for each unit)  
1. from 2709 00  Crude oil, gas condensate  0 tenge/tonne  
2. from 8702  Motor vehicles carrying 10 or more passengers with engine capacity of more than 3000 cu cm, excluding minibuses, buses and trolley buses 
  
100 tenge/cm3 
 
from 8703  Auto or other motor vehicles for carrying passengers with the engine  capacity of more than 
3000 cu cm (except for manually-operated automobiles or automobiles with manually-operated adapter designed for disabled people) 
 
from 8704  Motor vehicles on auto chassis with a platform for cargo and driver's cab separated from cargo module by a fixed partition,  with engine capacity of 
more than 3000 cu cm 
 
 
 
No.  
 Excise duty rates for each tonne (tenge)  
Petroleum (except 
aircraft motor gasoline)  
(HS Code  
2710 11 410 0-  
2710 11 590 0)  Motor fuel(HS 
Code  
2710 19  
3100-2710  
19 490 0)  
1 2 3 4 
1.  Wholesale trade by petroleum producers (except aircraft motor gasoline) and motor fuel  of domestic manufacture 
 4,500  540  
2.  Wholesale trade of petroleum and motor fuel (except 
aircraft motor gasoline) by in dividuals and legal entities  0  0  
3.  Retail sale by petroleum producers (except aircraft 
motor gasoline) and motor fuel for own production needs 
 5,000  600  
4.  Retail sale of petrol and motor fuel (except aircraft motor gasoline) by individual s and legal entities for own 
production needs
 500  60  
5.  Import  4,500  540  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 329 - 
 
