WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1  
25 June 2015  
(15-3288)  Page: 1/232  
Trade Policy Review Body 
21 and 23 April 2015 Original: English/Spanish  
anglais/espagnol  
inglés/español  
 
  TRADE POLICY REVIEW 
AUSTRALIA  
MINUTES OF THE MEETING 
Addendum 
Chairperson: H.E. Mr. Atanas Atanassov Paparizov (Bulgaria) 
This document contains the advance written questions and additional questions by WTO 
Members, and replies provided by Australia.1 
 
 
Organe d'examen des politiques commerciales 
21 et 23 avril 2015 
EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES COMMERCIALES 
AUSTRALIE  
COMPTE RENDU DE LA RÉUNION 
Addendum 
Président: S.E. M. Atanas Atanassov Paparizov (Bulgarie) 
Le présent document contient les questions écrites communiquées à l'avance par les 
Membres de l'OMC, leurs questions additionnelles, et les réponses fournies par l'Australie.1 
 
 Órgano de Examen de las Políticas Comerciales 
21 y 23 de abril de 2015 
EXAMEN DE LAS POLÍTICAS COMERCIALES 
A
USTRALIA  
ACTA DE LA REUNIÓN 
Addendum 
Presidente: Excmo. Sr. Atanas Atanassov Paparizov (Bulgaria) 
En el presente documento figuran las preguntas presentadas anticipadamente por escrito y 
las preguntas adicionales de los Miembros de la OMC, así como las respuestas facilitadas por Australia.
1 
                                               
1 In English and Spanish only./En  anglais et espagnol seulement./En inglés y español solamente. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 2 - 
 
  CONTENTS 
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF ARGENTINA ............................... 3  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM TH E GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL .................................... 10  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM TH E GOVERNMENT OF  CANADA ................................... 13  
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM  THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA ............... 25  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT CHILE ............................................ 27  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CHINA ...................................... 43  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF COLOMBIA  ............................... 80  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM  THE EUROPEAN  UNION ............................................... 87  
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION ......................... 104  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF FIJI ........................................ 107  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA ........................... 110  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVE RNMENT OF HONG KONG, CHINA .............. 112  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM TH E GOVERNMENT OF INDIA .................................... 119  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF INDONESIA ............................ 126  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN .................................... 131  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERN MENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA ...... 132  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA .............................. 134  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM TH E GOVERNMENT OF  MEXICO ................................. 136  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF NEW ZEALAND ....................... 145  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM TH E GOVERNMENT OF  NIGERIA ................................ 148  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF NORWAY ................................ 150  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN .............................. 151  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF PARAGUAY ............................. 153  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF PERU ...................................... 155  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GO VERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES .................. 165  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN 
FEDERATI ON ................................................................................................................ 167  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF SINGAPORE ........................... 173  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF SWITZERLAND ....................... 181  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GO VERNMENT OF CHINESE TAIPEI .................... 192  
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF 
CHINESE TA IPEI .......................................................................................................... 201  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THAILAND ............................. 202  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF TURKEY .................................. 212  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVE RNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES .............. 224  
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE  GOVERNMENT OF THE 
UNITED STATES ........................................................................................................... 230  
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF URUGUAY ............................... 232  
 WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 3 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF ARGENTINA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 5. Table 3.1 
Question 
Table 3.1 explains that the amount of bound tariff lines represents 96.6%. 
What is the reason why 100% of tariff lines are not bound? Answer 
Australia, like a number of WTO members does not have bound commitments on all goods. While 
duties on all agricultural goods were bound as a part of Australia's Uruguay Round commitments, 
this was not the case for all non-agricultural goods. 
6 Paragraph 3.21 
Question In this paragraph, the report mentions that since 1995, the quota allocation was based on the 
results of in-quota imports during the previous 23 months (regardless of transfers of quotas); the 
quota will be allocated on request to Customs Service. 
Could Australia explain the procedure by which the Customs, upon request, assign a quota? Answer 
The procedure Customs assigns quotas upon request, can be found in the Practice Statement, 
which is publically available at: http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resourc es/files/B_IND09CheeseandCurdQuota.pdf .  
7. Paragraph 3.27 
Question 
In this paragraph, the report indicates that among the products that do not meet the conditions to 
qualify for an order on tariff concessions include foodstuffs, most of textiles and clothing, certain 
motor vehicles and parts, jewelry and furniture, as local industry producing these goods. 
What are the conditions to qualify for an order on tariff concessions and what criteria are used to 
determine such conditions? 
Answer 
A Tariff Concession Order (TCO) will be granted on imported goods if substitutable goods are not 
produced in Australia. This does not apply to goods listed in Schedule 2 to the Customs Regulations 1926 which contains a list of goods on which tariff concession orders cannot be made. 
Paragraph 3.37  
Question 
In this paragraph, the report indicates that the program post-importation permits 2009 (last 
amended in 2011) gives the Customs discretion to grant post-importation for certain classes of 
goods subject to controls permits, as some dr ugs, chemicals, consumer goods, firearms and WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 4 - 
 
  knives, asbestos products and products bearing Australian national symbols. If the permit is 
requested or it is not granted within 30 days from the request, the Customs Service may seize the 
product in question. The system allows Customs to deal with flexibility to importers who were 
unaware of the need for an import permit prior to import, or could not get it. 
What is the procedure by which the permit referred obtained? Answer 
The Australian Government controls the import of certain goods into Australia. The controls 
include: 
 an absolute prohibition, where you are not allowed to import the goods in any 
circumstances, or 
 a restriction, where you need to have a permit or written permission in order to import the 
goods. 
ACBPS will determine whether the post import permission scheme can be applied. The  importer 
must apply to the relevant policy agency for a permit/written permission to import the goods 
within 30 days of the goods being detained under the post permission scheme.  
There are different requirements de pending  on the commodity that is being controlled.  
9. Paragraph 3.46 
Question In this paragraph, the report explains that voluntary standards often become mandatory (or 
regulatory) by reference in technical regulations. At June 30, 2014, Standards Australia had 
published 6,888 standards (6,953 in November 2010), of which approximately one third (as in 
2010) have become mandatory; 35% of the catalog of Standards Australia (as in 2010) corresponds to joint standards for Australia and New Zealand. 
a) What criteria do you consider the government of Australia to determine that a standard 
becomes mandatory? 
Answer 
Technical regulations may be mandated by gove rnment (Commonwealth, State and Territory or 
local council) or called up in a contract.  At the Commonwealth level, regulators are required to 
undertake a regulation impact statement to assess the impact of any proposed regulation. The more risk attached to the behaviour or issue, the more government involvement is likely. In 
principle, progress towards implementing regulation is in response to increased risk to justify the 
increased cost and impact upon society. Mandatory standards primarily relate to electrical safety, consumer product safety standards and building and plumbing standards. 
Paragraph 3.48 
Question 
In this paragraph, the report mentions that since July 2010, the ACCC, together with its 
counterparts in the states and territories have longer sold over 200,000 products for infringement 
or alleged infringement of mandatory rules and prohibitions. Very minor technical violations were 
found, but also serious offenses which involved significant risks for consumers, and various remedies (including product returns, retirement sale, modify products, new labeling, etc.) were 
adopted or measures to ensure compliance (processes, requirements, judgments, enforceable 
commitments and administrative actions). WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 5 - 
 
  What is a "minor breach of a technical nature"? 
In which cases it is considered that a violation is "serious"? Answer 
What is a "minor breach of a technical nature"? 
Mandatory consumer product safety standards in the Australian context generally consist of a 
number of elements to ensure that a product is safe to use. Such elements include design requirements, construction requirements, perfor mance requirements and marking requirements 
including warnings on safe use. Warning label requirements are usually of a prescriptive nature, 
for example, are required to be of a particular size and font or in a particular colour on a contrasting background. Where breaches of such  a nature are identified, for example where a 
warning label contains the required warning text but is not in the correct font or font size, it is 
generally considered to be non-compliance of a technical nature. 
In which cases it is considered that a violation is "serious"? Serious breaches are those of a kind that result in significant hazards to consumers. A significant 
hazard may present itself in a consumer product of unsafe design and/or a failure to perform as 
required by a mandatory standard. Where a mandatory standard establishes minimum 
performance objectives for a product, for example load bearing tests on vehicle jacks, failure to 
meet the load bearing requirement places the consum er at serious risk of injury and subsequently 
would be considered a "serious" violation of the mandatory standard for vehicle jacks. 
Paragraph  3.49 
Question:  
In this paragraph, the report explains that in December 2014, 71% of the standards for safety, 
anti-theft and car emissions vehicles were harmonized with the provisions of the Agreement of the United Nations concerning the adoption of uniform technical prescriptions motor vehicles and 
parts, 1958; another 13% had changed for adoption, while 16%, covering 10 standards, was not 
harmonized. Most non-harmonized standards relating to heavy vehicles and / or areas not covered by the regulations of the United Nations. Do yo u plan the government of Australia harmonized 
16% of standards that currently is of this character? 
Answer 
Australia has conducted a significant process of harm onisation of it national vehicle standards (the 
Australian Design Rules (ADRs)) with United Nations regulations since the 1990s. The Government 
has recently committed to accelerate the harmonisation process, including in preparation for the 
introduction of International Whole Vehicle Type Approval for light passenger vehicles. 
Most of the ADRs not already fully harmonised wi th UN vehicle regulations are for heavy vehicles 
and/or matters not covered by a UN vehicle regulation (e.g. vehicle configuration and dimensions / 
trailers designed for use in road trains). This is in large part because the ADRs include provisions for the safe use of high productivity vehicle combinations (i.e. long truck and trailer combinations 
such as b-doubles, b-triples and road trains) which are generally either more restricted or not 
allowed in many other markets.  
Para. 2.30 - background: 
Question 
Paragraph mentions that the Commonwealth Government is engaged in a major new initiative 
aimed at saving deregulation 1,000 million Australian dollars a year by reducing red tape. In 2014 the Parliament held two sessions devoted to the repeal of legislation and unnecessary and costly 
regulations. The first took place in March and resulted in the abolition of over 10,000 unnecessary 
or counterproductive regulations or laws. The second was held in October, and it almost WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 6 - 
 
