G/SG/N/8/TUR/15  
G/SG/N/10/TUR/15  
G/SG/N/11/TUR/20  
 
26 June 2015  
(15-3304)  Page: 1/10  
Committee on Safeguards  Original: English  
 
 NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(B) OF THE  
AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS ON FINDING  
A SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT THEREOF  
CAUSED BY INCREASED IMPORTS 
 
NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 12.1(C) 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
 
NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9, FOOTNOTE 2  
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
TURKEY 
(Wallpaper and similar wallcoverings) 
The following notification, dated 23 June 2015, is be ing circulated at the request of the Delegation 
of Turkey. 
 
_______________ 
 
Concerning imports of wallpaper and similar wallcoverings, Turkey had notified the initiation of a 
safeguard investigation with WTO Document G/SG/N/6/TUR/20, dated 12 December 2014.   
Turkey hereby provides notification to the Committee on Safeguards of findings of serious injury or 
threat thereof caused by increased imports and notification of a proposed definitive safeguard measure. The public version of the investigation report (in Turkish) together with references and 
sources can be found at the followings internet address ( http://www.economy.gov.tr ) and at the 
followings tabs named respectively "Legislation /Imports/Trade Defense Policy/Safeguards/Ongoing 
Investigations/Wallpapers and Similar Wallcoverings:   
Consistent with Article 12.3 of the Agreement on Safeguards , Turkey is prepared to consult with 
those Members having a substantial interest as exporters of the products concerned.  
I. EVIDENCE OF SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT THEREOF CAUSED BY INCREASED 
IMPORTS 
A. Evidence of threat of serious injury 
In order to make a determination of serious injury or threat thereof to the domestic producer of 
the like product, an evaluation of all relevant fact ors of an objective and quantifiable nature having 
a bearing on the situation of the domestic industry has been undertaken. In this analysis, data submitted by the applicant companies whose share of  the total domestic production of the product 
subject to investigation is 70%.  
 1. Consumption 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Consumption 
(Tons - Indexed) 100 156 174 197 229 
 G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 2 - 
 
  The consumption index has been rising constantly during the period under consideration. The 
highest increase rate was recorded in 2011 and the consumption reached in 2014 a level that is 129 points higher than its level in 2010.   
2. Production 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Production 
(Tons - Indexed) 100 117 128 177 212 
 
The production of the domestic producers shows in crease during the period under consideration. 
While the production index was 100 in 2010, it increased by 17, 10 and 38 points respectively 
in 2011, 2012 and 2013 and reached its peak at 212 in 2014.  
 3. Domestic Sales 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Domestic Sales 
(Tons - Indexed) 100 98 144 235 304 
 
Domestic sales index increased during the investigation period except for 2011. It has reached its 
highest point in 2014 with 204 points increase compared to 2010.   
4. Capacity and Capacity Utilization Ratio (CUR) 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Capacity  
(Tons - Indexed) 100 100 200 200 200 
CUR  
(% - Indexed) 100 117 65 89 107 
 
Production capacity remained stable throughout the period under consideration except for one time increase in 2012. The reason of increase in 2012 is the entry of Armada in to the market and 
the consolidation of related data. Capacity utilization ratio (CUR) index, on the other hand, 
fluctuated during the investigation period parallel with production level. CUR index reached its peak at 117 points in 2011, declined to its lowest level of 65 points in 2012 and increased again in 2013 and 2014. 
 
5. Stocks  
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Stocks  
(Tons -Indexed) 100 114 150 217 366 
 
Stocks index shows significant increase during th e period of under consideration. It increased 
to 366 points in 2014.  
6. Employment 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Employment  
(Workers – Index) 100 100 222 239 261 
 
In 2010 and 2011, the data of employment inde x only shows the Halley's employment and it 
remained stable. But, after entering of Armada in to the market, it has increased gradually in the period under consideration and reached its peak at 261 in 2014. 
 G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 3 - 
 
  7. Labor Productivity 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Productivity 
(Tons/Worker - Indexed) 100 117 58 74 82 
 
Labor productivity index displayed a surge of 17 points in 2011 compared to 2010 as production increased while employment remained stable. However, productivity index showed a major 
decrease in 2012 as the production and employment increased substantially. Productivity improved 
again in 2014, but remained under its level in 2010.  8. Profitability 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Profitability 
(% - Indexed) 100 40 43 86 11 
 