   
No. HS Code 
(EurAsEC)  Types of excisable goods  Rates of excise duties 
(in the tenge per unit of measurement)  
1 2 3 4 
1. From 2207  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated with the alcohol concentration of 80 volume % or more (except for ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, which is sold to manufacture alcohol products, medical and pharmaceutical prep arations, and also 
which is supplied to State medical institutions within the limits of established quotas), ethyl alcohol and other types of alcohol, denaturated, of any concentration (except for ethyl alcohol (ethanol) denaturated  fuel (not colourless, coloured) to be consumed in the domestic market)
 600 tenge/litre  
2. From 2207  Ethyl alcohol (ethanol) denaturated fuel (not colourless, colour ed) to be consumed 
in the domestic market
 1 tenge/litre  
3. From 2208  Ethyl alcohol non-de naturated, alcohol 
tinctures and other alcohol drinks with the alcohol concentration less than 80 volume % (except for ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, which is sold to manufacture alcohol pr oducts, medical and 
pharmaceutical prep arations, and also 
which is supplied to State medical institutions within the limits of established quotas)
 750 tenge / litre of 100% alcohol  
4. From 2207  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated with the alcohol concentration of 80 volume % or more which is sold to manufacture alcohol products
 60 tenge /litre  
5. From 2208  Ethyl alcohol non-de naturated, alcohol 
tinctures and other alcohol drinks with the alcohol concentration less than 80 volume %, which are sold to manufacture alcohol products
 75 tenge / litre of 100% alcohol  
6. From 3003, 3004
 Alcohol-bearing products of medical designation registered in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan as medical preparations
 500 tenge / litre of 100% alcohol  
7. 2208 Alcohol products (except for cognac, brandy, wines, wine material and beer)
 500 tenge/ litre of 100% alcohol  
8. 2208 Cognac, brandy (excep t for cognac, brandy 
manufactured from cognac alcohol of domestic manufacture)
 325 tenge / litre of 100% alcohol  
9. 2208 Cognac, brandy manufactured from cognac alcohol of domestic manufacture
 170 tenge / litre of 100% alcohol  
10. 2204, 2205, 2206 00
 Wines 35 tenge / litre  
11. from 2204, 2205, 2206 00
 Wine material (except for one which is sold to manufacture ethyl alcohol and alcohol 
products)
 170 tenge / litre  
12. from 2204, 2205, 2206 00
 Wine material, which is sold to manufacture ethyl alcohol and alcohol products
 20 tenge /litre  
13. 2203 00  Beer 26 tenge / litre  
14. 2202 90 100 1  Beer with the volume content of ethyl alcohol less than 0.5%
 0 tenge / litre 
Note: The nomenclature of goods shall be determined with the code of the CN FEA EurAsEC and (or) name 
of goods.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 330 - ANNEX 14 
Common List of Goods Subject to Bans and Restrictions on Importat ion and Exportation by Parties of the CU in Trade with Third C ountries 
Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
1. Goods which transportation across the customs border of the Customs Union is prohibited 
1.1 Ozone destroying 
substances   2903 77 100 0; 
2903 77 200 0; 2903 77 300 0; 2903 77 400 0; 2903 77 500 0; 2903 76 100 0; 2903 76 200 0; 2903 76 900 0; 
2903 77 900 0; 
2903 14 000 0; 2903 19 100 0; Ex. 2903 79 210 0; Ex. 2903 79 900 0; Ex. 2903 39 110 0; Ex. 3824 71 000 0; Ex. 3824 72 000 0; 
Ex. 3824 74 000 0 – 
Ex. 3824 79 000 0; 8415 10; 8415 81 00; 8415 82 000; 8418 61 00; Ex. 8418 69 000; 8418 10 200; 
8418 10 800; 
Ex.8418 50; Ex. 8418 69 000; Ex. 8418; Ex. 8419; 8418 10 200;  8418 10 800; 8418 30 200; 
8418 30 800; 
8418 40 200; 8418 40 800; Ex. 8418 50; Ex. 8418 69 000; Ex. 8479 89 970 1; Ex. 8479 89 970 2; Ex. 3921 11 000 0 – 
Ex. 3921 19 000 0; 
Ex. 3907 20 200 1; Ex. 3907 20 200 9; Ex. 8424 10 000 0. Import and export 
prohibition, all CU Parties (except for goods in transit)     
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 331 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
1.2 Hazardous wastes  
 Ex. 0511 99 100 0; 
Ex. 2106 90 980 3; 
Ex. 2524; 
Ex. 2620; Ex. 2620 91 000 0; Ex. 2620 21 000 0; Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621; Ex. 2706 00 000 0; 
2707 91 000 0; 
2707 99; Ex. 2710; 2710 91 000 0; 2713 20 000 0; Ex. 2713 90; Ex. 2714 90 000 0; Ex. 28; 
Ex. 29; 
Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2818; Ex. 2826 19 100 0; Ex. 2826 90 800 0; 2833 25 000 0; Ex. 2837; Ex. 2842; 
Ex. 2901 - 2942 00 000 0; 
Ex. 2903; Ex. 2908 99; Ex. 2915; Ex. 2916; Ex. 2917 Ex. 2918; Ex. 3006 92 000 0; 
Ex. 3101 00 000 0; 
Ex. 3802; Ex. 3808; Ex. 3811 11; Ex. 3824; Ex. 3824 90 610 0; Ex. 3825; Ex. 3825 30 000 0; 
Ex. 3825 41 000 0; 
Ex. 3825 50 000 0; Ex. 3825 61 000 0; Ex. 3825 69 000 0; Ex. 3915; Ex. 3923; Ex. 4013; Ex. 4017 00 000 0; 
Ex. 4101 – 4103; Import prohibition (including 
goods in transit), all CU 
Parties     
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 332 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
Ex. 4115 20 000 0; 
Ex. 4301;  
Ex. 4401 39; 
Ex. 4415; Ex. 4707; Ex. 4819; Ex. 5701 90; Ex. 5702 32; Ex. 5702 42; Ex. 5702 50 310 0; 
Ex. 5702 50 390 0; 
Ex. 5702 92 100 0; Ex. 5702 92 900 0; Ex. 5703 20; Ex. 5703 30; Ex. 5705 00 300 0; 6811 40 000 0; Ex. 6812; 
Ex. 7001 00 100 0; 
Ex. 7010; Ex. 7019; Ex. 7204; Ex. 7404 00; Ex. 7503 00; Ex.7602 00; Ex. 7802 00 000 0; 
Ex. 7902 00 000 0; 
Ex. 8002 00 000 0; Ex. 8101 97 000 0; Ex. 8102 97 000 0; Ex. 8103 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 20 000 0; Ex. 8104 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 90 000 0; 
Ex. 8105 30 000 0; 
Ex. 8106 00 100 0; Ex. 8107 30 000 0; Ex. 8108 30 000 0; Ex. 8109 30 000 0; Ex. 8110 20 000 0; Ex. 8111 00 190 0; Ex. 8112 13 000 0; 
Ex. 8112 22 000 0; 
Ex. 8112 52 000 0; Ex. 8112 92 100 0;  
Ex. 8112 92 210 1; Ex. 8112 92 210 9; Ex. 8113 00 400 0; Ex. 8539; Ex. 8540; 
Ex. 8548 10.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 333 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
1.3 Printed information or 
information on audio-visual 
and other devices containing 
information which may cause damage to political or economic interests of the republic, to its State security, to the health and morality of its citizens  Ex. 3706; 
Ex. 4901;  
Ex. 4902; 
Ex. 4908; Ex. 4909 00 000 0; Ex. 4910 00 000 0; Ex. 4911; Ex. 8523. Import/export/transit 
prohibition, all CU Parties    
1.4 Plant protection 
chemicals prohibited to be imported to the customs territory of the Customs 
Union subject to Annexes A 
and B of the Stockholm Convention on persistent polluting substances signed in Stockholm on 22 May 2001 2903 82 000 0; 
2903 89 900 0; 2903 92 000 0; 2903 99; 
2910 40 000 0; 
2910 90 000 0; 3808 50 000 0; 3808 91 200 0; 3824 82 000 0. Import prohibition, all 
CU Parties (except for goods in transit)    
1.5 Timber, recovered 
paper, paperboard and wastepaper  Ex. 4401 10 000 0;  
Ex. 4401 31 000 0; Ex. 4401 39; 4403 10 000 -  4403 20; 
4403 91 – 4403 99; 
4404; 4406; 4407 10; 4407 99 980; 4707. Export prohibition, 
Kazakhstan    
1.6 Office or civil weapon, 
its main parts and cartridges  Ex. 93; 
Ex. 9303; Ex. 9304 00 000 0; Ex. 9306 21 000 0; 
Ex. 9306 30; 
Ex. 9306 90; Ex. 9307 00 000 0. Import/export/transit 
prohibition, all CU Parties (except for goods, subject to the export control 
system)    
1.7 Implements for 
catching aquatic biological resources  Ex. 5608 11 800 0;  
8543 20 000 0. Import prohibition, all 
CU Parties    
1.8 Skins of Greenland 
seals and baby seals  Ex. 4301 80 709 5; 
Ex. 4301 80 709 7; Ex. 4301 90 009 0; Ex. 4302 19 410 0; Ex. 4302 19 499 0; Ex. 4302 20 009 0; Ex. 4302 30 100 0; Ex. 4303 10 101 0; 
Ex. 4303 10 109 0; 
Ex. 4303 10 908 0; Ex. 4303 10 909 0; Import prohibition, all 
CU Parties     
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 334 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
Ex. 4302 30 510 0; 
Ex. 4302 30 559 0; 
Ex. 6506 99 908 0. 
2. Goods which transportation across the custom s border of the Customs Union is restricted 
2.1 Ozone destroying 
substances and products containing such substances  Ex. 2903 71 000  0; 
Ex. 2903 73 000  0; Ex. 2903 74 000  0; Ex. 2903 75 000  0; 
Ex. 2903 79 110  0; Import and export licensing, 
all CU Parties (except for goods in transit) Ecological Regulation and  
Control Committee of the Ministry of Environment Protection None Activity licence is not 
required  
2.2 Plant protection 
chemicals  Ex. 3808 Import licensing, all 
CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies State Inspection Committee in 
Agro industrial Complex of the 
Ministry of Agriculture; Ecological Regulation and Control Committee of the Ministry of Environment Protection Activity licence for 
production, processing, 
purchase, storage, sale, use and destruction of toxic substances (Article 14.1 of the Law on Licensing) is required and issued by  
the Industry Committee 
of the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies 
2.3 Hazardous wastes  Ex. 0511 99 100 0; 
2307 00; Ex. 2520 10 000 0; Ex. 2530 90 000 0; 2618 00 000 0; Ex. 2619 00; Ex. 2619 00 900 0; 
Ex. 2620 
2620 11 000 0; Ex. 2620 19 000 0; Ex. 2620 21 000 0 – Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 30 000 0; Ex. 2620 40 000 0; 
2620;  
Ex. 2620 60 000 0; Ex. 2620 91 000 0; Ex. 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621 Ex. 28; Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2806 10 000 0; 
Ex. 2807 00; 
Ex. 2808 00 000 0; Ex. 2811 11 000 0; Ex. 2811 19 100 0; Ex. 2814 20 000 0; Ex. 2815 12 000 0; Import and/or export 
licensing, all CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Ecological Regulation and 
Control Committee of the Ministry of Environment Protection Activity licence for 
collection (purchase), storage, processing and sale of scrap and waste of nonferrous and ferrous metals by juridical persons is 
required (Article 12.3 
of the Law on Licensing) and issued by Government executives (Akims) of Oblast, Cities of Astana and Almaty  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 335 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
Ex. 2815 20 000 0; 
Ex. 2837; 
Ex. 2907; 
Ex. 2908; Ex. 2926; Ex. 2929; Ex. 3206; Ex. 3208; Ex. 3212; Ex. 3504 00; 
Ex. 3802; 
Ex. 3824; Ex. 3825; Ex. 3825 41 000 0; Ex. 3825 49 000 0; Ex. 3825 61 000 0; Ex. 3912 20; Ex. 4004 00 000 0; 
Ex. 4012 20 000 0; 
Ex. 4101 – 4103; Ex. 4115 10 000 0; Ex. 4115 20 000 0; Ex. 4301; Ex. 5003 00 000 0; Ex. 5103 20 000 0;  
Ex. 5202 10 000 0; 
Ex. 5505; 
Ex. 5601 30 000 0; Ex. 7112 30 000 0; Ex. 7112 99 000 0; Ex. 7204; Ex. 7404 00; Ex. 7503 00; Ex. 7602 00; 
Ex. 7802 00 000 0; 
Ex. 7902 00 000 0; Ex. 8002 00 000 0; Ex. 8101 97 000 0; Ex. 8102 97 000 0; Ex. 8103 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 20 000 0; Ex. 8105 30 000 0; 
Ex. 8106 00 100 0; 
Ex. 8107 30 000 0; Ex. 8108 30 000 0; Ex. 8109 30 000 0; Ex. 8110 20 000 0; Ex. 8111 00 190 0; Ex. 8112 13 000 0; Ex. 8112 22 000 0; 
Ex. 8112 52 000 0;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 336 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
Ex. 8112 92 210 9; 
Ex. 8113 00 400 0; 
Ex. 85 
Ex. 8548 10 910 0; Ex. 8548 10 100 0; Ex. 8548 10 210 0; Ex. 8548 10 290 0; Ex. 2620. 
2.4 Collectible materials in mineralogy and palaeontology  Ex. 9601; 
Ex. 9705 00 000 0. Export licensing, all 
CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Ministry of Agriculture 
Ministry of Culture and Information  Activity licence is not 
required 
2.6 Wild live animals,  certain wild growing plants and wild growing crude drug Ex. 01; 
Ex. 0301; Ex. 0306; Ex. 0307; Ex. 0308; 
Ex. 0407; 
0802 90 500 0; 1211; 1212 21 000 0; 1212 29 000 0; Ex. 1302. Export licensing, all 
CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Committee on Forest and 
Hunting Farms of the Ministry of Agriculture Committee on Fishery Farms of the Ministry of Agriculture 
 Activity licence is not 
required 
2.7 Species of wild fauna and flora subject to the Convention on international trade in endangered species 
of wild fauna and flora  
 No CN Codes are 
provided. Only the names of species of wild fauna and flora are specified.  Export restriction, all 
CU Parties (the goods included into this list are not subject to licensing and 
transported through the 
customs border of the CU members in accordance with the order established by the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora as of 
3 March 1973) Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies  Activity licence is not 
required  
2.8 Rare and endangered species of wild animals and 
wild growing plants and 
parts thereof and/or derivates inscribed in the "Red books" of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation Ex. 0101 – 0106; 
Ex. 0301; 
0306 -  0308; 
Ex. 0601 – 0604; Ex. 07; Ex. 1211; Ex. 1212; Ex. 20; Ex. 2102. Export licensing, all 
CU Parties Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required 
2.9 Precious metals and gems  Ex. 2530 90 900 0; 
7101 10 000 0; Ex. 7102 21 000 0; 7102 31 000 0; 
7103 10 000 0; 
7103 91 000 0; 7103 99 000 0; Export licensing, all 
CU Parties (except for precious metals exported by the Central (National) Banks 
of the Customs Union 
Parties)    Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Activity licence is not 
required   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 337 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
7106; 
7106 10 000 0; 
7106 91 000; 
7108; 7108 11 000 0; 7108 12 000; 7108 20 000; 7110; 7110 11 000; 7110 19 100 0; 
7110 21 000; 
7110 29 000 0; 7110 31 000 0; 7110 41 000 0. 
2.10 Unprocessed precious metals, waste and scrap of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals and commodities containing precious metals  2603 00 000 0; 
2604 00 000 0; 2607 00 000 0; 2608 00 000 0; 2609 00 000 0; 2616; Ex. 2617; 
2620 19 000 0; 
2620 21 000 0; 2620 29 000 0; 2620 30 000 0; 2620 91 000 0; 2620 99 100 0; 2620 99 400 0; 2620 99 950 1; 
2620 99 950 2; 
2620 99 950 3; 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621; 7106 91 000; 7108 12 000 9; 7110 11 000 9; 7110 21 000 9; 
7110 31 000 0; 
7110 41 000 0; 7112; 7401 00 000 0; 7402 00 000 0; 7501; 7801 99 100 0. Export licensing, all 
CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Activity licence is not 
required 
2.11 Mineral raw materials (only untreated stones)  Ex. 7103 10 000 0; 
Ex. 2530 90 000 0.  Export licensing, all 
CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies  Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Activity licence is not 
required 
2.12 Drugs, substances with psychotropic effects and their precursors 1209 99 910 0; 
1211 30 000 0; 1211 40 000 0; 
1211 90 850 0;  Import and/or export 
licensing, all CU Parties Committee on Fighting Drug 
Business and Illegal Drug Circulation of the  Ministry of 
Internal Affairs Ministry of Public Health; 
Ecological Regulation and Control Committee of the 
Ministry of Environment Activity licence for 
circulation of drugs (narcotics), 
psychoactive  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 338 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
1301 90 000 0; 
1302 11 000 0; 
1302 19 800 0; 
2806 10 000 0; 2807 00 100 0; 2812 10 950 0; 2841 61 000 0; 2902 30 000 0; 2902 90 000 0; 2903 39 190 0; 
2903 99 900 0; 
2904 20 000 0; 2905 39 250 0; 2905 51 000 0; 2907 19 900 0; 2909 11 000 0; 2909 30 900 0; 2912 21 000 0; 
2912 49 000 0; 
2914 11 000 0; 2914 12 000 0; 2914 31 000 0; 2914 50 000 0; 2915 21 000 0; 2915 24 000 0; 2915 90 000 0; 
2916 12 000 0; 
2916 14 000 0; 2916 34 000 0; 2918 19 980 0; 2920 90 100 0; 2921 11 000 0; 2921 19 990 0; 2921 30 100 0; 
2921 46 000 0; 
2921 49 000 0; 2922 14 000 0;  
2922 19 850 0; 2922 29 000 0; 2922 31 000 0; 2922 39 000 0; 2922 43 000 0; 
2922 44 000 0; 
2922 49 850 0;  
2922 50 000 0; 2924 23 000 0; 2924 24 000 0; 2924 29 980 0; 2925 12 000 0; 2926 90 950 0; 
2926 30 000 0; Protection  substances, precursors 
is required (Article 17 
of the Law on 
Licensing) and issued by the Committee on Fighting Drug Business and Illegal Drug Circulation of the  Ministry of Internal Affairs  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 339 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
2924 11 000 0; 
2924 29 980 0; 
2930 90 990 0; 
2932 11 000 0;  2932 20 900 0; 2932 91 000 0; 2932 92 000 0; 2932 93 000 0; 2932 94 000 0; 2932 95 000 0; 
2932 99 000 0; 
2933 29 900 0; 2933 32 000 0; 2933 33 000 0; 2933 39 990 0; 2933 41 000 0; 2933 49 300 0; 2933 49 900 0; 
2933 53 100 0; 
2933 53 900 0; 2933 55 000 0; 2933 59 950 0; 2933 72 000 0; 2933 91 100 0; 2933 91 900 0; Ex. 2933 99; 
2933 99 800 0; 
2934 91 000 0; 2934 99 900 0; 2939 11 000 0; 2939 19 000 0; 2939 41 000 0 -  2939 49 000 0; 2939 51 000 0; 
2939 61 000 0; 
2939 62 000 0; 2939 63 000 0; 2939 69 000 0; 2939 91 000 0;  
2939 99 000 0; Ex. 3003; 3003 40 000 0; 
3003 90 000 0; 
Ex. 3004; 3004 40 000; 3004 40 000 9; 3004 90 000 0; 3824 90 970.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 340 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
2.13 Toxic substances 
except for precursors of the 
drugs and substances with 
psychotropic effects   Ex. 1211 90 850 0;  
Ex. 1302 19 800 0; 
2804 70 001 0; 
2804 80 000 0; Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2811 29 900 0; Ex. 2837 11 000 0; Ex. 2837 19 000 0; Ex. 2842 90 800 0; Ex. 2843 29 000 0; 
Ex. 2848 00 000 0; 
Ex. 2852 10 000 9; 2905 11 000 0; Ex. 2905 59; Ex. 2907 11 000 0;  
Ex. 2922 19 850 0; Ex. 2924 19 000 0; Ex. 2926 90 950 0;   
Ex. 2930 90 990 0; 
Ex. 2931 10 000 0; Ex. 2931 90 900 0; Ex. 2933 39 990 0; Ex. 2939 20 000 0; Ex. 2939 99 000 0; Ex. 3001 90 980 0; Ex. 8112 51 000 0. Import/export licensing, all 
CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Ministry of Public Health,  Activity licence for 
production, processing, 
purchase, storage, 
sale, use and destruction of toxic substances is required (Article 14.1 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies 
2.14 Medicines and pharmaceutical products   
 Ex. 2106 90 980 3; 
Ex. 2106 90 980 9; Ex. 2904 - Ex. 2909; 
Ex. 2912-  Ex. 2942 
00 000 0; Ex. 2936; Ex. 3001; Ex. 3002; Ex. 3003; Ex. 3004; 3006 30 000 0; 
3006 60; 
Ex. 3913. Import restriction, all 
CU Parties    Activity licence for 
pharmaceutical activity is required (Article 26.2 
of the Law on 
Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Public Health   
2.16 Civil radio-electronic 
and/or high-frequency 
means including built-in or forming part of other goods    Ex. 8419; 
Ex. 8470; 
Ex. 8471; Ex. 8514; 8516 50 000 0; Ex. 8517; Ex. 8517 12 000 0; Ex. 8517 62 000 9; Ex. 8517 69 900 0; 
Ex. 8518; 
Ex. 8518 10; Ex. 8519; Import licensing, all 
CU Parties 
 Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Communication and Information 
Committee of the Ministry of 
Transport and Communications Activity licence is not 
required   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 341 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
Ex. 8521; 
Ex. 8525; 
Ex. 8526; 
Ex. 8527; Ex. 8528; Ex. 8531; Ex. 8540; Ex. 90; Ex. 9018; Ex. 9021; 
Ex. 9027. 
2.17 Special devices for 
unauthorised obtaining of 
information  
 Ex. 8301 70 000 0; 
Ex. 8471;  
Ex. 8505 90 200 0; 
Ex. 8517 61 000; Ex. 8517 62 000; Ex. 8517 69 390 0; Ex. 8517 69 900 0; Ex. 8517 70 900 1; Ex. 8518 30 950 0; Ex. 8518 40; 
Ex. 8519 81 550; 
Ex. 8519 81 510 0; Ex. 8519 81 610; Ex. 8519 81 650; Ex. 8519 81 750; Ex. 8519 81 850; Ex. 8519 89 900 0; Ex. 8521; 
Ex. 8523 51; 
Ex. 8523 29 310 1; Ex. 8523 29 310 2; Ex. 8523 49 250 0; Ex. 8523 49 450 0; Ex. 8523 49 910 1; Ex. 8523 51 910 1; Ex. 8523 59 910 1; 
Ex. 8523 80 910 1; 
Ex. 8525 50 000 0; Ex. 8525 60 000 0; Ex. 8525 80; Ex. 8526 10 000 9; Ex. 8526 91; Ex. 8527; Ex. 8529 10 390 0; 
Ex. 9002; 
Ex. 9006 51 000 0; Ex. 9006 52 000 9; Ex. 9006 53 100 0; Ex. 9019 10 900 9; Ex. 9022 19 000 0. Import/export licensing, all 
CU Parties 
 Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Committee on National Security Activity licence for 
development,  
production, repair and 
sale of special technical devices designed for conducting of operative-investigation activities is required (Article 19 of the Law on Licensing) and 
issued by the  
Committee on National Security  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 342 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
2.19 Encryption devices  
 Ex. 8443 31; 
Ex. 8443 32 100 9; 
Ex. 8443 32 300 0; 
Ex. 8443 99 100 9; Ex. 8470 10 000 9; Ex. 8470 50 000; Ex. 8471 30 000 0; Ex. 8471 41 000 0; Ex. 8471 49 000 0; Ex. 8471 50 000 0; 
Ex. 8471 70 500 0; 
Ex. 8471 70 980 0; Ex. 8471 80 000 0; Ex. 8471 90 000 0; Ex. 8473 21 100 0; Ex. 8473 21 900 0; Ex. 8473 30 200 9; Ex. 8473 30 800 9; 
Ex. 8517 11 000 0; 
Ex. 8517 12 000 0; Ex. 8517 18 000 0; Ex. 8517 61 000 1; Ex. 8517 61 000 2; Ex. 8517 61 000 8; Ex. 8517 62 000; Ex. 8517 69 390 0; 
Ex. 8517 69 900 0; 
Ex. 8517 70 900; Ex. 8523 29 310 1; Ex. 8523 29 310 2; Ex. 8523 29 330; Ex. 8523 49 250 0; Ex. 8523 49 450 0; Ex. 8523 49 910 1; 
Ex. 8523 49 930 0; 
Ex. 8523 51 910 1; Ex. 8523 51 930 0; Ex. 8523 52; Ex. 8523 59 910 1; Ex. 8523 59 930 0; Ex. 8523 80 910 1; Ex. 8523 80 930 0;  
Ex. 8525 50 000 0; 
Ex. 8525 60 000 0; Ex. 8528 71 130 0;  
Ex. 8529 90 200 1;  
Ex. 8529 90 650 0; Ex. 8529 90 970 0; Ex. 8526 91 200 0; Ex. 8526 91 800 0; 
Ex. 8526 92 000;  Import/export licensing, all 
CU Parties 
 Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and 
New Technologies Committee on National Security Activity licence for 
development and sale 
(including other types 
of transfer) of  cryptographic devices of information protection  is required (Article 18 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the  
Committee on National 
Security  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 343 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
Ex. 8542 31 901 1; 
Ex. 8542 31 909 9; 
Ex. 8542 32 900 9; 
Ex. 8543 70 900 0; Ex. 8543 90 000 9. 
2.20 Cultural values, documents of the national archive funds, originals of the archive documents  Ex. 37; 
Ex. 39; Ex. 40; Ex. 42; Ex. 44; Ex. 4420; Ex. 46; Ex. 49; 
Ex. 4907 00; 
Ex. 57; Ex. 58; Ex. 61; Ex. 62; Ex. 63; Ex. 64; Ex. 65; 
Ex. 66; 
Ex. 69; Ex. 6913; Ex. 70; Ex. 7018; Ex. 7113; Ex. 7114; Ex. 7117; 
Ex. 7118; 
Ex. 73; Ex. 74; Ex. 75; Ex. 76; Ex. 78; Ex. 79; Ex. 80; 
Ex. 81; 
Ex. 82; Ex. 8306; Ex. 84; Ex. 85; Ex. 87; Ex. 88; Ex. 89; 
Ex. 90; 
Ex. 91; Ex. 92; Ex. 93; Ex. 94; Ex. 95; Export licensing, all 
CU Parties  Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Ministry of Culture and 
Information Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 344 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
Ex. 96; 
Ex. 9611 00 000 0; 
Ex. 97; 
Ex. 9702 00 000 0; Ex. 9705 00 000 0. 
2.21 Human organs and tissues, blood and its components Ex. 3001 90 200 0; 
Ex. 3002 10 910 0; Ex. 3002 10 950; Ex. 3002 90 100 0. Import and (or) export 
licensing, all CU Parties  Ministry of Public Health None Activity licence for 
medical activity is required (Article 26.1 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Public Health 
2.22 Official and civil weapon, its main parts and cartridges  Ex. 9302 00 000 0; 
Ex. 9303; Ex. 9303 20 100 0; Ex. 9303 20 950 0; 
Ex. 9303 30 000 0;  
Ex. 9304 00 000 0; Ex. 9305 10 000 0; Ex. 9305 20 000 0; Ex. 9306 21 000 0; Ex. 9306 30 100 0; Ex. 9306 30 900 0;  
Ex. 9306 29 000 0; 
Ex. 9306 30 900 0; 
Ex. 8211; Ex. 9307 00 000 0; Ex. 9506 99 900 0. Import/export licensing, all 
CU Parties  Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Ministry of Internal Affairs  Activity licence for 
development, manufacture, repair, trade, collecting, 
exhibit of civil and 
official fire-arms and their cartridge shells is required (Article 20.5 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.  
2.23 Information on subsoil  Export licensing, all 
CU Parties Industry Committee of the 
Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Committee on Geology and 
Subsurface Use of Ministry of Industry and New Technologies Activity licence is not 
required 
2.24 Goods subject to quantitative restrictions  7204 (*); 
7404 00 (*); 7503 00 (*); 7602 00 (*).  Export and/or import 
restriction.   - (*) Applied to the 
goods originating from the Republic of Belarus when exported from 
the customs territory 
of the Customs Union. Application of the exclusive right is regulated by the Belarus' legislation; N/A N/A N/A 
2.25 Goods subject to 
licensing   1701 13*; 
1701 14*; Ex. 2709 00**; 2710**;  
2712 10**; 
2713**; 
3102**; 3103**; Export and/or import 
approval.  Applied to: *- the goods imported to 
the territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan from the 
third countries 
**- the goods, originating Ministry of Economy and Budget 
Planning  Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required    
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 345 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
3105**. from the Republic of 
Belarus when exported 
from the customs 
territory of the Customs Union 
2.26 Goods subject export/import monopoly Goods subject to export 
exclusive licenses  2711 11 000 0 (*); 2711 21 000 0 (*); 3104 (**).  Goods subject to import 
exclusive licenses (***) 
 0303 23 000 0 – 0303 25 000 0; 0303 29 000 0; 0303 89 10 – 0303 89 109 0; 0304 31 000 0 – 0304 39  
000 0; 
0304 42 500 0; 0304 49 101 0; 0304 49 109 0; 0304 51 000 0; Ex. 0304 52 000 0; 0304 59 100 0; 0304 61 000 0 –  
0304 69 000 0; 
0304 82 500 0; 0304 89 10; 0304 93 900 0; Ex. 0304 99 210 0; 0305; 1604; 1605; 
2401; 
2402; 2403; 2207; 2208 90 910; 2208 90 990; Ex. 1302; Ex. 2101; 
2103 90 300 0; 
Ex. 2103 90 900 9; Ex. 2106 90 200 0; Ex. 3302 10; 2204; 2205; - (*) Applied to the 
goods originating from the Russian Federation when exported from the customs territory of the Customs Union.  Application of the exclusive right is 
regulated by the 
Russian Federation's legislation;  
- (**) Applied to the 
goods originating from the Republic of Belarus when exported from the customs territory 
of the Customs Union.  
Application of the exclusive right is regulated by the Belarus' legislation; 
- (***) Applied to the 
goods originating from the third countries 
when imported to the 
Republic of Belarus. Application of the exclusive rights is regulated by the Belarus' legislation.  N/A N/A N/A  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 346 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
2206 00; 
2208 60; 
2208 20; 
2208 30; 2208 40; 2208 50; 2208 70; 2208 09 (except 2208 09 910 0, 2208 09 990 0). 
2.27 Goods subject to Tariff Rate Quotas 0201 10 000 1; 
0201 20 200 1; 0201 20 300 1; 0201 20 500 1; 
0201 20 900 1; 
0201 30 000 4; 0202 10 000 1; 0202 20 100 1; 0202 20 300 1; 0202 20 500 1; 0202 20 900 1; 0202 30 100 4; 
0202 30 500 4; 
0202 30 900 4; 0203 11 100 1; 0203 11 900 1; 0203 12 110 1; 0203 12 190 1; 0203 12 900 1; 0203 19 110 1; 
0203 19 130 1; 
0203 19 150 1; 0203 19 550 1; 0203 19 590 1; 0203 19 900 1; 0203 21 100 1; 0203 21 900 1; 0203 22 110 1; 
0203 22 190 1; 
0203 22 900 1; 0203 29 110 1; 0203 29 130 1; 0203 29 150 1; 0203 29 550 1; 0203 29 590 1; 0203 29 900 1; 
0203 29 550 2; 
0203 29 900 2; 0207 11 100 1; 0207 11 300 1; 0207 11 900 1; 0207 12 100 1; Import TRQ, all CU Parties 
(within CU Party TRQ).  Import procedure is determined by a Decision of 
the Customs Union 
Commission in accordance with the Agreement on Conditions and Mechanism of Implementation of Tariff Quotas of 12 December 2008 Ministry of Economy and Budget 
Planning None Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 347 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
0207 12 900 1; 
0207 13 100 1; 
0207 13 200 1; 
0207 13 300 1; 0207 13 400 1; 0207 13 500 1; 0207 13 600 1; 0207 13 700 1; 0207 13 910 1; 0207 13 990 1; 
0207 14 100 1; 
0207 14 200 1; 0207 14 300 1; 0207 14 400 1; 0207 14 500 1; 0207 14 600 1; 0207 14 700 1; 0207 14 910 1; 
0207 14 990 1; 
0207 24 100 1; 0207 24 900 1; 0207 25 100 1; 0207 25 900 1; 0207 26 100 1; 0207 26 200 1; 0207 26 300 1; 
0207 26 400 1; 
0207 26 500 1; 0207 26 600 1; 0207 26 700 1; 0207 26 800 1; 0207 26 910 1; 0207 26 990 1; 0207 27 100 1; 
0207 27 200 1; 
0207 27 300 1; 0207 27 400 1; 0207 27 500 1; 0207 27 600 1; 0207 27 700 1; 0207 27 800 1; 0207 27 910 1; 
0207 27 990 1; 
0207 41 200 1; 0207 41 300 1; 0207 41 800 1; 0207 51 100 1; 0207 51 900 1; 0207 60 050 1; 0207 42 300 1; 
0207 42 800 1;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 348 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
0207 52 100 1; 
0207 52 900 1; 
0207 60 050 1; 
0207 53 000 1; 0207 53 000 1; 0207 43 000 1; 0207 54 100 1; 0207 44 100 1; 0207 60 100 1; 0207 44 210 1; 
0207 54 210 1; 
0207 60 210 1; 0207 60 310 1; 0207 44 310 1; 0207 54 310 1; 0207 60 410 1; 0207 44 410 1; 0207 54 410 1; 
0207 54 510 1; 
0207 44 510 1; 0207 60 510 1; 0207 54 610 1; 0207 44 610 1; 0207 60 610 1; 0207 44 710 1; 0207 54 710 1; 
0207 60 810 1; 
0207 44 810 1; 0207 54 810 1; 0207 44 910 1; 0207 54 910 1; 0207 60 910 1; 0207 44 990 1; 0207 54 990 1; 
0207 60 990 1; 
0207 55 100 1; 0207 45 100 1; 0207 60 100 1; 0207 45 210 1; 0207 55 210 1; 0207 60 210 1; 0207 45 310 1; 
0207 55 310 1; 
0207 45 410 1; 0207 55 410 1; 0207 55 510 1; 0207 45 510 1; 0207 60 510 1; 0207 55 610 1; 0207 45 610 1; 
0207 60 610 1;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 349 - Description CN codes (in version of HS 
2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case of 
licensing) 
0207 45 710 1; 
0207 55 710 1; 
0207 60 810 1; 
0207 45 810 1; 0207 55 810 1; 0207 55 930 1; 0207 45 930 1; 0207 45 950 1; 0207 55 950 1; 0207 60 910 1; 
0207 45 990 1; 
0207 55 990 1; 0207 60 990 1. 
2.28 Goods subject to restrictions in accordance with the commitments undertaken upon accession to the WTO 4403 20 110 1; 
4403 20 110 2; 4403 20 190 1; 4403 20 190 9; 4403 20 310 1; 4403 20 310 2; 4403 20 390 1; 4403 20 390 9. Export tariff quotas. 
The Russian Federation. N/A N/A N/A 
2.29 Goods subject to 
import licensing on the basis of application of import quotas as a special safeguards  7304 11 000 1; 
7304 11 000 2; 7304 11 000 3;  7304 11 000 4;  7304 11 000 8; 7304 41 000 9; 7304 49 100 0; 7304 49 930 0; 
7304 49 950 0; 
7304 49 990 0; 7306 11 100 0; 7306 11 900 0; 7306 40 200 1; 7306 40 200 9; 7306 40 800 9. Import  licensing, all 
CU Parties  The Ministry of Economy and 
Budget Planning  None Activity licence is not 
required 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 350 - 
 