  another 1,000 were repealed legislation. It is estimated that the total net savings resulting from 
these two sessions deregulation amounted to 2,100 million Australian dollars.  
What specifically are the measures taken to reduce red tape? Answer 
$1 billion target  To reduce the stock of existing regulations, the Government has a red tape reduction target of $1 
billion per year for businesses, individuals and co mmunity organisations. Since the 2013 election, 
the Government has announced more than $2.45 billion in red tape savings. 
When reforms contributing to the target are proposed, an estimate is made of the likely change in 
the cost of complying with Commonwealth regulations. In each instance, the department must measure both the reduction in compliance costs from removing red tape as well as any additional 
costs arising from introducing new regulations. These changes are estimated using the Regulatory 
Burden Measurement Framework. 
Further information on the Australian Government's regulatory framework is available at: 
http://www.cuttingredtape.gov.au/ . 
Regulatory Impact Analysis  
As part of the deregulation agenda, the Govern ment has strengthened the Regulatory Impact 
Analysis (RIA) framework, with a focus on costing impacts on business, community organisations 
and individuals as part of a broader goal to redu ce the burden of regulation. A Regulatory Impact 
Statement (RIS) is now required for all Cabinet submissions, as well as any non-Cabinet decision made by an Australian Government entity if it is likely to impact on business, community 
organisations or individuals.  
Para. 2.32 – background 
Question 
The report explains that in October 2014, the Commonwealth Government also announced the 
creation of the New Framework for Performance of Regulatory Agencies, which establish a set of criteria for evaluating the performance of regulators and collaboration with stakeholders 
What are these criteria? 
Answer  
The criteria for Australia's Regulator Performance Framework, announced on 29 October 2014, 
include 6 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs):  
KPI 1 - Regulators do not unnecessarily impede the efficient operation of regulated entities 
KPI 2 - Communication with regulated entities is clear, targeted and effective KPI 3 - Actions undertaken by regulators are proportionate to the regulatory risk being managed 
KPI 4 - Compliance and monitoring approaches are streamlined and co-ordinated 
KPI 5 - Regulators are open and transparent in their dealings with regulated entities 
KPI 6 - Regulators actively contribute to the continuous improvement of regulatory frameworks  
The framework and guidance material can be found at: 
http://www.cuttingredtape.gov.au/resources/rpf . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 7 - 
 
  16. Paragraph 3.90 
Question 
In this paragraph, the report mentions that the EMDG program, the main program of financial 
assistance from Australia, is aimed primarily at small businesses, but also the medium, in all 
sectors of the economy. Its budget has increased by 50 million Australian dollars, to be distributed 
over four years from 2013 to help promote competitiveness. 
What are the conditions required for businesses to access financial assistance program? 
What is this financial assistance? 
Answer 
The conditions required for businesses to access this financial assistance program are as follows: Any Australian individual, partnership, company, association, co-operative, statutory corporation 
or trust that has carried on eligible export promotion activities during the year for which they wish 
to apply for an Export Market Development Grant can apply, provided that the business has: 
 income of not more than $50 million in the grant year (the year in which the export 
promotion expenditure was incurred)  
 incurred at least $15,000 of eligible export expenses under the scheme (first-time applicants 
can combine two years expenses)  
 principal status for the export business (some exceptions apply, e.g. non-profit export 
focused industry bodies)  
 The business also must have promoted one of the following: 
 the export of goods and most services  
 inbound tourism  
 the export of intellectual property and know-how  
 conferences and events held in Australia  
Under this program, certain organisations and groups, who would not otherwise be eligible to 
apply for a grant under the general provisions of  the Export Market Development Grants (EMDG) 
Act 1997, can obtain approved status to enable th em to apply for a grant in their own right. The 
two categories of approved status available are approval as an Approved Body and Joint Venture. 
Financial assistance under this program is provided as follows: EMDG reimburses up to 50% of eligible export promotion expenses above $5,000, up to a 
maximum grant of $150,000 and subject to availabl e funds, provided that the total expenses 
amount to at least $15,000, and the program provides up to eight (8) grants to each eligible 
applicant. The scheme's budget  is capped by an annual appropriation which for the 2014-15 
financial year is $137.9 million. 
17. Paragraph  3.93 
Question 
Under this paragraph during the reporting period Australia has maintained direct duty exemptions 
and the goods and services tax (GST) activities under the Program Tradex (last amended in 2008) WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 8 - 
 
  on imported goods that meet the required conditions designed to direct export or used, lost or 
discarded in the development of exports. 
What are the conditions to be met by imported goods to access these exemptions?  
Answer 
The Tradex Scheme is an entitlement program th at provides an upfront exemption from customs 
duty and GST for eligible imported goods that are to be subsequently exported. The imported goods may be: 
 exported in the same condition as imported; or 
 subjected to a process or treatment af ter importation and then exported; or 
 incorporated in other goods after importation and then exported.  
The only imported goods that are not eligible under the Tradex Scheme are: 
 goods intended for sale in an establishment that offers goods for sale free of customs duties 
and other taxes; and 
 goods which, if they were produced in Australia, would be subject to duties of excise (also 
known as excise-equivalent goods; for example, most forms of alcohol, cigarettes and 
other tobacco products, a wide range of petroleum products). 
To claim the exemption from the relevant customs duty and GST, the importer must apply for and 
hold a valid Tradex order which nominates the pa rticular goods that are being imported. Tradex 
Orders are issued by the Secretary for the Department of Industry and Science. Once issued a Tradex Order remains valid until revoked, either at  the request of the Tradex Order holder, or if 
the Tradex Order holder ceases to exist or becomes insolvent. 
Export of the imported goods may be carried out by  the importer or a third party, but must occur 
within 12 months of the time of import, or within a longer period, if approved by the Secretary of the Department of Industry and Science, or the Secretary's delegate. 
If goods imported under a Tradex order are not ex ported within one year (or other agreed period) 
of their importation or are otherwise used or disposed  of in Australia, Tradex duty must be paid on 
those goods to the Department of Industry and Scie nce. The Tradex duty is an amount equivalent 
to the customs duty that was exempted when th e goods were imported. The GST component must 
be accounted for in the importer's next scheduled Business Activity Statement required to be lodged with the Australian Tax Office. 
A Tradex Order holder must maintain records of all goods imported and exported under their 
Tradex Order, including, where applicable, relevant manufacturing records. 
P19, para 3.121 
Question: 
What steps is the code to help farmers and exporters to access the infrastructure?  
Answer 
The Port Terminal Access (Bulk Wheat) Code of Conduct, which was made on 30 September 2014, 
regulates the conduct of bulk wheat port terminal  operators. The regulations in the Code help 
exporters of bulk wheat to access port terminal serv ices on a fair and transparent basis, regardless 
of who owns the terminal. In doing so, the Code also helps farmers by ensuring that multiple exporters have access to port terminal services  and can compete to buy farmers' grain. The 
regulations under the Code include requirements on port terminal operators to:  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 9 - 
 
   deal in good faith with exporters seeking access to wheat ports 
 not discriminate in favour of its own exporting arm, and not hinder access by exporters to 
port terminal services 
 enter into negotiations with exporters for access, and comply with dispute resolution 
processes when negotiating (including recourse to independent arbitration of disputes)  
 allocate available port terminal capacity through an allocation mechanism approved by the 
ACCC 
 undertake a process for amendments to port loading protocols, including the requirement to 
consult  
 publish certain information, such as the amount of capacity available on a weekly and 
annual basis, and key performance indicators  
 publish a daily statement about ships due to load at the port (a shipping stem)  
 publish standard terms and reference prices available to all exporters. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 10 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 i. 2.19 
Paragraph 2.19 mentions the participation of Australia in the negotiations of the Trans-Pacific 
Partnership (TPP). According to information avai lable, one of the subjects raising particular 
concern among negotiating countries is the chapter on intellectual property rights. In this regard, please answer: 
Question 1 
Do the negotiating countries intend to include provisions ensuring that the resulting text of the 
agreement does not encroach on the exceptions and limitations to intellectual property rights of 
the TRIPS Agreement, in particular those related to public health? Please describe. 
Answer 
Negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement Intellectual Property (IP) chapter 
are ongoing and an outcome on health-related issues is still to be agreed. While it is not possible 
to comment on the intentions of other negotiating parties, Australia is working to negotiate an IP 
chapter that supports each Party's right to protect public health, including through the exceptions and limitations in the TRIPS Agreement. 
ii. 3.148 
Paragraph 3.148 describes the procedures for obtaining a patent right in Australia. Additionally, it 
is of notice that Australia signed the "Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from thei r Utilization", adopted by the Conference of the 
Parties to the Convention on Biological Dive rsity at its tenth meeting on 29 October 2010 in 
Nagoya, Japan. 
Question 2 
Has Australia experienced cases of misappropriatio n of genetic resources t hus far? If so, what 
measures have been undertaken by the Australian authorities? 
Answer 
Environmental Regulation  Access to biological resources in Australian Commonwealth areas for the purpose of research and 
development on their genetic makeup is regulate d under Part 8A of the Environment Protection 
and Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2000.  
Since coming into force in late 2005, there have been no confirmed instances of 'misappropriation', 
access without a permit, or inappropriate use under the conditions of a permit. A permit under Part 8A cannot be issued without the prior informed co nsent of Indigenous people where access is on 
Indigenous people's land, and disclosure of any use of traditional knowledge is required in the 
permit. application process. 
Patent Regulation 
There is no definition of the term 'misappropriation' in Australian patent law. There have been 
cases of patent applications being developed fr om Australian genetic resources and traditional 
knowledge, and the substantive criteria of patent ability have been applied in these cases.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 11 - 
 