Profitability remained positive throughout the period under investigation. But, there was a rapid deterioration in the profitability of the domestic producer in 2011. Following this year, profitability started to increase again in 2012 and 2013. However, in 2014, profitability declined to 11 which is 
its lowest point in the period under examination. 
 9. Conclusion 
 
Wallpaper and similar wallcoverings production an d consumption in Turkey have been increasing 
during the period under consideration. The production capacity of Halley remained stable but the 
total capacity doubled in 2012 due to the entry of Armada in to the market.  
 Furthermore, the capacity utilization ratio was 117 points, 65 points and 89 points respectively in 2011, 2012 and 2013 and it increased to 107 points in 2014. The domestic sales of the 
producers also increased in the investigation period, except 2011 and reached to 304 points 
in 2014. On the other hand, profitability index has deteriorated significantly in 2014.   
Taking into account all these factors, it is concluded that the domestic industry is exposed to 
threat of serious injury for the product subject to investigation.   
B. Causation Analysis 
In order to examine the existence of a causal li nk between increased imports and the threat of 
serious injury and in order to ensure that injury caused by other factors is not attributed to increased imports, the investigating authority analyzed the effects of the following factors: 
 
1. Analysis of Causation Factors  
a. Effect of Increased Imports 
Imports of the product subject to investigation increased constantly during the period under 
examination. In the first 2 years of the investigation period, a gradual increase was recorded and 
imports increased by 63% from 2010 to 2011. Alth ough there was a decrease in the increasing 
rate of imports, it continued to increase by about 9% between 2011 and 2013. Then, the huge increase of 15% was seen in imports from 2013 to 2014, reaching its highest level. So, total imports of wallpapers and similar wallcoverings rose significantly by 121% from the beginning to 
the end of the period under consideration. Besides, market share of imports was about 90% 
between 2010 and 2014. Therefore, it is conc luded that the increase in imports and the 
deterioration in the economic indicators of the domestic industry followed a similar pattern 
throughout the period analyzed. 
 G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 4 - 
 
  On the other hand, the unit prices of imported and domestic products are compared. Domestic 
product price indicates the average domestic sales price of the applicant companies.   
  2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Price Undercutting 
(% - Indexed) 100 225 200 157 92 
Price Suppression  
(% - Indexed) - 100 131 106 140 
 
As seen from the table above, the imported pr oduct undercut the sales price of the domestic 
product during the period analyzed. The indexed price undercutting which was 100 in 2010, 
reached to its highest level at 225 points in 2011. Although it decreased in the following years under examination, it is seen that the unit prices of imported products continued to undercut the unit prices of domestic products. Therefore, an evaluation of these figures reveals that the 
imported products have caused price undercutting on the domestic products during the period 
concerned.   
Besides, when the indexed price suppression was taken into account, the mentioned index data 
evaluated beginning from 2011 due to there was no price suppression in 2010. It is seen that the 
index was 100 in 2011 and fluctuated in the following years under examination. In the last year of period under examination, the indexed price suppression reached its peak at 140 points. 
 
For the foregoing reasons, it is concluded that there is a correlation between the increase in imports and the threat of serious injury that the domestic industry is exposed to. 
 
b. Coinciding trends 
It is understood that there is parallelism between the all relevant factors of an objective and 
quantifiable nature having a bearing on the situat ion of the domestic industry such as the decline 
in the profitability, the increase in the stocks of the domestic producer and the evaluations of the recent increase in the imports of the product concerned in absolute and relative terms and the increase in the market share of the imports. The fact that the expectation that the imports will 
increase in the following period exhibits the existe nce of the threat of serious injury. Moreover, the 
applicant companies could not increase its capacity due to the constraining imports despite the fact that there was a capacity increase in 2012 due to the entry of Armada into the market. For 
instance, while the imports increased significantly,  the capacity utilization ratio decreased in the 
investigation period, except 2014. Because of these evaluations, it is concluded that the surge in the imports of the concerned product and the threat of serious injury on its domestic producers are 
simultaneous. 
 
c. Other Factors 
i. Exports 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Exports (Tons - Indexed) 100 108 84 81 101 
 