  ANNEX 15 (A) 
Cryptographic Devices Subject to Export and Import Control* 
Description CN codes (in version of HS 2012) 
1. Printers, copying machines, fax machines and their 
electronic modules that have encryption (cryptographic)  functions  Ex.
 8443 31  
Ex. 8443 32 100 9  
Ex. 8443 32 300 0  
Ex. 8443 99 100 9  
2. Handheld  machines for recording, playback and visual 
presentation of data with calculating functions that have encryption (cryptographic) functions  Ex.
 8470 10 000 9  
3. Cash registers with encryption (cryptographic) functions  Ex. 8470 50 000  
4. Handheld computers with encryption (cryptographic) 
functions  Ex. 8471 30 000 0  
5. Computers and their parts with encryption 
(cryptographic) functions Ex. 8471 30 000 0  
Ex. 8471 41 000 0  Ex. 8471 49 000 0  
Ex. 8471 50 000 0  
Ex. 8471 90 000 0  Ex. 8473 30 200 9  
6. Computer devices with encryption (cryptographic) 
functions Ex. 8471 70 500 0  
Ex. 8471 70 980 0  Ex. 8471 80 000 0  
7. Electronic modules and parts of handheld devices with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8473 21 100 0  
Ex. 8473 21 900 0  
Ex. 8473 30 200 9  Ex. 8473 30 800 9  
8. Subscriber communication equipment with encryption 
(cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 11 000 0  
Ex. 8517 12 000 0  
Ex. 8517 18 000 0  
9. Base stations with encryption (cryptographic) functions  Ex. 8517 61 000 1  Ex. 8517 61 000 2 
Ex. 8517 61 000 8 
10. Telecommunications equipment and its parts with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  
Ex. 8517 70 900  
11. Programme encryption (cryptographic) devices 
regardless of information carrier Ex. 8523 29 310 1  
Ex. 8523 29 310 2  Ex. 8523 29 330  Ex. 8523 49 250 0  
Ex. 8523 49 450 0  
Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 49 930 0  Ex. 8523 51 910 1  
Ex. 8523 51 930 0  
Ex. 8523 52  Ex. 8523 59 910 1  Ex. 8523 59 930 0  
Ex. 8523 80 910 1  
Ex. 8523 80 930 0 
12. Broadcasting or television equipment and its parts with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8525 50 000 0  
Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8529 90 200 1  
Ex. 8529 90 650 0  
Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
13. Radio navigational receivers, remote control equipment 
and their parts with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8526 91 200 0  
Ex. 8526 91 800 0  Ex. 8526 92 000  Ex. 8529 90 650 0  
Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
14. Internet access equipment and television receivers/sets 
with communication function, their parts with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8528 71 130 0  Ex. 8529 90 650 0  Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
15. Electronic integral schemes, storing devices with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions f or having 
encryption (cryptographic) devices  Ex. 8542 31 901 1  
Ex. 8542 31 909 9  
Ex. 8542 32 900 9  
16. Other electric devices and equipment with individual 
functions that have encryption (cryptographic) devices Ex. 8543 70 900 0  
Ex. 8543 90 000 9 
*  In order to use this list, it is necessary to follow both the customs commodity code, and name of the goods. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 351 - 
 