  Upon request under the patent legislation, IP Australia considers submissions from third parties 
regarding the novelty and obviousness of inventions in patent applications and granted patents, including submissions from other countries with regard to their genetic resources and traditional knowledge. 
Question 3 
Does the Government of Australia plan to include a requirement that patent applicants provide the 
correct information regarding the origin of the genetic resources and traditional knowledge 
involved in patent applications? If not, how would the Government of Australia address the 
eventual cases of misappropriation of genetic resources in patent applications? 
Answer 
Australia recognises that international legal certainty in research and development using genetic 
resources relies on the ability to demonstrate that the genetic resources were acquired with the 
prior informed consent of the provider and on mutually-agreed terms.  
The regulation of access to biological resources in Australian Commonwealth areas includes legally 
binding undertakings regarding the commercial use of genetic resources, which enable prosecution 
in the event of a breach. Failure to adhere to terms of a contract made between a user and provider of genetic resources and associated trad itional knowledge would be subject to contract 
law.  
Australia has signed the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and 
Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation, a supplementary agreement under the Convention on Biological Diversity. The Australian Government is working through the ratification 
process within a number of relevant agencies.  
The Australian Government is also actively engaged in discussions in the World Intellectual 
Property Organization on proposals for disclosure of source in patent applications. 
iii. 3.148 
Paragraph 3.148 describes the procedures for obtaining a patent right in Australia. Recently, the 
discussion regarding the patentability of human genes was raised in Australia's Federal Court. 
Question 4 
Is a human gene sequence extracted and/or isolated from its natural environment patentable in 
Australia? Is synthetic DNA (cDNA) patentable? 
Answer 
A human gene sequence extracted and/or isolated from its natural environment and synthetic DNA 
are both patentable in Australia where a practical use is disclosed for the sequence. 
Question 5  
Is the decision of Australia's Federal Court final? Did the parties involved appeal the decision? Answer 
In 2014, the full Bench of the Federal Court confirmed that isolated gene sequences are patentable 
in Australia. In February 2015, the High Court of Australia agreed to hear an appeal against the 
Federal Court's decision. The High Court has set April 2015 as the date to commence to hear the case. However it may be some time before the court issues its decision.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 12 - 
 
  Report by the Australian Government WT/TPR/G/312 
i. 3.85 Trans Pacific Partnership 
"Significant progress has been made in recent mo nths and negotiations are now at an advanced 
stage. Australia hosted a meeting of TPP Mini sters in Sydney on 25-27 October 2014 where 
significant progress was achieved in market access negotiations and on trade and investment rules." 
Question 
When are TPP negotiations supposed to be conclude d? What are the main achievements in market 
access and technical regulations, if applicable, made so far? 
Answer 
Parties to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement are working to conclude negotiations in 
2015. Negotiations on market access are continuing  and we expect the TPP to provide significant 
new economic opportunities for the negotiating parties.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 13 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Part 2. Trade and Investment Regime: (2 .6) Framework for Business and Investment: 
paragraph 2.33, page 33 and 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: (2) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (8) Government procurem ent: paragraph 3.80, page 64: 
The Secretariat Report notes in paragraph 2.33 that under the Australian Jobs Act 2013, 
companies fulfilling projects in Australia with a capital expenditure of $A 500 million or more are 
required to prepare an Australian Industry Partic ipation (AIP) Plan to outline how projects will 
provide full, fair and reasonable opportunities fo r Australian industry to supply goods and services, 
or outline their use of overseas suppliers.  
Questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 
 Could Australia explain whether such policies provide a de facto preference for Australian 
companies? 
 Could Australia explain whether the AIP Plans require approval by relevant government 
authorities? On what grounds can approval of the Plan be denied? What are the consequences 
for the successful bidder of a procurement contract if its proposed AIP Plan is denied approval? 
 If the AIP policy does not mandate the use of Australia suppliers, does the policy nonetheless 
send a signal to potential bidders that the use of  Australia suppliers of goods and services is to 
be preferred over foreign suppliers? 
In paragraph 3.80, the Report further clarifies that the AIP plans apply to certain Commonwealth 
procurement projects, generally those above A$ 20 million. Moreover, companies receiving over 
$A 20 million from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation may also be required to prepare and report on an AIP plan as condition of investment. Since 2010, 253 AIP plans for Commonwealth 
procurement have been approved. The goal of such policies is to maximize the ability of domestic 
firms to win not only domestic contracts, but contracts abroad. 
 Out of the 253 AIP plans for Commonwealth procur ement, how many of these plans were for 
projects above A$ 20 million? Below A$ 20 million? 
 Could Australia indicate whether AIP Plans are requ ired as conditions of any loans or grants or 
other forms of financial assistance provided by the Australia Commonwealth government to 
private enterprises, other than investments by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation?   
 Could Australia explain how a requirement for an AIP Plan as a condition for an investment by 
the Clean Energy Finance Corporation is consistent with Australian commitments under GATT 1947, Article III(4)?  
Answers 
The intent of an AIP plan is to provide Australian  industry the same opportunity afforded to other 
global supply chain partners to participate in all aspects of a project; and to compete for contracts 
on an equal and transparent basis, including given reasonable time in which to tender. 
The requirements for AIP plans do not mandate the use of Australian industry, but rather aim to 
provide Australian industry with the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities and bid for work 
if they are able to meet the procurement specifications. Projects make procurement decisions 
based on value-for-money considerations. 
AIP plans under the Australian Jobs Act 2013 re quire approval by the Australian Industry 
Participation Authority. The Authority is a statutory position created by the Australian Jobs Act to 
monitor and promote compliance with the legislation. 
The Authority must not approve a draft AIP plan under the Act unless it complies with the 
legislation. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 14 - 
 
  The Authority is also responsible for approving AIP plans under government procurement. The AIP 
plan is usually a condition of participation. Companies require an approved AIP plan to be eligible to submit a bid. 
The intent of the Act is to provide Australian industry the same opportunity afforded to other 
global supply chain partners to participate in all aspects of a project; and to compete on projects 
on an equal and transparent basis, including given reasonable time in which to tender. 
The AIP plan requirement is only applied when th e expected value expenditure is more than $20 
million. It does not apply if the expected value is less than $20 million. 
The requirement for AIP plans applies to grants ad ministered by government agencies that are: 
 One-off grants over $20 million; or 
 Grant programmes where there is an expectation that successful applicants may each 
receive more than $20 million of Commonwealth funding;  
And: 
 Where there are opportunities for Australian industry to supply goods and services; and 
 Where there is potential Australian capability. 
If an AIP plan is required, it will be a condition of funding and will be included in the funding 
agreement between the Australian Gove rnment and the grant recipient. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: 3.2 Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; 3.2.1 Registration and documentat ion requirements: paragraph 3.8., page 39: 
It is noted that Australia conducts audits as follows: "Regular audit checks are undertaken to 
ensure accuracy of import declarations against the commercial documents and the physical cargo." 
Questions 7 & 8 
 Could Australia elaborate on which agency is responsible for these audits? 
 Are joint audits conducted with other permit-issuing agencies (to ensure compliance with 
import permit requirements)? 
Answers 
An Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS) audit examines the records of 
clients after the import or export transaction has been finalised. All audits follow recognised 
standards and procedures to ensure consistency and quality. ACBPS accredited and authorised auditors conduct all audits. For more information on ACBPS audits http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resourc es/files/A_guide_to_compliance_audits.pdf . 
The Australian Customs and Border Protection Service works with a range of agencies to ensure 
the effective operation of controls governing the importation of goods requiring permits. This work includes information sharing in respect of both trends in applications and usage and in terms of 
particular consignments. In addition to traditional border control strategies, measures to address 
prohibited or restricted imports also include education; campaigns; outreach activities and refining targeting activity to focus on high-risk transactions. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: 3.2 Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; 3.2.1 Registration and documentat ion requirement: paragraph 3.9., page 39: 
It is noted that Australia has taken actions to enforce import prohibitions on products of illegal 
logging. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 15 - 
 