Exports increased 8% in 2011 compared to 2010. Between 2012 and 2013 exports decreased steadily but, in 2014, exports increased again and reached to its highest level.  
Therefore, despite claims by some of the interested  parties, it is concluded that the changes in the 
level of exports were not a cause of serious injury suffered by the domestic producer.   
ii. Production Technology of Domestic Producer  
Some parties claimed that the machines that domestic producers use had old technology which is 
the cause of serious injury, not the surge in imports. It is also claimed that the domestic producers 
could not compete with imported products in terms of designs and colours. However, on spot 
investigation it is seen that the machines that have been used by applicant companies in the process of the production are identical with the ma chines of the exporter companies and also that G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 5 - 
 
  the applicant companies have the recent technology that it is sufficient for producing all types of 
designs and colours. In this determination, the de claration and the sales invoices have also been 
taken into account.   
As a result, it is concluded that the technology of  the domestic producer did not play a part in the 
serious injury that it is facing.   
2. Conclusion on Causation 
 Having concluded that there is a correlation betw een the increase in imports and the threat of 
serious injury that the domestic industry is facing; having examined the effects of other known 
factors and having determined that no injurious effects resulted from these; the investigating 
authority reached to the conclusion that there is a causal link between increased imports and threat of serious injury that the domestic industry is exposed to. 
 
II. INFORMATION ON WHETHER THERE IS AN  ABSOLUTE INCREASE IN IMPORTS OR 
AN INCREASE IN IMPORTS RELATI VE TO DOMESTIC PRODUCTION  
A. Unforeseen developments 
This analysis on unforeseen development is carried out during the investigation to find out which 
issues, that were unforeseen while the concessions at the WTO were made, have caused a sharp and significant increase in the imports. 
 
1. Claims of the Petitioners  
The petitioners claimed that there were 15-20 wallpaper and similar wallcovering producers in 
China prior to year 2013, however, after the mentioned year, dramatic increases in production quantities were experienced due to the increase in both domestic and worldwide demand for the 
product concerned. Besides, especially when the ex isting and expected increase in capacity over 
years in China taken into consideration, the Turkish market with its growing demand for wallpaper and similar wallcoverings has become an attractive target for the Chinese producers.  
On the other hand, when the historical background of wallpaper and similar coverings is taken into 
account, it is seen that Russian market is the largest and the most important market in the World with its product variety. However, due to the changes in consumer preferences, the Turkish 
market has also become one of the prominent markets in the world lately. The devaluation of 
Russian Ruble has caused purchasing power of Ru ssian people to weaken and therefore has made 
Turkish market a reasonable alternative.  
 
Furthermore, South Korea which already is the leading import partner and one of the most important producers cause a threat of serious injury for Turkish producers of the same product depending upon its increasing production and exports which exceed the expectations so far, the 
compatibility of their products with Turkish cons umer preferences. Besides, the current economic 
situation in Russian market has also affected this situation.   
2. Developments in Russian Market 
 Until recently, Russia was crucial importer and one of the leading wallpaper and similar 
wallcoverings markets in the world. As seen in the table below, illustrating the first 10 countries 
which imports the goods subject to investigation under the HS code 4814.20, Russia is still the number one importer with a share of 23% of the total imports.  G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 6 - 
 
  Countries Value 
imported in 
2013 (USD 
thousand) Quantity 
imported 
in 2013 Unit value 
(USD/unit) Annual 
growth 
in value 
between 
2009-
2013 
(%) Annual 
growth 
in 
quantity 
between 
2009-
2013 
(%) Annual 
growth in 
value 
between 
2012-
2013 (%) Share in 
the 
world 
imports 
(%) 
World 1.632.819 329.983 4,95 16 14 14 100 
Russian 
Federation 372.505 86.345 4,31 12 10 -2 22,8 
France 118.849 24.425 4,87 2 4 -2 7,3 
China 118.69 17.151 6,92 10 4 -2 7,3 
Viet Nam* 96.404 6.469 14,90 141 83 846 5,9 
Kazakhstan 71.947 16.978 4,24 35 28 28 4,4 
Lithuania 68.112 12.531 5,44 55 50 -6 4,2 
Belarus 57.503 11.434 5,03 25 21 17 3,5 
Turkey 47.17 8.942 5,28 35 41 24 2,9 
United 
Kingdom 46.34 9.516 4,87 18 21 18 2,8 
Iran 42.191 9.712 4,34 24 19 -9 2.6 
Source: Trade Map, Inte rnational Trade Center, http://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx 
* The data for Vietnam represents mi rror figures based on partner data. 
 