  ANNEX 15 (B) 
Special Technical Devices Subject to  Export and Import Licensing* 
Description CN codes (in version of HS 2012) 
1. Special technical devices for disguised obtaining and registration of acoustic information:    
(а) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
obtaining and (or) registration of acoustic information; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  
(b) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised obtaining 
and (or) registration of acoustic information;  
 Ex. 8517 70 900 1  
Ex. 8518 30 950 0  
Ex. 8518 40  
Ex. 8523 49 450 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8527  Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(c) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
acoustic information. 
 Ex. 8519 81 510 0  
Ex. 8519 81 550  Ex. 8519 81 610  Ex. 8519 81 650  Ex. 8519 81 750  
Ex. 8519 81 850  
Ex. 8519 89 900 0  Ex. 8523 51 
2. Special technical devices intended for disguised visual observation and recording:  
(а) pin-holelens Ex. 9002  
(b) photo cameras having at least one of the following 
features: camouflaged under another items; having pin-hole lens  Ex. 9006 51 000 0  
Ex. 9006 52 000 9  Ex. 9006 53 100 0 
(c) television and videocameras having at least one of the 
following features:  camouflaged under another items; having pin-hole lens Ex. 8525 80  
 
(d) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
obtaining and (or) registration of video information; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  
(e) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised obtaining 
and (or) registration of video information; 
 Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8523 49 450 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8527  Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(f) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
acoustic information. Ex. 8521  
Ex. 8523 51 
3. Special technical devices for disguised interception of telephone conversations: 
(a) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
interception of telephone conversations; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000   
(b) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised;  Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8527  Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(c) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
information on telephone conversations. Ex. 8519 81 510 0  
Ex. 8519 81 550  Ex. 8519 81 610  Ex. 8519 81 650  
Ex. 8519 81 750  
Ex. 8519 81 850  Ex. 8523 51 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 352 - 
 
  Description CN codes (in version of HS 2012) 
4. Special technical devices for disguised eavesdropping 
and registration of information from technical channels 
of connection  
 Ex. 8471  
Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8523 29 310 1  Ex. 8523 29 310 2 Ex. 8523 49 250 0  Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 51 910 1  
Ex. 8523 59 910 1  
Ex. 8523 80 910 1  Ex. 8527  
5. Special technical devices for disguised control of 
messages received and sent by mail Ex. 9022 19 000 0  
 
6. Special technical devices for disguised research of 
objects and documents, including portable compact X-ray TV units, fluoroscopic and radiographic equipment.  Ex. 9022 19 000 0  
  
7. Special technical devices for disguised entry and inspection of premises, vehicles and other objects: 
(a) means for disguised opening of closure devices; 
 Ex. 8301 70 000 0  
 
(b) portable compact X-ray TV units, fluoroscopic and 
radiographic equipment. Ex. 9022 19 000 0 
8. Special technical devices for disguised control over 
movement of vehicles Ex. 8526 10 000 9  
Ex. 8526 91  
9. Special technical devices for disguised obtaining 
(modifying, deleting) of information from technical devices of information storage, processing and 
transmission Ex. 8471  
Ex. 8505 90 200 0  Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8523 29 310 1  Ex. 8523 29 310 2  Ex. 8523 49 250 0  Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 51 910 1  
Ex. 8523 59 910 1  
Ex. 8523 80 910 1  Ex. 8527  
10. Special technical devices for disguised identification of 
persons.  Special technical devices for disguised registration of psychophysiological reactions of humans Ex. 9019 10 900 9 
  
*  In order to use this list, it is necessary to follow both the customs commodity code, and name of the goods. 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 353 - 
 
  ANNEX 15 (C) 
Categories of Goods which are Encryption (C ryptographic) Means or Containing thereof 
the Technical and Encryption Characteristics of which are Subject to Notification 
1. Goods containing encryption technology which consist of any of the following components:  (a) a symmetric cryptographic algorithm employing a key length not exceeding 56 bits 
  l o n g ;  o r  
 (b) an asymmetric cryptographic algorith m based on one of the following methods: 
- factorization of integers not exceeding 512 bits; 
- computation of discrete logarithms in multiplicative group of a finite field of a size 
not exceeding 512 bits; or 
- the discrete logarithm in group other than in item B hereof not exceeding 112 bits.  
Remark: (1) Bites of parity are not included in the length of a key. 
(2) The term "cryptography" does not refer to fixed methods of compression 
or coding of data. 
2. Goods containing encryption with the following limited functions:  (a) authentication, including all the aspects of access control without encryption of 
files and texts, except encryption related to passwords and identification and other 
similar data protection from unauthorised access; and 
 (b) electronic digital signature. 
Remark: Functions of authentication and electronic digital signature include connected with 
them function of keys distribution. 
3. Encryption (cryptographic) means, which are the components of programme operations 
systems, cryptographic abilities of which canno t be altered by users, which are developed 
for installation by the user individually without further substantial support by the provider and technical documentations (the description of algorithms of cryptographic changes, 
protocols on interactions, description of interfaces, etc.) on which is available. 
4. Personal smart-cards:  (a) cryptographic abilities of which are limited by use in equipment and systems, 
referred to in paragraphs 5-8 of the present list; or 
 (b) for wide, publicly available use, cryptographic abilities of which are not available 
for use and which as a result of special development have limited abilities of protection of stored personal information on them. 
Remark: If a smart-card can perform few functions, then the control status of each of them 
is defined separately. 
5. Receiving equipment for radio-broadcasting and commercial TV broadcasting or analogue 
commercial equipment for broadcasting to limited audience without encryption of digital signal, except for the cases of use of encryption solely for management of video or 
audio-channels and sending of bills or return of information connected to the programme 
to the providers of broadcasting. 
6. Equipment encryption functionality of which are not available to the user, specially 
developed or limited to the use with any of the following:  
 ( а) software is protected from copy; 
 (b) access to any of the following: 
- data protected from copy stored on the medium available for read only; and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 354 - 
 
  - information, stored in encrypted form on  media, when these media are offered for 
sale to public in identical kits; 
 (c) control of coping of audio- and video-information protected by the copyrights.  7. Encryption (cryptographic) equipment specia lly designed and limited for banking use and 
financial operations. 
Remark: Financial operations include duties and charges for transport services and 
crediting.  
8. Portable or mobile radio electronic devices for civil use (for example for use with 
commercial civil cellular radio communication systems) that are not capable of transmitting 
encrypted data directly to another radiotelephone or equipment.  
9. Wireless radio equipment encrypting information only in radio channel with the maximum 
effective range of unboosted cordless operation is less than 400 meters according to the manufacturer's specifications.  
10. Encryption (cryptography) means used for protection of technological channels of 
information-telecommunication systems and communication networks.  
11. Goods whose encryption function is blocked by the manufacture.  12. "Mass market goods" are goods that meet all of the following:   
 (a) Generally available to the public in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan  by 
being sold, without restriction, from stock at retail selling points by means of any of the following: 
  1. Over-the-counter transactions; 
  2. Mail order transactions; 
  3. Electronic transactions; or    4. Telephone call transactions. 
 (b) The cryptographic functionality cannot easily be changed by the user;  
 (c) Designed for installation by the user without further substantial support by the 
supplier; and 
 (d) When necessary, details of the item s are accessible and will be provided, upon 
request, to the appropriate authority in the regulator's country in order to 
ascertain compliance with conditions described in paragraphs (a) to (c) above.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 355 - 
 
  ANNEX 15 (D) 
Format of Notification of Good s which contain Encryption Means 
Registered in the Register "___" ___________ 20__ .     N _____ 
 Place for Seal      ___________________________________   ________________ 
                       (signature of a person of authorized body)       (Name) 
 
NOTIFICATION 
 
on characteristics of goods (products), which contain encryption means 
 1. Name of a good (product) _____________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ 
 
2. Use of a good (product) _______________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________  
3. Requisites of a producer of a good (product) _______________________________________ 
__________________________________________________________________________________
 
 4. Used encryption algorithms:                            N of a good category 
                                                                    from Annex 1 
 а) _______________________________________________________________________ 
____________________________________________________________________________ 
b) _______________________________________________________________________ 
_____________________________________________________________________________ c) ________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 
 
5. Presence of functional ability in a good (product), which is not described in a provided exploitation documents to the user ______________________________  
6. Period of validity of notification till "__" _____________ 20__. 
 7. Requisites of the applicant _________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 
 
8. Requisite of the document of a producer, who provided to the authority's representative the rights for drafting of notification (if nece ssary)  ___________________________________________ 
_____________________________________________________________________________ 
 
9. The date of adaptation of notification "__" _______________ 20__ .   
Place for Seal       ______________________________    __________________ 
                      (signa ture of applicant)           (Name) 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 356 - 
 
  ANNEX 16 
Additional Information on Trade Remedy Measures Applied in Kazakhstan and the 
Customs Union 
(i) Prior to the date of the entry into force of the Agreement of 25 January 2008, there were 
no trade remedy measures in place in Kazakhstan.  
(ii) On the date of the entry into force of the Agreement of 25 January 2008, there was one 
safeguard investigation in relation to accumulators in Kazakhstan, which has been initiated on 
8 June 2010.  The investigation had been comp leted without introduction of the safeguard 
measure due to the fact that the complainant did not satisfy the criteria of the 25% of the total 
production of the Customs Union.  
(iii) Currently, Kazakhstan applied at national level two safeguard measures against the 
imports of chocolate candies and cotton-wool.  
There are four safeguard and eight anti-dumping measures applied on a common customs 
territory of the CU.  
No. Product Type of measure  Period of application  
1. Nickel-based flat products 
of stainless steel Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from Brazil, China, Republic of Korea and South 
African Republic 25 Decembe r 2013  
2. Synthetic nylon filament Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from Ukraine 24 Septembe r 2013  
3. Bearing tubes Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from China 16 June 2013 
4. Some types of steel pipes Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from Ukraine 18 Novembe r 2015  
5. Fasteners Safeguard measure  17 March 2014 
6. Rolling-contact bearings  Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from China 20 January 2013 
7. Stainless steel tubes Safeguard measure  1 Novembe r 2014  
8. Caramel candies Safeguard measure  7 July 2014 
9. Steel forged rolls for 
rolling mills  Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from Ukraine 26 June 2014 
10. Rolled metal with 
polymeric coating Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from China 30 June 2017 
11. Activated carbons Safeguard measure  7 September 2014  
12. Graphite electrodes Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from India 25 January 2018 
(iv) Currently, four safeguard and four anti-dumping investigations are being conducted by the 
EEC.  
No. Product Type of investigation The CU Party, the 
company-resident of 
which requested the 
investigation Period of 
completion of 
investigation 
1. Light commercial 
automobiles Anti-dumping measure with rega rd to 
imports of this product from Germany, Italy, Poland and Turkey The Russian  Federation 16 July 2013  
2. Cold-rolled seamless 
stainless steel tubes Anti-dumping measure with regard to 
imports of this product from China The Russian Federation 16 July 2013  
3. Enameled iron baths Anti-dumping measure with regard to 
imports of this product from China The Russian Federation 16 June 2013  
4. Combine harvesters and 
modules Safeguard  The Russian Federation 6 July 2013  
5. Tableware and kitchenware 
made of porcelain Safeguard  The Russian Federation 3 September 2013  
6. Rolling-contact bearings Anti-dumping measure with regard to 
imports of this product from China The Russian Federation 18 Septembe r 2013 
7. Caramel Safeguard  The Russian Federation 28 Septembe r 2013 
8. Fabrics made of chemical 
fibers and yarns Safeguard  The Russian Federation 1 Octobe r 2013  
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 357 - 
 
  ANNEX 17 
Unified List of Products for which Mand atory Requirements are Established in 
the Customs Union 
1. Machinery and equipment. 
2. Low-voltage equipment. 
3. High-voltage equipment. 
4. Devices operating on gaseous fuels. 5. Equipment operating under excess 
pressure. 
6. Vessels working under pressure. 
7. Equipment for use in hazardous 
environments. 
8. Rides, equipment for children's 
playgrounds. 
9. Elevators. 10. Wheeled vehicles. 11. Tractors. 
12. Agricultural machinery. 
13. Machinery for forestry. 14. Tires. 15. Rolling stock of railways, including 
high-speed. 
16. Metro Rolling Stock. 17. Light rail vehicles and trams. 18. Objects of sea transport. 
19. Objects of inland waterway transport. 
20. Boats. 21. Buildings and facilities. 22. Building materials and products. 
23. Rail transport infrastructure, 
including high-speed. 
24. Underground railway (metro) 
infrastructure. 
25. Highways. 
26. Pyrotechnic compositions and goods 
containing them. 
27. Explosives for civilian use and 
products containing them. 
28. Production of light industry (ready-
made piece-goods, carpets, knitted goods, clothing and leather goods, 
shoes, furs and fur products). 29. Toys. 
30. Products for children and 
adolescents. 
31. Products for children care. 32. Cookware. 33. Products for sanitary and hygienic 
purposes. 
34. Perfumes and cosmetics. 35. Oral hygiene products. 36. Packaging. 
37. Personal protective equipment. 
38. Means of fire safety. 39. Fire extinguishing means. 40. Medical products. 
41. Sanitary products. 
42. Furniture products. 43. Chemical products. 44. Synthetic detergents. 
45. Household chemical goods. 
46. Paints and solvents. 47. Fertilizers. 48. Plant protection products. 
49. Petrol, diesel and marine fuel, jet fuel 
and heating oil. 
50. Alternative fuels. 51. Lubricants, oils and special fluids. 
52. Devices and systems of water, gas, 
heat, electricity. 
53. Devices and systems of oil and 
refined products. 
54. Food products. 
55. Alcoholic products. 56. Feed and feed additives. 57. Grain. 
58. Tobacco products. 
59. Hunting and sporting weapons, 
ammunition. 
60. Telecommunications facilities. 
61. Coal and its products. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 358 - 
 