  Question 9 
Could Australia specify what actions have been taken to enforce the import prohibitions on 
products of illegal logging? 
Answer 
Under the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 2012 (ILPA) Australia has prohibited the importation of 
illegally logged timber, and domestic processing of illegal logged Australian raw logs. The Australian Government has established processes and capabilities within the Department of 
Agriculture to enforce these prohibitions. 
Australia responds to allegations of breaches of th e ILPA through officers appointed as an inspector 
under the legislation within the Investigation and Enforcement area of the Department of 
Agriculture. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: 3.2 Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; 3.2.5 Import prohibitions, restrict ions, and licensing: paragraph 3.36., page 49: 
With regards to the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 2012, which came into effect on 29 November 
2012, that treats timber and timber products that have been illegally logged and imported into 
Australia as a prohibited import:  
Questions 10, 11 & 12 
 How does Australia identify an illegal shipment under the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 2012? 
What are the triggers? 
 How does Australia plan to measure the effectiveness of the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 
2012? 
 Does Australia have a central location where violations of the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 
2012 are posted? 
Answers 
Australia has opted to respond to investigate the legality of a shipment only in response to 
allegations. 
Under Part 5, S84 (1)-(3) of the ILPA the legislatio n will be reviewed following the first five years 
of operation.  
Any successful prosecutions under the ILPA will be listed in the same manner as any criminal 
conviction under other Australian law. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: 3.2 Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; 3.2.7 Standards and other tec hnical requirements; 3.2.7.3 Labelling and 
packaging: paragraph 3.68., page 60:  
Paragraph 3.68 of the WTO Secretariat's Report indicates that FSANZ had completed work on 
country-of-origin labelling following a comprehensive independent review of food labelling law and 
policy and the release of an expert panel report on 28 January 2011. However, Canada would like to refer to the recent announcement on 26 Fe bruary 2015 by the Australian Minister for 
Agriculture, Barnaby Joyce, that Australia was moving to introduce a new Country of Original 
Labelling framework (see Minister for Agriculture, Barnaby Joyce's recent media release at: http://www.agricultureminister.gov.au/Pag es/Media%20Release s/food-labelling-
breakthrough.aspx ). 
Questions 13 & 14 
 Canada would ask Australia to provide an update and clarification of its work on developing and 
implementing changes to its country-of-origin labelling regime.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 16 - 
 
   Canada also asks if Australia can provide an assurance that any revisions to its country of origin 
labelling laws will be WTO-consistent and that trade partners will be consulted and have the 
opportunity to provide comments on draft legislation prior to it being finalized? 
Answers 
On 26 February 2015 the Prime Minister announced that Ministers would bring forward proposals 
for changes to Australia's country of origin labelling framework to provide consumers with clearer information about the origin of food. The Government has since commenced work on the 
development of options for improvement. Australia will ensure that amendments to its country of 
origin labelling regime are consistent with its international trade obligations and that trading partners are consulted on proposed amendments. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: (2) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (8) Government procurem ent: paragraph 3.71, page 61: 
The Secretariat Report notes that Australia announced on 14 November 2014 it is working towards 
possibly acceding to the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). Canada welcomes 
this announcement and looks forward to working with Australia towards its accession to the GPA.  
Question 15 
Could Australia provide an update on its preparations for launching its GPA accession? When does 
it expect to be in a position to officially launch its accession negotiations? 
Answer 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: (2) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (8) Government procurem ent: paragraph 3.72, pages 61-62: 
The Secretariat Report states that in many cases, infrastructure works are dominated by 
government trading enterprises (GTEs) at the central, state and territory government level and 
that such procurements are not competed openly.  
Questions 16 & 17 
 Could Australia provide a listing of the primary GTEs involved in infrastructure works at the 
central, state or territorial government level, in cluding an estimate of the dollar value spent on 
infrastructure works by each entity? 
 Could Australia provide an estimate of the relative  value of public infrastructure works that are 
not competed openly versus those that are competed openly at the central, state or territorial 
government level?  
Answers 
The Commonwealth Department of Finance website provides information on the Commonwealth's 
Government Business Enterprises (GBEs). See http://www.finance.gov.au/property/gbe/ . 
Data on procurement by GBEs is not collected by the Commonwealth Government, as they are not 
subject to the Commonwealth procurement framework. 
Available Commonwealth Government procurement data on public infrastructure works is 
published on AusTender ( https://www.tenders.gov.au/ ). 
The Commonwealth Government does not have information regarding GBEs involved in 
infrastructure works undertaken by States and Territories. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 17 - 
 
  Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: (2) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (8) Government procurem ent: paragraph 3.74, pages 62-63: 
The Secretariat report notes that between February 2012 and December 2014 limited tendering 
represented 56.1% of total procurement value at the Commonwealth level.  
Question 18 
Could Australia provide an estimate of the prop ortion of limited tendering contracts that are 
secured by Australian firms as compared to foreign firms? 
Answer 
The Commonwealth Government does not discriminate by collecting information on a supplier's 
nationality for government procurement contracts. While supplier addresses are reported in contract notices, this is not a definitive indicator of whether they are local or foreign firms. 
Therefore, the requested data is not available. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (1) Overview; paragraph 3.4, 
page 37-38 and Part 3. Trade Policies and Prac tices by Measure: (2) Measures Directly 
Affecting Imports; (8) Government pr ocurement: paragraph 3.77, page 63: 
The Secretariat Report notes that despite Australia's commitment to non-discrimination in 
government procurement, Australia maintains its target of sourcing at least 10% of purchases by 
value from small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Under certain circumstances this figure 
goes up to 20% for software and services in large ICT contracts. The Secretariat Report further states that an SME is a domestic or New Zealand firm with fewer than 200 full-time employees (emphasis added). 
Questions 19 & 20 
 Has this target of 10% increased over the years?  Are there plans to increase such a target of 
minimum SME participation purchases from domestic and New Zealand SMEs?  
 Canada understands that Australia uses a definition of SME for the purposes of the ICT SME 
participation procurement policy as "a body corporate incorporated in Australia or New Zealand which, together with its related bodies corporate or parent entities, has an average annual 
revenue over the last four financial years of less than AUD$500 million." Could Australia confirm 
this definition of SME? Could Australia confirm that the annual revenue of $500 million is per year? How does this revenue threshold compare to other definitions used in Australia for SMEs?  
Answers 
The 10% target for SME participation has not increased and there are currently no plans to 
increase the target. 
Australia can confirm this definition of an SME for the purposes of this policy. The annual revenue 
is per year. The definition of an SME used in the Commonwealth Procurement Rules is an 
Australian or New Zealand firm with fewe r than 200 full time equivalent employees. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: (2) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (8) Government procurem ent: paragraph 3.79, pages 63-64: 
The Secretariat Report indicates that while Australian states also adopt a "best value for money" 
procurement framework, almost all Australian states or territories provide some kind of incentives 
for the procurement of local goods. Among those incentives, the Secretariat Report highlights the 
use of "price preference" in several states, whereby domestic, New Zealand, US and Chilean goods 
and related services are provided a price preferen ce of 10% (e.g. in Western Australia, Tasmania, 
and Northern Territory) or 20% (e.g. in New South Wales, Queensland, and South Australia) over 
other foreign goods and related services in state/territorial government procurement. The 
Secretariat Report further mentions that various states incorporate "buy local" preferences in their procurement policies. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 18 - 
 
  Questions 21 & 22 
 Could Australia provide a list of all such "buy local" preferences at the state and territorial 
levels??  
 Could Australia confirm that the inclusion of non-Australia goods and related services (e.g. New 
Zealand, US and Chile) in the price preference  i s  a s  a  r e s u l t  o f  g o v e r n m e n t  p r o c u r e m e n t  
commitments in preferential trade agreements with these countries? 
Answers 
The Commonwealth is in discussion with sub-central authorities to address questions about 
industry participation schemes. 
State and Territory Governments implement procurement policies consistent with Australia's 
international trade obligations. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: (2) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (8) Government procurem ent: paragraph 3.81, page 64: 
The Secretariat Report states that under the Government of New South Wales Local Jobs First 
Plan, the definition of SMEs was revised from  a business with 200 workers to one with 500. 
Victoria's Victorian Industry Participation Policy (VIPP) is aimed at encouraging domestic suppliers for procurements of A$ 1 million or more, or for projects valued at A$ 3 million or more in 
Metropolitan Melbourne or state-wide projects designated as "strategically significant." VIPP 
guidelines have also introduced a "contestability assessment," as well as more robust monitoring and reporting requirements to demonstrate local content outcomes of VIPP. 
Questions 23, 24, 25 & 26 
 Could Australia indicate if the central or other state/territorial governments are considering 
expanding the definition of an SME? 
Under the VIPP: 
 Could Australia please explain what a "strategically significant" project is and what are the 
criteria for such a project? 
 Could Australia elaborate as to what a "contestability assessment" is? Would such a mechanism 
allow local suppliers to contest the award of a procurement contract to a foreign supplier?  
 What type of robust monitoring and reporting requirements have been implemented? 
Answers 
No expansion of the definition of an SME in the Commonwealth Procurement Rules is currently 
under consideration by the Commonwealth. The States and Territories set their own procurement 
policies. No State or Territory has indicated they are planning any changes to their definition of an SME. 
The Victorian Government has provided detailed information on the VIPP at this link: 
http://dsdbi.vic.gov.au/our-department/strategies-and-initiatives/victorian-industry-participation-
policy . 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Me asure: (2) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (8) Government procurem ent: paragraph 3.82, page 65: 
Question 27 
The Secretariat report notes that so far there has been no analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the 
existing domestic preference policies in governme nt procurement. Does Australia plan on carrying 
such an analysis in the near future?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 19 - 
 