As mentioned by the domestic producers, while Russia is still the number one importer of the 
wallpapers and similar wallcoverings despite the de preciation of Russian Ruble, the exports from 
South Korea which is also leading provider of the products subjected to investigation are on the 
decrease. This can also be observed obviously in the tables below which shows the South Korean 
exports to both whole world and Russia in the period 2012-2014.  
South Korea's Exports  to Russia to World Share of South 
Korea's Exports to 
Russia in the World 
(%) 
2012 2013 2014  2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014  
Value (USD thousand) 9.074 7.902 8.316 110.306 125.802 142.437 8,23 6,28 5,84 
Quantity (Tons) 2.262 1.888 1.934 29.305 33.037 37.230 7,72 5,71 5,19 
Source: Trade Map, Inte rnational Trade Center, http://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx 
 
It is seen in the table above that while South Korea's wallpaper and similar wallcoverings exports 
to the world increased between 2012 and 2014, in contrary, the share of its total exports to the 
exports directed to Russia decreased from 7.72%  to 5.19%. Therefore, South Korea's exports 
capacity which has become kind of idle due to Russian market decline has caused Turkey to be one 
of its main markets. It can also be seen in th e table below that the share of mentioned country's 
exports to Turkey to its total exports raised significantly between 2012 and 2014. 
 
South Korea's 
Exports to Turkey to World Share of South 
Korea's Exports to 
Turkey in the World 
(%) 
2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014  
Value (USD thousand) 18.537 23.679 30.668 110.306 125.802 142.437 16,81 18,82 21,53
 
Quantity 
(Tons) 4.997 6.429 8.263 29.305 33.037 37.230 17,05 19,46 22,19  
 G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 7 - 
 
  3. Developments in Chinese Market 
 In recent years, the production capacity related to the wallpapers and similar wallcoverings of China increased significantly as new companies entered to market. Therefore, the imports of China 
who was an important importer of South Korean products began to import lesser than before and 
to export to the other countries. It is also expected strongly that China who had taken the fourth place in ranking of exporters to Turkey would expo rt its products to Turkey finally as claimed by 
petitioners. So, the export of China with its low prices is a considerable threat of serious injury. 
 Although there is no enough healthy data about the production capacity of China, it is possible to 
determinate from the decreasing export number of South Korea's to China that its export is 
turning towards Turkey and it can be seen the table below. 
 
South Korea's 
Exports to China to World Share of South Korea's 
Exports to China in the 
World (%) 
2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014 2012 2013 2014  
Value (USD thousand) 30.109 18.060 10.051 110.306 125.802 142.437 27,30 14,36 7,06 
Quantity (Tons) 9.227 5.671 3.795 29.305 33.037 37.230 31,49 17,17 10,19  
Source: Trade Map, Inte rnational Trade Center, http://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx 
 
In the table above, it is seen that the exports of  South Korea as the biggest exporter of wallpapers 
and similar wallcoverings to China have decreased while it increased to the whole world. 
Therefore, the share of South Korea's exports to China diminished from 31% to 10% in the period 
under consideration. 
 
Consequently, according to these findings, it is thought that South Korea has been increasingly directing its exports to Turkey due to its re cent decline of exports to China and Russia. 
 
4. Increase in Turkish Wallpaper and Similar Wallcoverings Demand  
 In recent years, there has been a significant increase in demand of wallpaper and similar 
wallcoverings comparing to traditional painting. In general, increase in demand is favorable for the 
domestic producers. But the domestic producers could not benefit from the increasing demand in especially 2011 and 2012 when there were important suppression of imports as it has been 
mentioned in the part of regarding relative import. Demand was met by increasing imports and in 
turn market share of imports increased considerably during the period under consideration.   
5. Conclusion on Unforeseen Developments 
 In light of evaluations above, it is concluded that the sharp, sudden, significant and recent 
increase in imports of wallpaper and similar wallcoverings during the investigation period resulted 
from unforeseen developments in the last three years. These developments were: increasing 
number of producers and production capacity in China; South Korea's search for new export markets due to the economic deterioration in Russian market; decline in mentioned country's 
exports to Chinese and Russian market while, in co ntrary, the increase in their exports to Turkey, 
as being an attractive market with its proximity and large demand.   
B. Increase in imports 
An analysis of the increase in imports of the product concerned to Turkey both in absolute and 
relative terms has been carried out over the period from 2010 to 2014. Imports of the product concerned increased considerably, both in absolute terms and relative to domestic production. 
 