  ANNEX 18 
SEZs Operating under Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011 
SEA/SEZ Establishing Legisl ation Time-frame Purpose 
Astana – 
New City Presidential Decree 
No. 645  of 29 June 2001  the period 
2002-2027 to facilitate the development of the 
capital of Kazakhstan by attracting investments, building public facilities, real estate and mo dern infrastructure 
based on advanced construction technologies, an d creation of 
competitive industries 
Aktau Seaport Presidential Decree 
No. 853  of 26 April 2002 the period 
2003-2028 to facilitate the development of the 
seaport infrastructure and its auxiliary services by attracting new investments, creating new jobs and introducing modern administration and management methods 
Innovation Technologies Park Presidential Decree 
No. 1166 of 18 August 2003 until 2028 to diversify the economy through the 
production of information technology (IT) products and the effective use of the country's scientific and technical innovation capacity 
Ontustyk Presidential Decree 
No. 1605 of 6 July 2005 until 1 July 2030 to diversify the economy by creating 
jobs and attracting foreign investment through the development of the textile industry (cotton) in southern Kazakhstan 
National Industrial Petrochemical Techno-Park (in Atyrau oblast) Presidential Decree 
No. 495  of 19 December 2007 until 
31 December 2032 to develop and implement 
"breakthrough" inve stment projects 
aimed at developing an internationally-
competitive deep hydrocarbon processing and high value-added petrochemica l products 
Burabai (in the 
Akmola oblast) Presidential Decree 
No. 512 of 15 January 2008 until 
1 December 2017 to develop an effici ent and competitive 
tourism infrastructure 
Saryarka (in Karaganda oblast) Decree of the President 
No. 181 of 24 November 2011  until 
1 December 2036 to develop the metallurgical industry  
Pavlodar 
(in Pavlodar oblast) Decree of the President 
No. 186 of 29 November 2011  until 
1 December 2036 to develop chemical and  metallurgical 
industries  
Horgos-East Gates Decree of the President 
No. 187 of 29 November 2011 until 2035 to develop Kazakhstan's transport 
infrastructure and transit capacity through construction of logistics centre in the SEZ 
 
 
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 359 - 
 
  ANNEX 19(A) 
List of Goods, Works and Services Covere d by Government Proc urement by Auction 
1. Agriculture products, hunting products, agriculture and hunting services, other than live 
animals, products and services related to hunting, fishing and bird breeding. 
2. Forest and logging products, forestry and logging services.  
3. Fishing products, fish hatcheries and fi sh farms, services related to fishing. 
4. Coal and lignite, peat. 5. Crude oil and natural gas, services for their extraction, other than exploratory works. 6. Metallic ores. 
7. Stone, clay, sand and other types of minerals. 
8. Food products and beverage. 9. Tobacco and other products of the tobacco industry. 10. Textiles. 
11. Clothing, fur and fur goods, except for children's clothing. 
12. Leather and leather goods, saddler goods and footwear. 13. Wood, wood goods, cork, straw and plai ting materials, except for furniture. 
14. Pulp, paper, paperboard and articles thereof. 
15. Printed and published materials, except advertisements, drawings, designs, printed 
photos, souvenir and gift sets (pads and notebooks), election and referendum ballots. 
16. Coke ovens products. 17. Refined petroleum products, petroleum-refinery and pyrolysis gas, products of gas 
processing plants. 
18. Products of organic and inorganic synthesis. 19. Rubber and plastic products. 20. Other non-metallic mineral products, except for household and interior glass products, as 
well as non-structural non-refractory ceramic ware products. 
21. Production of metallurgical industry. 22. Metal products, except for machinery and equipment (other than nuclear reactors). 23. Machinery and equipment not included in ot her groups, except for weapons, ammunition 
and their parts, explosive devices and explosives for household purposes. 
24. Office, accounting and computing machinery. 25. Electric motors and electrical equipment, not included in other groups. 26. Equipment and instruments for radio, television and communication. 
27. Medical equipment, measuring equipment, photo and video equipment, clocks. 
28. Motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers, car bodies, parts and accessories for 
automobiles, garage equipment. 
29. Other vehicles except for trade and passenger ships, warships, aircraft and space vehicles, 
equipment and parts of aircraft. 
30. Finished products, except for jewelry, an d related products, musical instruments, games 
and toys, equipment for training processe s, textbooks and school equipment, craft 
products, artworks and collectibles, exposed film; human, animal and synthetic hair and 
articles thereof. 
31. Waste and scrap used as raw material. 32. Natural water and ice. 33. Construction services and construction projects, including major and minor repair, except 
for technically complicated construction projects (including major and minor repairs), a list 
of which is established in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on architecture, urban planning and construction activities.  
34. Trade services, services for maintenance and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles. 
35. Wholesale and commission trade services, exce pt for trade services of motor vehicles and 
motorcycles. 
36. Retail trade services. 37. Hotel and restaurant services. 
38. Land transport services, except for rail way transport services, underground services, 
pipeline transportation services. 
39. Water transport services. 40. Ancillary transport services and ancillary serv ices in the sphere of tourism and excursion, 
except for travel and tourist agencies services, other assistance services to tourists. 
41. Communications services, except for courier services, other than national post services, 
telecommunications services. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 360 - 
 
  42. Financial intermediation services, except for insurance and pension funding, bond issue 
services. 
43. Ancillary services to financial intermediation services, except for evaluation services. 44. Services related to real estate. 45. Services for the maintenance and repair of office equipment, electronic computers and 
other equipment used in conjunction with office equipment. 
46. Cleaning services. 47. Packaging services. 48. Sewage and waste disposal services, sanitation and other like services. 
49. Housing and communal services except for hairdressers, beauty salons and cosmetic 
medical institutions and funeral, burial and cremation services. 
50. Services related to the activities in the manufacturing sector, except for coke production 
services, refined petroleum products and nuclear fuel, furniture production services, 
equipment maintenance services, not included in this list. 
 
Source : Approved by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 339 dated 
19 March 2012 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 361 - 
 
  ANNEX 19(B) 
The List of Goods and Services for Daily or Weekly Needs which Are Purchased by 
Customers in Order to Ensure Non-stop Acti vity, as well as Procurement from a Single 
Source for the Period until Results of a Tender Are Announced, and the Agreement on 
Government Procurement Enters into Force 
1. Food stuffs. 
2. Fuels and lubricants. 
3. "Paper" A-4, A-3. 
4. Works on maintenance of roads in winter season 
5. Catering services. 
6. Services of burial of lonely citizens and citizens without relatives. 
7. Bath and laundry services. 
8. Motor transport services. 
9. Installation, assembly, repair and operation of means of traffic control. 
10. Service on maintenance of o ffice buildings:      
 (1) cleaning inside offices and facade of the building and in the surrounding area;  
 (2) urban land improvement and landscaping of surrounding area, and maintenance of 
  plants inside the buildings; 
 (3) sanitation inside of the buildings and in the surrounding area;    (4) removal of garbage and snow from the surrounding area;  
(5) custodial services, provision with signal systems and other devices for the 
protection of buildings, fire safety and in  the surrounding areas of the buildings. 
11. Communication services (including Internet, satellite, telephone, courier mail service). 
12. Services in support of information systems. 
13. Services on publication of information in the media. 
14. Services for the maintenance of fire fighting systems and air conditioning of server rooms. 
15. Services on hardware and software system-maintenance. 
16. Services for conduction of a scientific expertis e of draft laws, regulations and concepts of 
the draft laws. 
17. Services for the production of Collected Acts of central executive and other state bodies of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
Source : Approved by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 341 dated 
19 March 2012. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 362 - 
 
  ANNEX 19(C) 
The List of Commodity Exchange Goods and Minimum Limits of Provided Lots of  
Goods, which Are Realised through Commodity Exchange 
No. Short name of commodity Code of CU FEACN Minimum 
limits of 
provided lots 
of goods 
1 2 3 4 
1. Fresh or refrigerated potato: others 0701 90 900 0 60 tonnes 
2. Wheat and meslin:  other dinkel wheat, soft wheat and other 
meslin** 1001 91 990 0, 
1001 99 000 0 600 tonnes 
3. Barley: others** 1003 90 000 0 600 tonnes 
4. Crashed or non-crashed soybean: others 1201 90 000 0 600 tonnes 
5. White sugar 1701 99 100 60 tonnes 
6. Portland cement, aluminous 
cement, slag cement, su persulphate and like 
hydraulic cements, either in manu factured form or in the form 
of clinkers 2523 60 tonnes 
7. Coal, briquettes, fuels pellet and similar solid 
fuels manufactured from stone coal* 2701 3,000 tonnes 
8. Lignite or brown coal, 
agglomerated or not agglomerated, except for jet* 2702 3,000 tonnes 
9. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
propane 2711 12 100 tonnes 
10. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
butanes 2711 13 100 tonnes 
11. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
others 2711 19 000 0 100 tonnes 
12. Cotton fiber, carded or combed 5203 00 000 0 600 tonnes 
* Applied for the procurement by municipal juridical persons since 1 January 2013 
** The list is not applied to  State resources of grain 
Source : Approved by the  Resolution of the Government of th e Republic of Kazakhstan No. 375 dated 
6 April 2011.  
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 363 - ANNEX 20 
Rates for Works and Services Rendered by th e National Intellectual Property Institute 
Part I. Section I - For patenting inventions, utility models, industrial designs,  selection achievements 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 
12% VAT) Juridical person Natural 
person Juridical 
person Natural person Individual (the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled veterans, 
invalids, students of 
high schools, 
vocational schools, 
technical secondary 
schools, higher 
schools) 
25% 10% 10% 5% 2% 
1. For application to issue a title of protection including formal 
examination:       
for inventions 15,971.2     1,597.1 798.6 319.4 
for utility models 14,425.6     1,442.6 721.3 288.5 
for industrial designs 11,334.4     1,133.4 566.7 226.7 
for selection achievements 10,292.8     1,029.3 514.6 205.9 
In case of payment for application after the set period but not later than two months after its expiration, the amount of the p ayment increases by 20%: 
for inventions 19,165.4   1,916.5 958.3 383.3 
for utility models 17,310.7   1,731.1 865.5 346.2 
for industrial designs 13,601.3   1,360.1 680.1 272.0 
for selection achievements 12,351.4   1,235.1 617.6 247.0 
2. For processing an international application at the recipient authority 
and forwarding it to the International bureau and International searching authority  8,243.2      
3. For checking the Eurasian application in terms of compliance with 
formal requirements and forwarding to the Eurasian patent office 3,091.2      
4. For conducting examination as to substance of an application for 
invention: 62,854.4   6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1 
4.1 additionally for each extra invention 50,489.6     5,049.0 2,524.5 1,009.8 
 When application contains a report on the international search or a preliminary examination report prepared by one of the inte rnational authorities in compliance with international 
agreements to which Kazakhstan is a member, the cost of examination as to substance decreases by 15%. 
When application contains a report on informational search perf ormed in compliance with paragraph 11 of Article 22 of the Paten t Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the cost of 
examination as to substance decreases by 60%. 
5. For conducting examination as to substance of an industrial design 
application: 31,427.2   3,142.7 1,571.4 628.5 
 additionally for each extra industrial design  2,060.8   206.1 103.0 41.2 
6. For introducing changes and amendments to the materials of the 
application by the applicant's initiative 3,091.2   309.1 154.6 61.8  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 364 -  Works and services Rate 
(including 
12% VAT) Juridical person Natural 
person Juridical 
person Natural person Individual (the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled veterans, 
invalids, students of 
high schools, 
vocational schools, 
technical secondary 
schools, higher 
schools) 
25% 10% 10% 5% 2% 
6.1  - for introducing changes and amendments of the same kind into the 
series of the same applicant's applications per each subsequent application 2,060.8   206.1 103.0 41.2 
7. For transforming an invention application into an utility model 
application or an utility model application into an invention application   8,243.2   824.3 412.2 164.9 
8. For preparation of documents to issue the title of protection and the 
author's certificate and for publication of data about such issuance  31,427.2   3,142.7 1,571.4 628.5 
9. For preparation of documents to issue duplicate of the title of 
protection and publication of data about such issuance  20,608.0   2,060.8 1,030.4 412.2 
10. For preparation of documents to issue duplicate of the author's 
certificate and publication of data about such issuance 10,292.8   1,029.3 514.6 205.9 
11. For preparation of documents to re-register the title of protection as a 
result of amending errors made du e to the applicant's fault and for 
publication of data about such re-registration 16,486.4   1,648.6 824.3 329.7 
12. For introducing changes and amendments into the State registers and 
the titles of protection for inventions, utility models, industrial designs, and selection achievements 11,334.4 2,833.6 1,133.4     226.7 
12.1  - for introducing changes and amendments of the same kind and 
same owner per each ti tle of protection  3,091.2 772.8 309.1     61.8 
13. For statement from the State registers of inventions, utility models, 
industrial designs, and selection achievements (per each item)  3,091.2 772.8 309.1     61.8 
14. For preparation of documents to extend the validity period of a title of 
protection and for publication of data about the extension of             
14.1  - preliminary patent for invention, patent for utility model and   
industrial design; 2,060.8 515.2 206.1     41.2 
14.2  - patent for invention 7,212.8 1,803.2 721.3     144.3 
14.3  - patent for selection achievement  515.2 128.8 51.5     10.3 
15. For preparation of documents to renew validity of a patent for 
invention, utility model, industrial design and for publication of data about such renewal  10,292.8     1,029.3 514.6 205.9 
 