  Answer 
No such analysis has been announced. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (3.4) Measures Affecting Production 
and Trade; (3.4.6) Intellectual Proper ty Rights: paragraph 3.143, page 83: 
It will also allow for a single trans-Tasman patent attorney regime and single patent application 
and examination processes for Australia and New Zeal and, as part of the broader Single Economic 
Market (SEM) agenda; make minor administrative changes to the Patents, Trade Marks and 
Designs Acts to repeal unnecessary document retention provisions; and make minor technical 
amendments to the Patents Act to correct oversigh ts in the drafting of the Intellectual Property 
Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012. 
Question 28 
How, if at all, will the single trans-Tasman patent attorney regime affect patent and trade-mark 
agents in terms of privilege? 
Answer 
The Single Trans-Tasman Patent Attorney Re gime, and the associated amendments in the 
Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act 2015, is not intended to affect client-attorney privilege for patent and trade mark attorneys in any way. Subsections 200(2) and (2A) of the Patents Act 
1990 provide that communications and documents made for the dominant purpose of a registered 
patent attorney providing intellectual property advice are privileged to the same extent as a legal practitioner. Subsection 200 (2A) extends this to an  individual authorised to do patents work under 
a law of another country or region, to the extent to which the individual is authorised to provide 
intellectual property advice of the kind provided . Therefore, the privilege provisions already apply 
to a patent attorney registered in New Zealand and other countries. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (3.4) Measures Affecting Production 
and Trade; (3.4.6) Intellectual Property Rights; (3.4.6.2) Indu strial Property; (3.4.6.2.1) 
Patents: paragraph 3.148, page 84: 
The Patents Act 1990, last amended in 2012 (secti on 3.4.6), provides protection for standard 
patents and innovation patents, with terms of 20 (up to 25 for eligible pharmaceuticals) and 
8 years, respectively. The changes made by the 2012 Act covered, inter alia… patent oppositions;…  
Questions 29, 30 & 31 
 Did these changes affect the length of the patent  opposition process, if so how long did it 
previously take and how long does it currently take? 
 Did these changes affect how many oppositions the commissioner hears a year, if so how many 
were previously heard and how many are heard now? 
 Did these changes affect the percentage of patent  oppositions that are appealed to the federal 
court, if so how many were previously appeal ed and how many have been appealed since the 
amendment? 
Answers 
In Australia the majority of oppositions filed do  not proceed to final determination but are more 
often resolved by negotiation or unilateral withdrawal of either the opposition or the patent 
application. Prior to changes to the regulations go verning patent oppositions, the average time to 
finalise the small number of oppositions that reached final determination was in excess of 4 years. The main contributor to this was the ready availabili ty of extensions of time to file evidence with 
several extensions typically granted to both the applicant and opponent.  
Since the commencement of the amendments there has been a marked decrease in requests for 
extensions of time to file evidence in opposition matters. During 2012, there was an average of WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 20 - 
 
  202 requests for extensions of time per quarter. During 2014, this reduced to 22 per quarter. This 
will inevitably result in a very significant decrease in the time taken to finalise opposition proceedings.  
As oppositions involving extensions of time under the former rules are still being processed, it is 
too soon to see this clearly reflected in the time to finalise opposition proceedings. However, 
in 2014 the average time to final determinatio n was reduced to approximately 3.5 years. 
The extension of time regime is not the only variable impacting on the hearing of oppositions. 
However, changes to the timeframes for filing evidence have resulted in a transitional surge in the 
number of oppositions being set for hearing.  
In 2012, there were 7 decisions issued in relation to oppositions to the grant of a patent. In 2014, 
there were 37 decisions issued in relation to oppositions to the grant of a patent. At the same time 
there has been no significant change in the rate at which applications are being opposed. 
Due to transitional effects, oppositions are still being determined on the basis of old substantive 
law requirements. Consequently, it is too early to  determine what effect changes to these or the 
rules for oppositions will have on the number of appeals to the Federal Court. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (3.4) Measures Affecting Production 
and Trade; (3.4.6) Intellectual Property Rights; (3.4.6.2) Indu strial Property; (3.4.6.2.1) 
Patents: paragraph 3.148, page 84: 
Experimentation and approval for generic manufac turers is no longer delayed or negatively 
impacted by patents thus providing certainty to researchers and manufacturers and allowing them 
to work without worrying about patent litigation. 
Question 32 
Could Australia clarify the scope of the exception allowing for experimentation and research 
involving patented subject matter, and whether this exception only applies to generic 
manufactures or whether it applies to other industries as well? 
Answer 
The experimental use exemption (section 119C of the Patents Act 1990) is a statutory exemption 
from patent infringement for research and experimental activities. The exemption is not explicitly 
limited to any particular type of manufacturer. 
Section 119C is designed to clarify that research and experimental activities relating to patented 
inventions are exempt from infringement, whereas commercial activities are not.  
The intent is to give broad and clear protection to  research and experimental activities in order to 
maximise the potential for research in Australia. The exemption is not intended to exempt the use 
of patented 'research tools' from infringement. 
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (3.4) Measures Affecting Production 
and Trade; (3.4.6) Intellectual Property Rights; (3.4.6.2) Indu strial Property; (3.4.6.2.1) 
Patents: paragraph 3.149, page 84: 
Between 2009 and 2013 patent applications rose by 25.7% to 29,747; of these, 90% were from 
non-residents, mostly from the United States, Japan, and Germany. During the same period, 
innovation patents applications rose by 23.2% to 1,681 (2013).  
Questions 33, 34 & 35 
 Could Australia provide additional information as to the breakdown of innovation patent 
applications by residents/non-residents, similar to that for the standard patents? 
 Does Australia track the percentage of foreign ownership of granted patents? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 21 - 
 
   Does Australia have any system or database for identifying who the current owner of a granted 
patent is once that patent has been assigned? 
Answers 
The total number of Innovation Patent applic ations in 2013 was 1,676. Of these 1130 or 67 % 
were by Australian residents. The remaining 546 a pplications or 33% were by non-residents.   
The Australian Intellectual Property Report 2014 published on IP Australia's website 
(http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/ ) includes figures on foreign ownership of patents granted in a 
particular year.  
In 2013, 16,002 out of 17,112 (or 93%) of patents granted were to non-residents.  
Year Resident Non-resident Total 
2013 1,110 16,002 17,112 
2012 1,311 16,413 17,724 
2011 1,262 16,611 17,873 
Details of patent ownership are provided in IP Australia's search database (AusPat) - accessible 
from IP Australia's website at http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/ .  
Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (3.4) Measures Affecting Production 
and Trade; (3.4.6) Intellectual Property Rights; (3.4.6.2) Indu strial Property; (3.4.6.2.1) 
Patents: paragraph 3.150, page 84: 
A Commonwealth, state or territory court may order the granting of a compulsory licence if it is 
satisfied that the reasonable requirements of the public have not been met in relation to the invention, and the patentee has not given a satisfactory reason for failing to exploit the invention. Compulsory licences have seldom been sought in Australia and to-date there have been no 
successful cases. 
Questions 36, 37 & 38 
 Could Australia clarify in what situations has an application for a compulsory license been 
sought and refused, as well as the process for granting a compulsory license? 
 Could Australia outline how the reasonable requ irements of the public are determined, and 
what satisfactory reasons for failing to exploit the invention may be? 
 Can the compulsory licence and revocation provisions be used to deal with abuse of patent 
rights by patent owners (for example, patent tr olling or issues related to standard essential 
patents)? 
Answers 
An inquiry into the compulsory licensing of patents was undertaken by Australia's Productivity 
Commission in 2013 – Details of the inquiry and related reports are available from the Commission's website: http://www.pc.gov.au/ .  
The Commission's report identified that since 1903 there had been only three applications for 
compulsory license order. The most recent in 1999 was the only case made under current provisions in the Patents Act 1990. None of these applications resulted in a compulsory licence. 
Applications for compulsory licenses are made to the Federal Court of Australia. The relevant 
provisions for compulsory licensing applicatio n are contained within Sections 133-140 of the 
Patents Act 1990. 
Australia's Federal Court may order a patentee to grant an applicant a licence to work a patented 
invention on the ground that the 'reasonable requ irements of the public' are not being satisfied. 
The criteria for making this order are specified in s.133(2)(a) of the Patents Act 1990:  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 22 - 
 