1. Absolute Imports  
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Imports (Tons) 5.248 8.542 9.320 10.146 11.600 
Year on Year Change (%)  63 9 9 14 
 G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 8 - 
 
  Imports of the product subject to investigation increased constantly during the period under 
examination. The imports which were 5.248 tons in 2010, gradually increased by 63%, 9% and 9% between 2011 and 2013 reaching to 10.146 tons in 2013. From 2013 to 2014 the imports surged 14% reaching 11.600 tons, bringing imports to its highest level. Total increase in imports 
between 2010 and 2014 is 121% during the period under examination. 
 2. Relative Imports 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Imports/Production (Indexed) 100 150 150 116 100 
 
Similar to imports in absolute terms, the ratio of imports to domestic production rose throughout 
the period under consideration. Between 2010 and 2011, the ratio of imports to domestic production increased significantly, reaching th e highest level with 150 points in 2011. Although 
there were decreases in the following years, ratio of imports to domestic production in 2015 is still 
higher than the level in the beginning of the period under examination.  3. Market Share of Imports 
 
 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
Market Share of 
Imports (% – Indexed)  100 104 101 97 96 
 
As seen from the table above, the share of import s in domestic market is considerable throughout 
the investigation period. Between 2010 and 2011, there was a dramatic increase in the market 
share of the imports, as domestic sales decr eased. Starting with 2011 imported products 
diminished their market share, but it is still large in quantity.  4. Share of Main Exporters 
 
The share of imports from the main exporters to the Turkish market is shown at the table below. 
The countries are sorted according to their share in imports in 2014.  
 
Countries (%) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
South Korea 35,29 38,3 51,5 58,8 65,2 
Germany 23,63 19,4 18,3 14,5 11,5 
Italy 7,13 6,42 8,29 8,6 7,02 
China 11,51 7,85 5,43 4,29 5,44 
Ukraine 3,08 1,59 1,97 1,55 2,45 
Belgium 6,52 16,3 6,01 3,07 2,38 
United Kingdom 2,83 2,08 1,87 2,07 1,81 
France 1,53 1,73 1,44 1,76 1,2 
Russian Federation 0,47 1,01 1,12 1,42 1,11 
United States 1,35 0,7 0,67 1,15 0,67 
Others 7,93 4,68 5,25 3,47 2,44 
Total 100 100 100 100 100 
 
South Korea has been the biggest supplier of the Turkish market during the investigation period 
under examination. This country accounted for more than half of the market and its market share increased constantly in the period of investigation. As a traditional supplier, Germany whose 
market share was 24% in 2010 decreased its share to 12% in 2014. On the other hand, the 
market share of Italy dropped from 7% to 6% between 2010 and 2011 and then it increased in 
both 2012 and 2013. 
 
III. PRECISE DESCRIPTION OF  THE PRODUCT INVOLVED 
The subject goods are classified under Turkish Customs Codes 4814.20.00.00.00, 
4814.90.10.00.00 and 4814.90.70.10.00 with the definition of "wallpaper and similar wall 
coverings, consisting of paper coated or covered, on the face side, with a grained, embossed, 
colored, design-printed or otherwise decorated layer of plastics", "wallpaper and similar wall G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 9 - 
 
  coverings, consisting of grained, embossed, surf ace-colored, design-printed or otherwise surface-
decorated paper, coated or covered with transparent protective plastics" and "wallpaper and similar wall coverings, consisting of paper cove red, on the face side, with plaiting material, 
whether or not bound together in parallel strands or woven" respectively in Turkish Customs Tariff 
Schedule of 2015. 
 IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED MEASURE 
The imposition of a definitive safeguard measure is  proposed in the form of a specific duty, which 
will be implemented as shown in the table below.  
 