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 365 - Part I. Section II - For registration of trademarks, appella tions of origin, and right to use appellation of origin 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 
12% VAT)      
16. For application to register a trademark and appellation of origin 
including formal examination 11,334.4           
 In case of payment for application after the set period but no t later than two months after its expiration, the amount of the payment increases by 20%: 
17. For application to register a collective trademark 
 In case of payment for application after the set period but no t later than two months after its expiration, the amount of the payment increases by 20%: 
18. For complete examination of the application to register a trademark 
up to 3 classes of the International Classification of Goods and 
Services: 22,668.8      
18.1  - additionally for each extra class if more than three  5,152.0      
19. For examination of the application materials to register and/or grant a 
right to use an appellations of origin  14,425.6      
20. For dividing a trademark applicat ion into classes by the applicant's 
initiative 8,243.2      
21. For transforming a trademark application into an application for a 
collective trademark and vice versa  10,292.8           
22. For processing an international application at the recipient authority 
and forwarding it to the International bureau  6,182.4           
23. For examination related to the acknowledgment of a trademark as 
well-known including publication  69,036.8 Excluded by the Order of the Vice Chairm an of the Intellectual Property Rights Committee 
of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 23 June 2010 
24. For preparation of documents to issue trademark certificates, 
certificates of right to use an appella tion of origin or their duplicates 
and for publication of data about such issuance  11,334.4           
25. For changes and amendments into State registers, trademark 
certificates and certificates of right to use an appellation of origin 11,334.4           
25.1  - for introducing one-type changes and amendments into the State 
register and the trademark certificate of the same owner per each 
certificate  3,091.2           
26. For statement from State registers of trademarks/service marks and 
appellations of origin (per each item) 3,091.2           
27. For preparation of documents to extend the validity period of a 
trademark certificate and for publication of data about such extension 
for three classes: 22,668.8           
27.1  - additionally per each extra class if more than three  11,334.4           
 In case of extension of the validity period of a certificate after the set period but not later than six months after its expi ration, the amount of the payment increases by 50%: 
28. For preparation of documents to extend the validity period of right to 
use an appellations of origin and for publication of data about such extension 22,668.8           
 In case of extension of the validity period of a certificate after the set period but not later than six months after its expi ration, the amount of the payment increases by 50%: 
Source : Agreed with the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Regula tion of Natural Monopolies and Pr otection of Competition on 16 August 2004.   
 Approved by the Order of the Chairman of the Intellectual Prop erty Rights Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic  of Kazakhstan No. 37-p dated 
27 May 2004.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 366 - Part II. Section I - Patenting inventions, utility mo dels, industrial designs,  selection achievements 
 
 Works and services Rate (including 
12% VAT) Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural person 
(the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled 
veterans, 
invalids, students 
of high schools, 
vocational 
schools, technical 
secondary 
schools, higher 
schools ) Juridical 
person/ 
natural 
person Natural 
person Natural person 
(the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled 
veterans, 
invalids, 
students of high 
schools, 
vocational 
schools, 
technical 
secondary 
schools, higher 
schools ) 
50% 25% 15% 10% 5% 2% 
1. Application inquiring the conventional priority after the 
law-established period including making a formal examination  21,123.2       2,112.3 1,056.2 422.5 
2. Entering into a national phase of the international application upon 
expiration of the period fixed by the Patent Cooperation Treaty 5,152.0       515.2 257.6 103.0 
3. Extending the submission period for translated documents of an 
application into the state and Russian languages  5,152.0       515.2 257.6 103.0 
4. Pre-schedule beginning of a formal  examination of an application for 
a patent item  11,334.4       1,133.4 566.7 226.7 
5. Information search to identify the state-of the-arts level with the 
purpose of assessing the patentability of an invention or utility model 37,721.6       3,772.2 1,886.1 754.4 
6. Extension of the submission periods for requested documents per 
each month:               
6.1  - up to 6 month from the date of expiration of the set period  5,152.0       515.2 257.6 103.0 
6.2  - from 6 to 12 months from the date of expiration of the set period  10,214.4       1,021.4 510.7 204.3 
7. Renewal of the period omitted by an applicant  30,912.0       3,091.2 1,545.6 618.2 
8. Preparation and certification of a copy of an application (priority 
document) 2,060.8 1,030.4 515.2 309.1 - -   
9. Production of a copy of an application  1,030.4 515.2 257.6 154.6 - -   
10. Keeping a title of protection in force within the set periods and for 
publication of data about such keeping   See Annex 2 
For keeping a title of protection in force after the set period but not later than six months after its expiration, the amount of payment increases by 50% 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 367 - Part II. Section II - Registration of tr ademarks, appellations of origin, the ri ght to use an appellation of origin 
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT)       
11. Extension of the period to answer the enquiry per each month 5,152.0             
12. Entering an opposition for de cision on preliminary denial in 
registration  16,486.4             
13. Extending of the submission period for entering an opposition for 
examination decision per each month  4,121.6             
14. Preparation and certification of a copy of an application (priority 
document) 1,030.4             
15. Renewal of periods omitted by an applicant  30,912.0             
16. Introduction of changes and amendments to the materials of an 
application by the initiative of an applicant:  8,243.2             
16.1  - for one-type changes and amendments into the series of the 
applications introduced by the same applicant per each following application  3,091.2             
 
Part II. Section III - Examination of agreemen ts on assignment of titles of protection , licence (sub-licence) agreements to emp loy industrial 
property items, protection titles pledging  agreements, package business licence agre ements (only regarding the protected indust rial 
property items) 
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT)       
17. Examination of agreement on assi gnment of title of protection per 
each title of protection provided by the agreement and for publication of data about the agreement registration  39,155.2             
18. Examination of agreement on assignment of the right to obtain a 
preliminary patent  7,280.0 Excluded by the Order of the vice Chairman of the Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010 
  19. Examination of licence (sub-licence) agreement to employ an 
industrial property item, protection title pledging agreement, 
agreement to issue a package business licence (in respect to protected items of industrial property) and for publication of data about the agreement registration:   
19.1  - in respect to one item of industrial property  39,155.2 
19.2  - in respect to a group of indust rial property items additionally per 
each extra item 8,243.2 
20. Introduction of changes into the registered assignment agreement, 
licence (sub-licence) agreement, pledging agreement, package business licence agreement  11,334.4 
21. Application to issue an open licence and publication of data about 
such application  11,334.4 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 368 - Part II. Section IV - Preparation of documents to regi ster patent agents of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT)       
22. Preparation of documents to issue a certificate of a patent ag ent excluded Excluded by the Order of the Vice Chairman of th e Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010 23. Publication of data about regist ration of a patent agent 4,121.6 
24. Publication of changes and additions on data about a patent agent 2,240.0 
 
Part II. Section V - Preliminary works to co nsider answers at the Board of appeal of the Intellectual Property Rights Committee  
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT) Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural person 
(the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)    
10% 5% 2%    
25. For carrying out the preliminary works (including expenses to 
participate in the meeting of the Board of Appeal of independent 
experts) to create materials required for consideration of objections against denial to issue:                
25.1  - preliminary patent to invention or industrial design  8,254.4 825.4 412.7 165.1       
25.2  - patent to invention, industrial design or selection achievement  53,592.0 5,359.2 2,679.6 1,071.8       
25.3  - patent to utility model 13,406.4 1,340.6 670.3 268.1       
26. For carrying out preliminary works (including expenses to participate 
in the meeting of the Board of Appeal of independent experts) to create materials required for consideration of objections against denial to issue a protection title for:                
26.1  - preliminary patent to invention or industrial design  8,254.4 825.4 412.7 165.1       
26.2  - patent to invention, industrial design or selection achievement  53,592.0 5,359.2 2,679.6 1,071.8       
26.3  - patent to utility model 13,406.4 1,340.6 670.3 268.1       
27. For carrying out preliminary works to create materials required for 
consideration at the Board of Appeal of objections against decisions to deny a registration of trademarks/appellations of origin, acknowledgement a trade mark as well-known, registration of assignment agreement for the right to obtain a protection title, assignment agreement for the protection title, licence (sub-licence) agreement to employ an industrial property item, agreement to 
pledge the protection title, agreement to issue a package business 
licence  6,193.6             
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 369 - Part II. Section VI - General services 
 Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
29. Oral consultations 772.8 1 page           
30. Written consultations concerning the legislation of Kazakhstan on 
protection of industrial property, submission and consideration of international applications in compliance with the Patent Cooperation 
Treaty; submission of Eurasian applications  1,030.4 per 1 hour           
31. Publication of advertisements on the issues of industrial property 
protection  1,030.4 1 page           
32. Upon request of an applicant organization of expert negotiations or 
meetings with participation of the applicant or his/her representative  515.2 per 1 cm2            
33. Patent and information search  1, 545.6 per 1 hour           
34. Search within the works of registered items of industrial property  - agreed price           
34.1  - per each subsequent IP item indicated in the request of one 
applicant 3,696.0             
  Preparation of a duplicate Annex to the title of protection for an 
invention, utility model, industrial design, and selection achievement  918.4             
34.2 Drawing up a petition to the PC T application including the duties 
calculation sheet  5,152.0   1,545.6 772.8 103.0     
35. Drawing up an application to lower the duty for PCT application for 
individuals  2,060.8             
36. Drawing up a requirement for international preliminary examination 
of the PCT application including the duties calculation sheet  515.2             
37. Drawing up a petition for Eurasian application including the duties 
calculation sheet  1,030.4             
38. Transfer, upon the applicant's request, a certified copy of one 
national application to the International Bureau  515.2             
39. Request on assignment of the right to obtain a trade mark/service 
mark certificate  2,060.8             
39.1  14,560.0             
40. Preliminary search of a designation in the trademarks database and 
designations applied to be registered  in the context of classes of IGSC 
goods and services indicated by the applicant:                 
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 370 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
40.1  - for one verbal or graphic designation per one IGSC class within a 
monthly period  10,292.8             
40.2   - for simultaneous search of  several verbal designations being 
transliterations of each other by coinciding classes, additionally per 
each extra designation (within preliminary search based on a 
combined designation, factor 2 is applied)  515.2             
40.3  - per each extra IGSC class (factor 2 is applied for an urgent search 
within 10 days upon the customer's request)  1,030.4             
40.4  - supplying of printouts on designations shown in the search report  
including reproduction of the mark, data about the mark's owner, and 
a list of goods and services according to the IGSC classes additionally per each designation shown in the search report  1,030.4             
40.1 Carrying out of search works for registered trademarks (except for 
search for identity and similarity)   4,368.0             
    - per each subsequent trade mark indicated in one applicant's 
request  1,097.6             
40.2 Upon applicant's request advancement of a complete examination of 
a trademark application  22,400.0             
40.3 Preparation of a duplicate Annex to a trademark certificate / 
appellations of origin certificate 5,600.0             
41. Upon applicant's request urgent examination of an application 
suggested to be submitted for the international registration  10,292.8             
42. Preparation of an international tr ademark application according to the 
Madrid Agreement 5,152.0             
42.1 Preparation of an application to introduce changes into an 
international application submitted according to the Madrid Agreement  5,152.0             
   - preparation of one-type applications from one applicant additionally 
per each extra application  2,576.0             
43. Preparation of a list of goods and services for international application 
in compliance with the IGSC and translation of each item into French 1,030.4             
44. Bringing, upon the applicant's request, of a trademark to the level of 
available standards with the help of computers 2,060.8             
45. Classification of a designation according to the IGSC upon the 
applicant's request   1,030.4 per 1 class            
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 371 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
46. Legal assistance in development of contractual terms of agreement 
on assignment of titles of protection and of licence agreement for their employment  20,585.6 
Excluded by the Order of the vice Chairman of the Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010 47. Certification of signatures of indi viduals being a party or parties of the 
agreement  515.2 
48. Preparation and certification, within one month, of a copy of 
assignment agreement, licence agreement, or pledge agreement (provided their owner submits the original agreements)  1,030.4 
48.1  - per each subsequent copy under condition that all copies are 
prepared at the same time (for urgent copies (up to 15 days) upon 
the applicant's request, the rate increases by 50%)  515.2 
49. Prolongation, upon a written request of the applicant, of the 
submission period to answer the enquiry in respect to an assignment agreement, licence agreement, or a pledge agreement after the set period has expired  515.2 
50. Renewal of the submission period to answer the enquiry in respect to 
an assignment agreement, licence agreement, or a pledge agreement when omitted by the applicant  5,152.0 
51. Publication, upon the request of a party (parties) of the registered 
agreement, of data about its cancellation  515.2 
52. Carrying out of various search works in the registers of registered 
assignment agreements or licence agreements  1,030.4 
Excluded by the Order of the vice Chairman of the Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010  53. Supervision, upon the request of licensee, of the legal status of the 
title of protection for industrial property item and notification about a pre-schedule termination of this document  1,030.4 
54. Sale of bulletins, manuals, and methodological materials published by 
the National Intellectual Property Institute  (per one pcs) - agreed price           
55. Search of patent documentation:               
55.1  - numerical search 20.2 1 document           
55.2  - title search 51.5 1 document           
56. Sale of complete descriptions of inventions in electronic format 
(through Internet) 2,060.8 1 МB           
57. Sale of databases of pre-patents and pate nts of Kazakhstan:               
57.1  - a full-text database Patents of Kazakhstan (discount of 30% for 
educational institutions)  30,912.0              
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 372 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
57.2  - a bibliographic database Patents of Kazakhstan for the entire past 
period (free of charge for those who have bought the full-text database) 18,547.2 1 year           
57.3  - annual bibliographic database Patents of Kazakhstan 6,182.4 1 year           
58. Analysis of the patent and legal literature fund including selection of 
documents (per one subject matter)  - agreed price           
59. Making annotated subject lists on the matters of intellectual property 
protection (per one list) - agreed price           
60. Subscription service on supply of information about inventions of 
Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, EAPO according to subject requests and granting of copies of abstracts (1 request for 1 group of 
IPC for six months) - agreed price           
61. Supply of information based on statistical data on titles of protection 
(1 request)  - agreed price           
62. Producing hard copies of docu ments of the National Intellectual 
Property Institute:               
62.1  - one page sheet 10.1 1 page           
62.2  - two page sheet 20.2 -//-           
62.3  - classifiers 30.2 -//-           
63. Producing hard copies of documents of a customer:               
63.1  - one page sheet 10.1 1 page           
63.2  - two page sheet 15.7 -//-           
64. Producing  copies of documents for machine-readable media 51.5 1 file           
65. Printing out of documents  10.1 1 page           
66. Filling in application forms and request forms   1,030.4 1 document           
67. Supply of application forms  20.2 1 form           
68. Investigation of engineering objects and technologies in terms of 
patent clearance (non-infringement) (1 subject, 1 country) - agreed price           
69. Investigation and analysis of trends in the state-of-the-arts 
development                
69.1  - by titles of protection of Ka zakhstan and scientific and technical 
literature    agreed price           
69.2  - by titles of protection of other countries and scientific and technical 
literature  - agreed price           
70. Patent and legal analysis of scientific research being of special 
significance to elaborate recommendations for the interested persons (1 subject) - agreed price           
71. Consultative assistance at court examinations related to infringement 
of industrial property rights  - agreed price            
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8  
 