  (a) all the following conditions exist:  
(i)  the applicant has tried for a reasonable period, but without success, to obtain from 
the patentee an authorisation to work the invention on reasonable terms and conditions;  
(ii) the reasonable requirements of the public  with respect to the patented invention have 
not been satisfied;  
(iii) the patentee has given no satisfactory reason for failing to exploit the patent.  
Guidance on the reasonable requirements of the public is given in s. 135(1):  
(1) … the reasonable requirements of the public with respect to a patented invention are to be 
taken not to have been satisfied if:  
(a) an existing trade or industry in Austra lia, or the establishment of a new trade or 
industry in Australia, is unfairly prejudiced, or the demand in Australia for the 
patented product, or for a product result ing from the patented process, is not 
reasonably met, because of the patentee's failure:  
(i) to manufacture the patented product to an adequate extent, and supply it on 
reasonable terms; or  
(ii) to manufacture, to an adequate extent, a part of the patented product that is 
necessary for the efficient working of the product, and supply the part on 
reasonable terms; or  
(iii) to carry on the patented process to a reasonable extent; or  (iv) to grant licences on reasonable terms; or (b) a trade or industry in Australia is 
unfairly prejudiced by the conditions atta ched by the patentee (whether before 
or after the commencing day) to the purchase, hire or use of the patented product, the use or working of the patented process; or (c) if the patented 
invention is not being worked in Australia on a commercial scale, but is capable 
of being worked in Australia. 
The Federal Court may also order a patentee to grant an applicant a licence to work a patented 
invention on the ground that the patentee has contravened or is contravening Part IV of the 
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 in connection with the patent.  
Provisions contained within the Patents Act 1990 and consumer law provide protections against the 
abuse of patents rights by patents owners.  
Australian law allows for compulsory licenses to be granted if the patented invention is not being 
worked in Australia or where the patentee has breached or is breaching Part IV of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA) in connection with the patent. It should be noted that a patent may 
be revoked under the Patents Act 1990 if, after the prescribed period (currently 2 years from the 
licence being granted), the owner of the patent fa ils to exploit the invention or is breaching the 
CCA.  
Part IV of the CCA contains a number of provisions prohibiting conduct that would likely lessen 
competition including agreements that restrict dealings or affect competition and misuse of market power. Subsection 51(3) of the CCA provides a limited exception from most of the competition law prohibitions for certain types of transactions involving IP (in particular certain conditions in a 
licence or assignment). The exception covers conditions in licences or assignments of IP rights in 
patents, registered designs, copyright, tradem arks and circuit layouts where, broadly, the 
condition relates to products that are the subject of the application of the intellectual property 
right. The exception does not extend to the prohib itions relating to misuse of market power and 
resale price maintenance.  
The final report to Government on the Competition Policy Review was published on 31 March 2015 
and recommended that Subsection 51(3) of the CCA should be repealed. This Government has not 
yet responded to this recommendation. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 23 - 
 
  Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (3.4) Measures Affecting Production 
and Trade; (3.4.6) Intellectual Property Rights; (3.4.6.4) En forcement: paragraph 3.161, 
page 88: 
Under the new laws, importers will no longer be able to avoid prosecution and receive the 
infringing goods or copies when the statutory period expires. 
Question 39 & 40 
 Could Australia elaborate on their experiences since enacting these new laws, particularly with 
respect to receiving infringing goods once the statutory period expires? 
The largest seizures for this period consisted of batteries, chicken-bags, toiletries (including 
toothpaste and cosmetics), energy drinks and toys. 
 Could Australia elaborate on whether the seized items were confiscated only because they were 
found to be infringing goods, or whether there were health and safety concerns that allowed 
them to be seized as well? 
Answers 
The previous intellectual property enforcement framework appeared to operate in favour of 
recidivist importers, specifically, the goods would be released to the importer if the Objector did 
not commence legal action within a 10 day "Action Period". Often, the Objector was unable to 
initiate legal proceedings; serve legal papers or obtain forfeiture from the importer because: 
 The importer was deliberately unavailable during the Action Period; 
 False contact details were provided to Customs and/or the Objector; or 
 Addresses led to vacant blocks of land. 
Under the new intellectual property enforcement framework the importer has to make a Claim for 
the seized goods/copies within a 10 day claim period. For the Claim to be valid, all mandatory details on the form must be completed. The Claim must have enough detail included to enable the 
rights holder to identify and contact the importer to obtain forfeiture or serve legal documents so 
the objector can test the matter of infringement in  court. If the importer does not lodge a Claim 
within the claim period the goods will be considered as forfeited to the Commonwealth. This 
ensures that importers are not able to avoid prosecution and still retain the infringing 
goods/copies. 
Since the introduction of the new measures there has been a significant rise in voluntary 
forfeitures. Where an importer does make a claim for the goods, the new process provides 
increased opportunities for the rights holders to initiate court action.   
The goods would have been seized because they were infringing goods. However, the detection by 
Australian Customs and Border Protection Servic e (ACBPS) of infringing goods is determined 
through a risk-based, intelligence-driven approach to cargo assessment. The level of risk (and the 
resources applied) would be elevated for goods which pose a health or safety concern to the community.    
The ACBPS approach to intellectual property rights risk management occurs as part of our broader 
risk management of all border controls. 
If goods which posed a health and safety risk to the community were identified but not covered 
under a Notice of Objection, ACBPS would share re levant information with the appropriate agency 
within Australia, to allow them to take action as necessary within the Australian market. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 24 - 
 
  Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
Part 2. Economic Environment: (2.5) Market and Regulatory Reforms, including Tax 
Reform; (3) Small Business Policy Ag enda: paragraph 2.17, page 7: 
Question 41 
Could Australia explain what types of programs or policies it is implementing or plans to implement 
in order to increase the "quality and effectiven ess of government engagement" to build small 
business capacity? 
Answer 
In 2014, as part of its Industry, Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda, the Australian 
Government announced the adoption a set of Small business engagement principles. The Principles are aimed at helping Australian Government agencies improve the way they engage with small 
business with a view to cutting red tape, improving access to information and building business 
competitiveness. 
The Australian Government is continuing to raise awareness and uptake of Government initiatives 
to support small business. It is currently reviewing the taxation system with a view to reducing the 
complexity and compliance burden for small business. 
The Australian Government is developing incentives and reward for enterprise including support for 
entrepreneurship. 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 and Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
Government Report - Part 3. Trade and Inve stment Policy: (3.7) Intellectual Property: 
paragraph 3.25, page 14: 
A number of intellectual-property related legislative developments have occurred since Australia's 
last WTO Trade Policy Review: The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 
2012 came into full effect on 15 April 2013. The Act raises the quality of granted patents, allows free access to patented inventions for regulatory approvals and research, reduces delays in 
resolution of patent and trade mark applications, assists the operations of the intellectual property 
profession, improves mechanisms for trade mark and copyright enforcement, and simplifies some 
aspects of the intellectual property system. 
AND 
Secretariat Report – Part 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (3.4) Measures 
Affecting Production and Trade; (3.4.6) In tellectual Property Ri ghts: paragraph 3.142, 
page 82-83: 
To improve the robustness of its IP laws and system, Australia passed the IP Laws Amendment 
(Raising the Bar) Act 2012, its biggest IP system overhaul in twenty years, that came into full effect on 15 April 2013…The amendments address th e following key areas: raising the quality of 
granted patents; free access to patented inventions for regulatory approvals and research; 
reducing delays in the resolution of patent and tr ade mark applications; assisting the operations of 
the IP profession; improving mechanisms for trade mark and copyright enforcement; and 
simplifying the IP system. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 25 - 
 
  Question 42 
Given that it has been almost two years since the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising 
the Bar) Act 2012 came into effect, can Australia provide more information, including figures, if available, on the results the Act has had on raisin g the quality of granted patents, reducing delays 
in resolution of patent and trade mark applications, improving mechanisms for trade mark and 
copyright enforcement?  
Answer 
The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012, which commenced on 15 
April 2013, was the biggest overhaul of Australia's IP  system in twenty years. The objective of the 
amendments in the Act is to better support innovation by encouraging investment in research and technology in Australia, and to help Australia n businesses benefit from their good ideas.  
IP Australia is measuring a number of metrics to determine the extent to which this Act is 
achieving its objectives. As it only came into full effect in April 2013 its impacts are only beginning to emerge. (This is due primarily to the nature of  the transitional provisions and the lengths of 
time involved examination and opposition processes.) Initial indications regarding the effect of the 
reforms on patent quality, delays in patent and trade mark applications, and enforcement are positive. For example, the time taken to resolve divisional patent applications has begun to show a 
decrease, as has the number of extensions of time  granted during patent opposition processes. 
The Act also made a significant change to the Notice of Objection Scheme by introducing the claim 
for release process. This ensures that for Customs seizure, importers cannot circumvent the Notice of Objection Scheme by not responding to the se izure notice. When the new measures were first 
introduced there was a significant increase in forfeitures. It was estimated that 99.9% of seizures 
were forfeited (either voluntary, deemed or court ordered). There has since been a decrease in forfeitures as importers become more familiar with the new process. For the 2013/2014 financial 
year approximately 75% of seizures have resulted in forfeiture.  
The Act also extended the jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit Court to trade mark and designs 
matters, as an alternative to the Federal Court of Australia. To date, we are aware of four cases 
using this new avenue. 
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA 
Follow-up question 1 
What specific processes and capabilities within th e Department of Agriculture has the Government 
of Australia established to enforce the import prohibitions on products of illegal logging?  
Answer 
The Australian Government Department of Agriculture is the regulator for a range of legislation 
including the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act (ILPA). Allegations of breaches with any legislation can 
be made to the department through its phone, email and website contact channels. Any allegations will be referred to the department's  Enforcement Section for assessment and response 
(if appropriate) in accordance with Australian Government policy. The department has the 
capability to investigate legislative breaches of the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 2012 and the Illegal Logging Prohibition Regulation 2012. Tw enty-seven enforcement section officers are 
currently appointed as 'Inspectors' under the Act. 
Follow-up question 2 
What form of allegations, and from what sources,  would Australia consider sufficient evidence to 
investigate the legality of a forest product shipment? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 26 - 
 