On the other hand, implementation of a tariff quota is considered to allow imports of a certain level 
exempt from the safeguard measure. The quantity of the tariff quota, which will be in effect during 
the duration of the safeguard measure, will be dete rmined later and will be published together with 
the Decision of the Council of Ministers regarding the safeguard measure. 
 Below is the list of Developing Countries excluded from the measures as they export less than 3% 
of imports to Turkey. 
 Afghanistan; Albania; Algeria; Angola; Antigua and Barbuda; Argentina; Azerbaijan; Bangladesh; Barbados; Belarus; Belize; Benin; Bhutan; Bolivia, Plurinational State of; Bosnia and Herzegovina; 
Botswana; Brazil; Burkina Faso; Burundi; Camb odia; Cameroon; Cabo Verde; Central African 
Republic; Chad; Chile; Colombia; Comoros; Congo; Cook Islands; Costa Rica; Côte d'Ivoire; Cuba; 
Republic of Korea; Democratic Republic of Congo; Djibouti; Dominica; Dominican Republic; 
Ecuador; Egypt; El Salvador; Equatorial Guinea ; Eritrea; Ethiopia; Fiji; Gabon; the Gambia; 
Georgia; Ghana; Grenada; Guatemala; Guinea; Guinea-Bissau; Guyana; Haiti; Honduras; India; Indonesia; Iran; Iraq; Jamaica; Jordan; Kazakhstan; Kenya; Kiribati; Kosovo; Kyrgyzstan; Lao 
People's Democratic Republic; Lebanon; Lesotho; Li beria; Libya; The former Yugoslav Republic of 
Macedonia; Madagascar; Malawi; Malaysia; Maldives; Mali; Marshall Islands; Mauritania; Mauritius; Mexico; Micronesia (Federated States of); Moldova, Republic of; Mongolia; Montenegro; Morocco; Mozambique; Myanmar; Namibia; Nauru; Nepal; Nicaragua; Niger; Nigeria; Niue; 
Pakistan; Palau; Palestine; Panama; Papua New Guinea; Paraguay; Peru; Philippines; 
Russian Federation; Rwanda; Samoa; Sao Tome and Principe; Senegal; Serbia; Seychelles; Sierra Leone; Solomon Islands; Somalia; South Africa; South Sudan; Sri Lanka; Saint Kitts and 
Nevis; Saint Lucia; Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; Sudan; Suriname; Swaziland; Tajikistan; 
Tanzania; Thailand; Timor Leste; Togo; Tonga; Trinidad and Tobago; Tunisia; Turkmenistan; 
Tuvalu; Uganda; Ukraine; Uruguay; Uzbekistan; Vanuatu; Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of; 
Viet Nam; West Bank and Gaza Strip; Yemen; Zambia; Zimbabwe. 
  Turkish 
Customs Tariff 
Code Description Of The Product 1st Period 2nd Period 3rd Period 
4814.20.00.00.00 Wallpaper and similar wall coverings, 
consisting of paper coated or covered, on the face side, with a grained, embossed, colored, design-printed or 
otherwise decorated layer of plastics 
5 USD/Kg 4,5 USD/Kg 4 USD/Kg 
4814.90.10.00.00 Wallpaper and similar wall coverings, 
consisting of grained, embossed, surface-colored, design-printed or otherwise surface-decorated paper, coated or covered with transparent protective plastics 
4814.90.70.10.00 Wallpaper and similar wall coverings, 
consisting of paper covered, on the face side, with plaiting material, whether or not bound together in parallel strands or 
woven G/SG/N/8/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/10/TUR/15 • G/SG/N/11/TUR/20 
 
- 10 - 
 
  V. PROPOSED DATE OF INTRODUCTION OF THE MEASURE 
The measure will come into effect after the appr oval of the Council of Ministers. The date of 
introduction of the measure will be provided in the Decision of the Council of Ministers which will be the published after all legal procedures are completed. 
 
VI. EXPECTED DURATION OF THE MEASURE 
The expected duration of the proposed measure is three years. 
 
VII. PROPOSED DATE FOR THE REVIEW  
Not applicable. 
 
VIII. EXPECTED TIMETABLE FOR PROGRESSI VE LIBERALIZATION OF THE MEASURE 
In order to induce adjustment, the proposed measure will be subject to liberalization on a regular 
basis following its imposition, thereby ensuring that there is a strong incentive for domestic 
producers to undertake progressively the necessa ry restructuring and adjustment programs. The 
proposed measure is to be progressively liberalized as indicated in item IV above.  
IX. INFORMATION RELATING TO THE EXTENSION OF A SAFEGUARD MEASURE 
Not applicable. 
 
__________