- 373 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
72. Conduct of internships  on the matters of legal protection of IP items 
(preparation and examination of applications and agreements, performance of search, methods of work with patent documentation) up to 6,840 1 person/day           
73. Re-setting off previously paid payment or rate 515.2 document           
74. Accounting and control of payments from deposit sub-accounts of 
legal entities and individuals  112.0 per 1 
application or a title of protection           
75. Confirmation of receipt by the National Intellectual Property Institute 
of the relevant payment 56.0 per each 
receipt           
Source : Approved by the Order of the Chairman of the Intellectual Prop erty Rights Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republi c of Kazakhstan No. 51-p dated 
16 August 2004.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 374 - 
 
  Annex 2 to Part II of the Price List (Bill of Fare) for Works and Services Rendered by the 
National Intellectual Property Institute 
- Amount of payment for keeping the titles of protection in force: 
1. A title of protection for an invention 
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date 
of application Rate (including 
12% VAT Juridical person Natural person Natural person (the Great 
Patriotic War participants 
and disabled veterans, 
invalids, students of high 
schools, vocational 
schools, technical 
secondary schools, 
higher schools ) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4  
Second 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4  
Third 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4  
Forth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0  
Fifth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0  
Sixth 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6  
Seventh 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6  
Eighth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0  
Ninth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0  
Tenth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0  
Eleventh 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1  
Twelfth 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257,1  
Thirteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9  
Fourteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9  
Fifteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9  
Sixteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1  
Seventeenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1  
Eighteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1  
Nineteenth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twentieth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty first 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty second 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty third 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty forth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty fifth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
 
2. A patent for utility model  
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date 
of application Rate (including 
12% VAT) Juridical person Natural person Natural person 
(the Great Patriotic War 
participants, invalids, 
etc.) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7  
Second 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7  
Third 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7  
Forth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5  
Fifth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5  
Sixth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5  
Seventh 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5  
Eighth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 375 - 
 
  3. A title of protection for an industrial design 
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date 
of application Rate (including 
12% VAT Juridical person Natural person Natural person (the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, invalids, 
etc.) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7  
Second 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7  
Third 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7  
Forth 16,486.4 1,648.6 824.3 329.7  
Fifth 16,486.4 1,648.6 824.3 329.7  
Sixth 19,577.6 1,957.8 978.9 391.6  
Seventh 19,577.6 1,957.8 978.9 391.6  
Eighth 20,585.6 2,058.6 1,029.3 411.7  
Ninth 20,585.6 2,058.6 1,029.3 411.7  
Tenth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0  
Eleventh 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7  
Twelfth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7  
Thirteenth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7  
Fourteenth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7  
Fifteenth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7  
4. A patent for a selection achievement 
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date of 
application Rate (including 
12% VAT Juridical person Natural person Natural person (the Great 
Patriotic War participants, 
invalids, etc.) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4  
Second 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4  
Third 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4  
Forth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0  
Fifth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0  
Sixth 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6  
Seventh 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6  
Eighth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0  
Ninth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0  
Tenth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0  
Eleventh 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1  
Twelfth 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1  
Thirteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9  
Fourteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9  
Fifteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9  
Sixteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1  
Seventeenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1  
Eighteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1  
Nineteenth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twentieth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty first 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty second 125,708,8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty third 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty forth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty fifth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2  
Twenty sixth - thirtieth  140,616.0 14,061.6 7,030.8 2,812.3
 
Thirty first - 
thirty five 156,240.0 15,624.0 7,812.0 3,124.8  
Thirty six - forty 171,864.0 17,186.4 8,593.2 3,437.3  
Forty first - 
forty five 187,488.0 18,748.8 9,374.4 3,749.8  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 376 - 
 
  ANNEX 21 
Preferential Trade Agreements 
I. CIS Free Trade Area  Basic Agreements 
- Agreement on Establishing Free Trade Area (15 April 1994); 
- Protocol on Amending the Agreements on Establishing Free Trade Area of 15 April 1994 
(2 April 1999); 
- Protocol on the Rules for Conducting of Consultations on Phasing-Out of Exemptions from 
Free Trade Regime of the Parties to the Agreement on Establishing Free Trade Area 
(24 December 1999); and 
- Agreement on Free Trade Area (18 October 2011) – signed by following CIS countries:  
Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Ukraine. 
Bilateral Free Trade Agreements Concluded under the CIS 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of Azerbaijan Republic  of 10 June 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan an d the Government of the Azerbaijan Republic 
of 10 June 1997 - not effective, new Protocol signed; 
- Protocol on Amending the Free Trade Agreem ent between the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Azerbaijan Republic of 10 June 1997 
(24 May 2005) - effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Armenia of 20 September 1999 – effective, will be renounced after the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  A r m e n i a  o f  20 September 1999 - not effective, terms ended; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Belarus (23 September 1997) – effective, will be renounced 
after the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Kyrgyz Republic of 22 J une 1997 – effective, will be renounced after 
the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan an d the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic of 
22 June 1997 – effective, will be renounced after the Agreement on FTA of 
18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Moldova of 26 May 1995 – effective, will be renounced after 
the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan an d the Government of the Republic of Moldova 
of 26 May 1995 – effective, will be renounced after the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Russian Federation of 22 October 1992 – effective, will be renounced after the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Russian Federation 
of 22 October 1992 - not effective; 
- Protocol on Establishment of Free Trade Regime without exemptions and restrictions 
between the Republic of Kazakhstan and th e Russian Federation of 20 January 1995 - 
effective, will be renounced after the Agreem ent on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 377 - 
 
  - Amendment of 23 December 1998 to the Protoc ol on Establishment of Free Trade Regime 
without exemptions and restrictions between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 20 January 1995 - effective, will be renounced after the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Tajikistan of 22 November 1995 - effective, will be 
renounced after the Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  
Tajikistan of 22 November 1995 – effective, will be renounced after the Agreement on FTA 
of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p ub l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Uzbe kistan of 2 June 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  Uzbekistan of 2 June 1997 - effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of Ukraine of 17 September 1994 – effective, will be renounced after the 
Agreement on FTA of 18 October 2011 is effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of Ukraine of 
17 September 1994 – effective, will be renounced after the Agreement on FTA of 
18 October 2011 is effective; and 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of Georgia of 11 November 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of Georgia of 11 November 1997 – not effective, new Protocol signed;  
- Protocol on Amending the Free Trade Agreem ent between the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Government of Geor gia of 11 November 1997 (11 November 2004) 
- effective. 
Most Important Agreements Adopted within the CIS FTA: 
- Decision of the Council of the Heads of the Governments of the Commonwealth of 
Independent States on Rules of Origin (30 November 2000) - not effective; 
- Agreement on Rules of Origin in the Commonwealth of Independent States 
(20 November 2009) - effective; 
- Agreement on Re-export of Goods and th e Procedure of Licensing of Re-export 
(15 April 1994);  
- Agreement on Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic Activity of 
(3 November 1995); 
- Protocol on Amendments into Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity (4 June 1999); 
- Protocol on Amendments into Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity (8 October 1999); 
- Protocol to the Agreement on Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity (20 June 2000); and 
- Agreement on Measures for Prevention and Restraint of Fictitious Trade Marks and 
Geographical Indications (4 June 1999). 
II. The Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian Federation within the Eu rasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) 
EurAsEC Agreements that Form Legal Basis for the Customs Union: 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between the Republic of Belarus and the Russian 
Federation (6 January 1995); 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation (20 January 1995); 
- Agreement on the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space (26 February 1999); - Agreement on the Establishment of the EurAsEC (10 October 2000); WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 378 - 
 
  - Protocol on Mechanism of Applying Special Safeguards, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing 
Measures in Trade of the Customs Union Member-States (17 February 2000); 
- Protocol on Amendments and Addenda in the Protocol on Mechanism of Applying Special 
Safeguards, Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures in Trade of the Customs Union 
Member-States of 17 February 2000 (28 October 2003); 
- Agreement on the Fundamentals in Harmonization of Technical Regulations of the Eurasian 
Economic Community Parties (24 March 2005);  
- Protocol on Amendments to the Agreement on the Fundamentals in Harmonization of 
Technical Regulations of the Eurasian Economic Community Parties of 24 March 2005 
(12 December 2008); 
- Agreement on the Application of Unified Marking Identifying Commodities in Circulation in 
the Markets of EurAsEC Parties (19 May 2006); 
- Agreement on the Creation of Information Sy stem of the Eurasian Economic Community in 
the Field of Technical Regulation, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
(12 December 2008);  
- Agreement on Conducting of Coordinated Policy in the Sphere of Technical Regulating, 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of the EurAsEC of 25 January 2008; and 
- Protocol on Amendments and Addenda to the Agreement on the Establishment of the 
EurAsEC of 10 October 2000 (6 October 2007). 
Customs Union Agreements that Finalised the Creation of the CU: 
- Treaty on the Customs Union Commission of 6 October 2007; 
- Treaty on Creation of the Common Customs Territory and Formation of the Customs Union 
of 6 October 2007;  
- Protocol on the Order of Entering into Force of the International Agreements Forming the 
Legal Base of the Customs Union, Withdr awal from and Accession to Them of 
6 October 2007;  
- Agreement on Single Customs and Tariff Regulation of 25 January 2008; - Agreement on Export Customs Duties wi th regard to the Third Countries of 
25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Single Rules of Determinatio n of Country of Origin of 25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Single Non-Tariff Regulation Measures with regard to the Third Countries of 
25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Application of Special Safeguard, Anti-dumping and Countervailing 
Measures with regard to the Third Countries of 25 January 2008;  
- Agreement on Determination of Customs Valuation of Goods Transferred Across the 
Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008;  
- Agreement on Customs Statistics of External  and Mutual Trade in Goods of the Customs 
Union of 25 January 2008;  
- Agreement on Principles of Levying of In direct Taxes when Exporting and Importing 
Goods, Performing Works and Rendering Services in the Customs Union of 25 January 2008;  
- Agreement on Secretariat of the Customs Union Commission of 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Conditions and Mechanisms of Application of Tariff Quotas of 
12 December 2008; 
- Protocol on Conditions and Procedure for Use in Exceptional Cases of the Rates of Import 
Customs Duties Other than Common Customs Tariff Rates of 12 December 2008; 
- Protocol on Granting Tariff Concessions of 12 December 2008; - Protocol on Common System of Tariff Preferences of the Customs Union of 
12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Order of Calculation and Payment of Customs Fees in Member-States of the 
Customs Union of 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Order of Declaration of Goods of 12 December 2008; - Agreement on Order of Customs Clearance and Customs Control in Member-States of the 
Customs Union of 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Types of Customs Procedures and Customs Regimes of 12 December 2008; - Protocol on Unified Application of Rules for Determination of Customs Valuation of Goods 
Transferred Across the Customs Border of the Customs Union of 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Order of Declaration of Customs Value of Goods Transferred Across the 
Customs Border of the Customs Union of 12 December 2008; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 379 - 
 
  - Agreement on Order of Control over Accuracy  of Customs Valuation of Goods Transferred 
Across the Customs Border of the Customs Union of 12 December 2008; 
- Protocol on Exchange of Information Required for Customs Valuation and Control Over 
Customs Value of Goods between Customs Bodies of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on Rules Determining the Origin of Goods from the Developing and 
Least-Developed Countries of 12 December 2008; 
- Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Affecting Foreign Trade in 
Goods on the Common Customs Territory with Regard to the Third Countries of 
9 June 2009; 
- Agreement on the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Trade in Goods of 9 June 2009; - Protocol on the Status of the Center for Customs Statistics of the Commission of the 
Customs Union of 11 December 2009; 
- Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009; 
- Agreement on the Movement of Goods Subj ect to Mandatory Conformity Assessment on 
the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of 11 December 2009; 
- Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Accreditation of Certification (Conformity Assessment) 
Bodies and Testing Laboratories ( сenters) Performing Conformity Assessment of 
11 December 2009; 
- Agreement of the Customs Union on Sanitary Measures of 11 December 2009; - Agreement of the Customs Union on Veterinary and Sanitary Measures of 
11 December 2009; 
- Agreement of the Customs Union on Plant Quarantine of 11 December 2009; - Protocol on Amendments to  the Agreement on Principles of Levying of Indirect Taxes 
when Exporting and Importing Goods, Perfor ming Works and Rendering Services in the 
Customs Union of 25 January 2008  of 11 December 2009; 
- Protocol on Order of Levying of Indirect  Taxes and Mechanism of Control Over Their 
Payment on Exportation and Importation of Goods in the Customs Union of 11 December 2009; 
- Protocol on Order of Levying of Indirect  Taxes When Performing Works and Rendering 
Services in the Customs Union of 11 December 2009; and 
- Protocol on Order of Transferring of Foreign Trade Statistics and Mutual Trade Statistics 
Data of 11 December 2009. 
Agreement establishing the legal basis for the Si ngle Economic Space between the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation: 
- Agreement on Coordinated Macroeconomic Policy of 9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Coordinated Principles of Monetary Policy of 9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Common Principles and Rules of Competition of 9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Common Rules for Granting Industrial Subsidies of 9 December 2010; - Agreement on Common Rules of State Support of Agricultural Sector of 9 December 2010; - Agreement on State (Municipal) Procurement of 9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Common Principles of Regulation in the Sphere of Protection of Intellectual 
Property Rights of 9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Trade in Services and Investments of 9 December 2010; - Agreement on Establishing Conditions on Financial Markets for Free Movement of Capital of 
9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Legal Status of Natural Pe rsons and Members of Their Families of 
19 November 2010; 
- Agreement on Coordinated Principles on Counteraction to Illegal Labor Migration from 
Third Countries of 19 November 2010; 
- Agreement on Common Principles and Rules of Regulation of Activities of Natural 
Monopolies of 9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Regulation of Access to the Se rvices of Railway Transport, Including Basics 
of Tariff Policy of 9 December 2010; 
- Agreement on Uniform Rules and Principles of Technical Regulation in the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and th e Russian Federation of 18 November 2010; 
- Agreement on Rules of Access to Services of Natural Monopolies in the Sphere of Electro 
Energy, including Basics of Pricing and Tariff Policy of 19 November 2010; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 380 - 
 