  Answer 
The Department of Agriculture will assess any information that it is provided concerning alleged 
breaches of the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act (ILPA). Information may be provided by any person through the department's contact channels and may be done so anonymously. Information may 
relate to specific allegations of wrong-doing through to reports of suspicious activity. Any offence 
within the ILPA that is alleged to have been committed will be assessed based on the nature of the allegation, the availability of evidence and the o ffence elements that need to be satisfied in the 
ILPA.  
Follow-up question 3 
What criteria would the Government of Australia ap ply following the first five years of operation of 
the Illegal Logging Prohibition Act 2012 to assess the effectiveness of the legislation?  
Answer 
The Act does not specify the criteria that will be used to assess its effectiveness. The Department 
of Agriculture will take advice from the Australi an Government of the day in developing the scope 
of the review. The review will consider a number of issues that go to the effectiveness, efficiency 
and appropriateness of the Act. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 27 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT CHILE  
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 II.1 Propiedad Intelectual 
3.4.6.4 Enforcement, puntos 3.160 y 3.161, páginas 87 y 88. 
Respecto del párrafo 3.160, referido a la observancia de los derechos de propiedad intelectual, y la 
suspensión de importaciones y exportaciones en particular en el párrafo 3.161, se solicita más información respecto a la existencia de contrapesos jurídicos o administrativos a las facultades de 
las autoridades de aduana para decretar una suspensión de despacho de mercancías.  
Question 1 
3.4.6.2.5 Geographical indications (GIs), punto 3.155, sobre las Indicaciones Geográficas, se 
solicita más información respecto de cuáles son los "determinados criterios" que se mencionan 
para aceptar el registro de Indicaciones Geográficas. 
II.1 Intellectual Property 
3.4.6.4 Enforcement, 3,160 and 3,161 points, pages 87 and 88. 
Regarding paragraph 3.160, on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, and the suspension 
of imports and exports in particular in paragraph 3.161, more information is sought regarding the existence of legal or administrative balances on the powers of customs authorities to order a 
suspension of clearance of goods. 
3.4.6.2.5 Geographical Indications (GIs), about 3,155, on Geographical Indications, more 
information on what the "specific criteria" referred to accept the registration of geographical indications is requested. 
Answer 
There are essentially three possible options to suspend the release of goods in Australia: 
1. Through the Notice of Objection Scheme;  
2. Via Court Injunction; or 
3. Ex officio action.  
Option 1 & 2 are based on application by the rights holder. Option 3 - Ex Officio action is taken & 
initiated by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS). This action is not 
reliant on whether a Notice of Objection is in pl ace. This action is undertaken by ACBPS through 
provisions within the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act 1905 (CTDA) and not intellectual property legislation. (Under the CTDA, it is an offence for goods to have a false trade description 
or bear a false country of origin. It is for this reason we are able to apply this legislation in an ex 
officio capacity, where appropriate, for intellectual property infringements)  
ACBPS has powers under provisions of the Copyright Act 1968 (the Copyright Act), the Trade 
Marks Act 1995 (the Trade Marks Act) and the Olym pic Insignia Protection Act 1987, relating to 
imported goods. This gives rise to Australia's Notice of Objection Scheme. 
The Notice of Objection Scheme allows trade mark and copyright owners to notify ACBPS of their 
rights, and object to the importation of goods that infringe those rights. ACBPS will detain any 
goods suspected of infringing rights notified under  the Notice of Objection Scheme, where they are 
detected at the border. Notification of seizure is then sent to the Importer and the Objector (rights owner), and one of the following scenarios will follow: 
 If the importer makes a Claim for the Release (Claim) of the goods within a 10 day Claim 
Period, the information on the Claim form, such as contact details, is given to the rights holder, who will make a decision as to whether to commence civil action against the 
i m p o r t e r  ( c i v i l  a c t i o n  m u s t  b e  c o m m e n c e d  w i t h i n  t h e  1 0  d a y  A c t i o n  P e r i o d  w h i c h  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 28 - 
 
  commences on the day the rights holder receiv es notification that a Claim for Release has 
been made by the importer) 
 The importer voluntarily forfeits the goods (a large proportion of importers choose this 
approach).  
 If no Claim or voluntary forfeiture is received  from the importer, the goods will be deemed 
forfeited and can be disposed of after 30 working days.  
 If a Claim for the goods is made, and no civil action is undertaken by the rights holder, the 
goods will be released to the importer. 
 If the importer, upon advice that the goods ha ve been released, does not collect the goods 
within 90 days, they will be considered forfeited and disposed of. 
In Australia, a determination of infringement can only be made through judicial process 
i.e. courts/legal system. In addition, it is the courts that determine whether damages should be 
awarded as part of the settlement process. Th ere are no circumstances where the ACBPS would 
impose administrative penalties (which may include fines or the seizure of infringing goods) 
following a determination that the goods are infringing. In Australia, seizure occurs first, then the 
courts determine infringement (if it progresses to court action). 
The criteria for the registration of certification trade marks include: 
 the certification trade mark must be capable of distinguishing the certified goods from goods 
not so certified; 
 the certification trade mark must not be the same or confusingly similar to an earlier trade 
mark for the same or similar goods; or likely to deceive or confuse, or be scandalous or 
contrary to law, or consist of or contain a prohibited sign; 
The application must be accompanied by rules governing use of the certification trade mark which 
must, inter alia , include: 
 the requirements that goods or services must meet for the certification trade mark to be 
applied to them; 
 the attributes that a person must have to become an approved certifier; 
 the requirements that the owner of the certification trade mark or an approved user must 
meet to use the certification trade mark in relation to goods or services; 
 the procedure for resolving a dispute about whether goods or services meet the certification 
requirements.  
Once a certification trade mark has met registrability requirements, the application is forwarded to 
an independent government organisation, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) to ensure the application rules are consistent  with competition principles and in the public 
interest.  
The rules must not unfairly exclude those qualif ied to use the trade mark and certification 
authorities must be competent. 
3.2.7.1 Standards, testing, and ce rtification, punto 3.44, page 53 
Question 2 
In regard to ACCC, who are its members? Answer 
The ACCC is governed by a Chair and other member s of the Commission appointed for terms of up 
to five years. Commissioners are appointed by the Governor-General on recommendation of the Commonwealth Government. An appointment is made after the majority of state and territory 
jurisdictions support the selection. The Commonwealth Treasurer may also appoint associate 
members of the Commission, with the support of a majority of state and territory jurisdictions.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 29 - 
 
  The ACCC is currently comprised of seven full-t ime members including the Chair and two Deputy 
Chairs, and three associate members (being the Chairs of Australian Communications and Media Authority, the AER and the New Zealand Commerce Commission). 
3.2.7.1.5 Transparency, punto 3.54, page 56 
Questions 3 
Does Australia have an Export Alert of Notifications?  
Answer 
What particular actions Australia does in order to increase the industry awareness of the benefits 
of knowing in advance the TBT notifications? How often does the Australian industry make comments to the TBT notifications? 
Australia does not undertake an automatic alert of TBT notifications and is always interested in 
analysing improvements to assist transparency of the TBT notification process. Relevant Australian 
agencies consult with Australian industry on rele vant TBT notifications. Australian industry will 
comment on TBT notifications on an as required basis and depending on the industry sector and 
type of regulatory change being proposed in a TBT notification. 
3.2.7.2 Sanitary and phytosanitary regulations Questions 4 & 5 
 ¿Cuál es el rol del ESG (Eminent Scientist Group) ? ¿Cómo funciona y cuáles son sus políticas 
de transparencia? Sírvase aclarar cuál es el nivel de incidencia de las declaraciones de este grupo sobre la adopción de MSF.  
 En el informe se establece que se consideran las repercusiones económicas de las MSF, pero 
que no son el foco principal a la hora de elaborar regulaciones. ¿Se espera cambiar la 
ponderación del impacto económico y de las relaciones comerciales en las medidas regulatorias? 
3.2.7.2 Sanitary and ph ytosanitary Regulations 
 What is the role of ESG (Eminent Scientist Group)? How does it work and what their policies of 
transparency? Please clarify what level of inci dence of the statements of this group on the 
adoption of SPS. 
 The report states that considering the economic impact of SPS measures, but are not the main 
focus when developing regulations. Do you expe ct to change the emphasis on the economic 
impact of trade relations in regulatory measures? 
Answers 
The Eminent Scientist Group (ESG) is a group of independent persons appointed by the Secretary 
of the Department of Agriculture to examine revised draft IRA reports to ensure stakeholder 
comments have been properly considered and that the conclusions/recommendations of the IRA 
report are reasonable based on the evidence presented. The ESG are only used during the e x p a n d e d  I R A  p r o c e s s ,  n o t  d u r i n g  a  s t a n d a r d  I R A .  I n  t h e  c a s e  o f  a n  e x p a n d e d  I R A ,  t h e  E S G  
considers the revised draft IRA report after the department has considered stakeholder comments 
and takes account of any relevant, new information brought to its attention and assesses conflicting scientific views, to ensure that: 
 all submissions received from stakeholders in response to the draft IRA report have been 
properly considered 
 all relevant matters relating to the likely biological and economic consequences of a pest or 
disease incursion have been properly considered 
 the conclusions of the revised draft report are scientifically reasonable, based on the 
material presented.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 30 - 
 