  - Agreement on Organization, Management , Functioning and Development of Common 
Markets of Oil and Oil Products of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 9 December 2010; and 
- Agreement on Rules of Access to the Services of Natural Monopolies in the Sphere of Gas 
Transportation, Including Basics of Price and Tariff Formation of 9 December 2010. 
III. Other Bilateral FTAs 
- The Free Trade Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Government of the Republic of Serbia of 7 October 2010 (entered into force on 10 January 2012). 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 381 - 
 
  ANNEX 22 
The List of Spheres where State Enterprises could be Established 
1. public utility services for population (energy, gas, water, heat supply and burial of 
communal wastes, creation and maintenance of waste landfills); 
2. creation of woodland-park, green and protection zones with the restricted regime of nature 
use and forest planting; 
3. activities maintaining the functions of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
Administration of the President of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and its departments and 
diplomatic service authorities of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
4. maintenance of state-owned automobile roads; 
5. public healthcare; public high  and post-graduate education; 6. operation of public sports and fitness entities, culture and leisure parks; 7. scientific researches;  
8. maintenance of the state land cadastre, information databases concerning subsurface and 
subsurface use, state reserves of ecological information and state cadastres of natural resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan, state register of regulatory legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
9. maintenance, operation, and safety of wate r management systems, and facilities which are 
in state ownership; 
10. plant protection and quarantine, and phytosan itary expertise of production subject to plant 
quarantine;  
11. scientific research, preservation, restoratio n, re-creation, repair and adjustment of 
monuments of history and culture; 
12. activity of a sea port; 13. aero navigation services to users of air space of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
14. formation and storage of the state commodity reserves; 
15. economic and business activities in the sp here of technical regulation and metrology; 
16. production activities in the sphere of the criminal-prosecution system and organization of 
employment of prisoners; 
17. performance of functions on: 
- reference function on diagnostics of animal diseases; 
- epizootic monitoring of diseases of wild animals in the Republic of Kazakhstan; - maintenance of National Collection of Deposited Strains of Microorganisms; 
- registration testing, approbation of veterina ry specimens, feed additives, as well as 
control of series (lots) of drugs at their reclamation; 
- state monitoring, references on provision of food security; - monitoring of safety of veterinary  drugs, feeds, and feed additives; 
- veterinary measures against extremely hazardous and enzootic animal diseases; 
- identification of agricultural animals; - provision of services on artificial insemination of animals; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 382 - 
 
  - provision of services on transportation (delivery), storage of veterinary preparation 
against extremely hazardous and enzootic animal diseases, as well as transportation (delivery) of items (means) and attributes of veterinary purpose for conducting identification of agricultural animals; 
- maintenance of animal burial sites (biothermical pits), slaughter sites, built by local 
executive bodies of corresponding administrative territorial units; 
- trapping and extermination of stray dogs and cats. 
18. liquidation (termination, utilization, burial) of weapons, military equipment and other not 
used military property, leasing of defence objects, selling (including exports) and 
purchasing (including imports) of weapon, military equipment, ammunition, their spare 
and component units, production, equipment and corresponding technology of double application for Armed Forces, other troops and military units of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
19. liquidation and conservation of state-owned accident-risk inactive mines and coal 
enterprises, under the list determined by the Government, and also liquidation of consequences of their activities; 
20. rendering and automatization of state services on "single window". 
21. performance of mountain rescue and other special operations in emergency and accident 
situations, protection from fire, flood and other natural disasters; 
22. pre-school education and training, additional education, technical, professional and 
post-secondary education; 
23. postgraduate education entities under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
24. work safety and protection of employment , social protection of population, except 
activities, performed by the authorised organization according to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on "Pension safety", culture and sports; 
25. protection, ensuring sustainable use, reproduction and breeding of fauna and flora spices 
for the purposes of preserving biological di versity and genetic stock, and protection of 
nature (zoological gardens, botanical gardens, dendrological parks), aviation work for protection and guarding of the forest reserves; 
26. performance of topographic-geodesic and cartographic works; 
27. rendering of special social services to persons (families) in a difficult life situation; 28. classification and providing for technical safety of vessels.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 383 - 
 
  ANNEX 23(A) 
Rates of Export Duties Currently Applied by Kazakhstan 
HS Number Description of Goods Duty Rate 
4101 Raw pelts of cattle (including buffalos) or animals of 
horse family (vapored or salted, dried, limed, pickled or 
conserved by other methods, but not tanned, not curried 
as parchment or without further processing), with hair or without hair, splitting or non-splitting.  20, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
4102  Raw pelts of sheep or lambs (vapored or salted, dried, 
limed, pickled or conserved by other methods, but not tanned, not curried as parchment or without further processing), woolly or non-woolly, splitting or non-splitting. 20, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
4103 Other raw skins (vapored or salted, dried, limed, pickled 
or conserved by other methods, but not tanned, not curried as parchment or without further processing), with hair or without hair, splitting or non-splitting. 20, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
5101 -  5104 00 000 0 Un-carded and uncombed wool. 10, but not less than   
€50 per 1,000 kg 
7204* Iron-and-steel waste and scrap; ferrous metal ingots for 
re-melting (charging ingots). 15, but not less than  
€20 per 1,000 kg 
7302 Ferrous metal products, used for railway lines and 
tram-lines:  rails, flange rail and rack rails, switch blades, point frogs, regulating rods and other cross connections, crossties, splice bars and base-plates, wedges, bedplates, hood joint bolts, bad plates and bracing wires, foundation slabs, cross bars and other details for connection and 
bonding of rails.  20, but not less than  
€20 per 1,000 kg  
7404 00 Copper waste and scrap. 30, but not less than  
€330 per 1,000 kg 
76  
 Aluminium and aluminium products 
Aluminium and beryllium ligature. 15, but not less than  
€100 per 1,000 kg  
8607 Parts of locomotives and motor-wags of trams and 
rolling-stocks.  20, but not less than  
€15 per 1,000 kg 
2709 00 900 9 Crude Oil Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 12 110 0 –  2710 12 900 9, 2710 20 900 0 Light distillates and products Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 110 0 –  2710 19 290 0, 2710 20 900 0 Middle distillates: for specific re-treatment processes; for 
chemical conversions during processes; except for indicated in sub-position 2710 19 110 0 for other aims Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 420 0 –  2710 19 480 0, 2710 20 110 0, 
2710 20 150 0, 
2710 20 190 0 Hard distillates:  gas oils Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 510 1, 
2710 19 510 9 –  
2710 19 550 9 Hard distillates:  liquid fuels Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 620 1 - 2710 19 680 9, 
2710 20 310 1, 2710 20 310 9, 2710 20 350 1, 2710 20 350 9, 2710 20 370 1, 2710 20 370 9, 2710 20 390 1, 
2710 20 390 9 Hard distillates:  liquid fuels Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2713 20 000 0 –  
2713 90 900 0 Bitumen Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 310 0 –  2710 19 350 0 Hard distillates:  gas oils Calculated with a specific 
formula 
* Rates of export customs duties not applied with respect to goods exported to the customs territory of the 
European Union countries, which were the countries of destination in these cases.  This treatment will be eliminated upon Kazakhstan' s accession to the WTO. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 384 - 
 
  ANNEX 23(B) 
Results of Negotiations on Export Duties Refe rred to in Paragraph [487] of this Report 
 
_______________ 
 HS category From the date of 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After one year 
starting  from 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After two years 
starting from 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After three years 
starting from Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO 
7204 Ferrous waste and scrap; remelting scrap ingots of iron or steel 15%, but not less 
than 15 euro per tonne 15%, but not less 
than 15 euro per tonne 10%, but not less 
than 10 euro per tonne 5%, but not less 
than 5 euro per tonne WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 385 - 
 
  APPENDIX 
 
[DRAFT DECISION 
 
ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
 
Decision of […] 
 
 The [Ministerial Conference] [General Council], 
  Having regard to  paragraph 2 of Article XII and pa ragraph 1 of Article IX of the 
Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (the "WTO Agreement"), and the 
Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed by the 
General Council (WT/L/93),  
 [ Conducting  the functions of the Ministerial Confer ence in the interval between meetings 
pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article IV of the WTO Agreement,]  
 Taking note  of the application of the Republic of Kazakhstan for accession to the 
WTO Agreement dated 29 January 1996, 
 
 Noting  the results of the negotiations directed toward the establishment of the terms of 
accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement and having prepared a Protocol on 
the Accession of Kazakhstan,  
 Decides  as follows: 
1. The Republic of Kazakhstan may accede to the WTO Agreement on the terms and conditions 
set out in the Protocol annexed to this Decision.  
 
_______________ 
 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 386 - 
 
  DRAFT PROTOCOL  
ON THE ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
Preamble 
 
 The World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as the "WTO"), pursuant to the 
approval of the [Ministerial Conference] [General Council] of the WTO accorded under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as the 
"WTO Agreement"), and the Republic of Kazakhstan,  
 
 Taking note of  the Report of the Working Party on the Accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement reproduced in document WT/ACC/KAZ/[…], dated […] 
(hereinafter referred to as the "Working Party Report"), 
 
 Having regard to  the results of the negotiations on the accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement,  
 
 Agree  as follows: 
PART I -  GENERAL 
 1. Upon entry into force of this Protocol pursuant to paragraph 8, the Republic of Kazakhstan 
accedes to the WTO Agreement pursuant to Article XII of that Agreement and thereby becomes a 
Member of the WTO.   
2. The WTO Agreement to which the Republic of Kazakhstan accedes shall be the 
WTO Agreement, including the Explanatory Notes to  that Agreement, as rectified, amended or 
otherwise modified by such legal instruments as may have entered into force before the date of entry into force of this Protocol.  This Protocol, which shall include the commitments referred to in 
paragraph [...] of the Working Party Report, shall be an integral part of the WTO Agreement. 
3. Except as otherwise provided for in paragraph […] of the Working Party Report, those 
obligations in the Multilateral Trade Agreements annexed to the WTO Agreement that are to be implemented over a period of time starting with the entry into force of that Agreement shall be 
implemented by the Republic of Kazakhstan as if it had accepted that Agreement on the date of its 
entry into force.  
4. The Republic of Kazakhstan may maintain a measure inconsistent with paragraph 1 of 
Article II of the GATS provided that such a measure was recorded in the list of Article II Exemptions 
annexed to this Protocol and meets the conditions of the Annex to the GATS on Article II Exemptions. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 387 - 
 
  PART II - SCHEDULES 
 5. The Schedules reproduced in the Annex to this Protocol shall become the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments annexed to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 
(hereinafter referred to as the "GATT 1994") and the Schedule of Specific Commitments annexed to 
the General Agreement on Trade in Services (hereinafter referred to as "GATS") relating to Kazakhstan.  The staging of the concessions and commitments listed in the Schedules shall be implemented as specified in the relevant parts of the respective Schedules. 
 
6. For the purpose of the reference in paragraph 6(a) of Article II of the GATT 1994 to the date 
of that Agreement, the applicable date in respect of the Schedule of Concessions and Commitments 
annexed to this Protocol shall be the date of entry into force of this Protocol. 
 
PART III - FINAL PROVISIONS 
 
7. This Protocol shall be open for acceptance, by signature or otherwise, by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan until [...] or such later date as may be  decided by the [Ministe rial Conference][General 
Council]. 
 
8. This Protocol shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the day upon which it shall 
have been accepted by Kazakhstan.  
 
9. This Protocol shall be deposited with the Director-General of the WTO.  The Director-General 
of the WTO shall promptly furnish a certified copy of this Protocol and a notification of acceptance by the Republic of Kazakhstan thereto pursuant to paragraph 7 to each Member of the WTO and to 
Kazakhstan.   
 
10. This Protocol shall be registered in accordance with the provisions of Article 102 of the 
Charter of the United Nations.   
 
 Done at […] this […] day of […] in a single copy in the English, French and Spanish 
languages, each text being authentic, except that a Schedule annexed hereto may specify that it is 
authentic in only one of these languages, and the Working Party Report is authentic in English only. 
 
 
_______________ 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.8 
 
- 388 - 
 
  ANNEX 
SCHEDULE […] – THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
Authentic only in the English language. 
(Circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/[…]/Add.1) 
_______________ 
SCHEDULE OF SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS ON SERVICES 
LIST OF ARTICLE II EXEMPTIONS 
Authentic only in the English language. 
(Circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/[…]/Add.2)] 
__________