  Under the Quarantine Regulations 2000, the ESG consists of independent persons appointed by 
the Director of Animal and Plant Quarantine (the director) in consultation with the Chief Scientists and chief executive officers of state and territory departments responsible for primary industries. Each member selected will have a proven record of scientific leadership, have made significant 
contribution to science and be well respected in the broad scientific community.  
The ESG prepares a report to the director on its findings and recommends action to overcome any 
identified deficiencies. The ESG's report is provided to the department and is publicly released on 
the department's website. 
3.2.7.2.1 Food standards-setting Question 6 
Pregunta: ¿Cuál es la razón del por qué FSANZ elabora normas que son más estrictas que el Codex 
Alimentarius? Se señala que en caso de que las normas no se ajusten, se notifican a la OMC. Se 
solicita explicar por qué en muchas ocasiones las medidas son más estrictas que el Codex.  
3.2.7.2.1 Food standards-setting 
What is the reason why FSANZ develops standards that are stricter than the Codex Alimentarius? 
It is noted that if the rules do not conform notifi ed to the WTO. Is asked to explain why in many 
cases the measures are more stringent than the Codex. 
Answer 
FSANZ follows best international practice in developing food standards, including following the 
Principles and methods for the Risk Assessment of  chemicals in food published by the FAO/WHO 
and the working principles for risk analysis as  set out in the Codex Alimentarius Procedural 
Manual. The risk analysis is based on the use of the best available evidence and the risk 
assessment and risk management processes are f unctionally separated and documented fully and 
systematically in a transparent manner. The primary objective of standard-setting is the protection 
of consumers. In all cases, FSANZ pays regard to effects on international trade and Codex 
Alimentarius (Codex) standards and harmonises wh ere justified. Where this is not possible, for 
example for the reasons set out below, an explanat ion of the rationale for the food standard is 
given in the WTO notification. The reasons for a decision on a food standard are presented clearly 
and transparently in FSANZ reports for each amendment to the Australia New Zealand Food 
Standard Code (the Code). 
Some of the reasons why a standard in the Code may be more restrictive than a Codex standard 
are given below. These are factors relating to the protection of the health and safety of Australian 
consumers: 
 Setting maximum permitted levels for substances added to foods requires consideration of 
national consumption levels to determine a safe level. 
 Standards are set based on current and best sci entific evidence and therefore may be more 
up-to-date than the evidence used to set an earlier Codex standard. 
 Some substances added for a technological need should only be used up to the level 
required for that need, and this may differ in different countries due to food processing requirements and availability of alternatives. 
 Standards for allergens are based on geographically important food components giving rise 
to significant allergenic potential – these vary regionally. 
 Other specifications e.g. for vitamins and mineral permissions are based on the national diet 
and may require the setting of upper levels to ensure there is no excessive exposure. 
 FSANZ has established a system whereby interested parties may apply on an annual basis 
for recognition of international MRLs for import purposes, thus facilitating the harmonisation of international MRL standards where appropriate. 
It should also be noted that many standards in Australia are less restrictive than for Codex e.g. 
commodity standards, contaminant standards. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 31 - 
 
  3.2.7.2.3 Import risk analyses (IRAs) 
Question 7 
Se detalla la realización de evaluaciones de riesgo en base a ciencia y de análisis de riesgo de 
importación. Se solicita aclarar la razón de hacer IRAs, sobre todo si se considera el tiempo que 
toman en realizarse. Existe un marco de tiempo en que se deben finalizar ambos procesos 
(2 años), pero no existen prescripciones relativas al tiempo en que se deben empezar luego de recibir una solicitud, lo que se prestaría para demo ras innecesarias en el proceso de apertura de 
mercado.  
Se solicita aclarar "Assessing risk may also take the form of a non-regulated analysis of existing 
import policy". ¿Bajo qué criterios se decide que un permiso de importación se debe actualizar? y 
en caso de que se deba hacer, ¿se debe pasar por un proceso regulado o no-regulado?  
Se solicita aclarar por qué habría de existir una diferencia entre Análisis de Riesgo regulados y 
des-regulados. En caso de que este proceso fuera algún tipo de proceso acelerado, no se explica cuál sería el criterio para que un producto califique para ser evaluado con mayor celeridad que los 
regulados.  
En conclusión, se solicita aclarar la diferencia entre análisis de riesgos regulados, no-regulados, y 
revisiones de políticas de importación existente.  
¿Es posible que Australia haga un Roadmap o entregue actualizaciones de los avances del proceso 
de revisión de los IRAs, de manera que se an comentados por los socios comerciales?  
3.2.7.2.3 Import risk analyses (IRAs) Conducting risk assessments based on science and import risk analysis is detailed. Requested 
clarification why do IRAs, especially when you consider the time it takes to complete. There is a 
time frame in which to finish both processes (two years), but there are no requirements for the time in which to start after receiving a request, which would lend itself to unnecessary delays in 
the process of market opening. 
Requested clarification "Assessing risk May Also take the form of a non-regulated analysis of 
Existing import policy" I .¿Bajo what criteria is decided that an import permit must be updated? 
and if they should do, should go through a process regulated or unregulated ? 
Requested clarification why should there be a di fference between Risk Analysis regulated and de-
regulated. If this process were some kind of a ccelerated process, it does not explain what the 
criteria for a product to qualify to be evaluated more quickly than would be regulated. 
In conclusion, it is requested to clarify the difference between risk analysis regulated, non-
regulated, and reviews existing import policy. 
Is it possible that Australia make a Roadmap or submit updates on the progress of the review 
process of IRAs, so be discussed by the partners? 
Answer 
The Australian Government Department of Agriculture undertakes a range of risk assessments in 
response to market access requests from other countries and from Australian businesses to import 
animals, plants and/or other goods into Australia, where the plants, animal or goods have not been imported into Australia before, or have not been imported into Australia from a particular country or region.  
The department uses risk assessments as a tool to assist in considering the level of biosecurity risk 
that may be associated with the importation of a good, and to identify ways to manage these risks.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 32 - 
 
  There are two types of risk assessments used by the department; an import risk analysis (IRA) 
which is conducted through a regulated process provided for in the Quarantine Regulations 2000 and non-regulated risk assessments (such as scientific reviews of existing policy or technical advice from within the department). 
In prioritising import risk assessments, the department takes the following criteria into account 
(where relevant): 
 National interest 
 Alignment with the department's objectives 
 Expected benefits 
 Challenges 
 Practical considerations. 
The time taken to initiate a risk assessment is dependent upon the assignment of a priority based 
on these criteria. 
A risk assessment which does not meet the criteria for an IRA is undertaken as a non-regulated 
risk assessment. The department undertakes a ra nge of non-regulated risk assessments when 
assessing proposals to import animals, plants or other goods into Australia or reviewing import conditions for goods already entering Australia.  
Risk assessments are undertaken through an administrative process and must also meet 
Australia's international obligations. The department has separate, formally agreed processes for undertaking weed risk assessments and biological control agent risk assessments, both of which are available on the department's website http://www.agriculture.gov.au/ . 
The department uses a formal methodology to assess biosecurity risk. The method used by 
Australia follows internationally agreed principles  outlined by the SPS Agreement and the OIE and 
IPPC codes and standards relating to import and pest risk analyses.  
Trading partners will be advised of any regulatory or administrative changes to the IRA process via 
an SPS notification. 
3.2.7.2.4 Quarantine 
Question 8 
En el párrafo 3.62 se establece que "The Department of Health (previously Department of Health 
and Ageing (DoHA)) performs risk assessments on all biological materials that are of human quarantine concern, and provides advice to the De partment of Agriculture before an import permit 
is issued".  
¿De qué manera es distinto este Análisis de Riesgo que los detallados en la sección anterior? En el párrafo 3.63 se menciona una revisión del proceso de asesoramiento de FSANZ en los 
riesgos de los alimentos importados. Chile quisiera saber si ese proceso fue notificado (como lo fue 
el de revisión de IRA) y si es un proces o abierto, transparente y participativo.  
Se solicita explicar el concepto de "stop the clock" mencionado en el párrafo 3.64, en el contexto 
de la exportación a Australia de carne fresca. Aclarar qué gatilló esta provisión, en qué consiste, y 
por qué sigue vigente si, de acuerdo al texto, se estableció en el año 2000.  
3.2.7.2.4 Quarantine Paragraph 3.62 states that "The Department of Health (previously Department of Health and 
Ageing (DoHA)) performs risk assessments on a ll biological materials are of human quarantine 
That Concern, and Provides advice to the Department of Agriculture before an import permit is issued ". 
How is this different risk analysis that detailed in the previous section? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 33 - 
 
  In paragraph 3.63 a review process FSANZ advice on the risks of imported food is mentioned. 
Chi le  wou ld  l ike  to know if th is  p roc e ss  was  notifie d  (as  was the  re vis ion I R A) and  if an op e n, transparent and participatory process. 
It is requested to explain the concept of "stop the clock" mentioned in paragraph 3.64, in the 
context of export to Australia of fresh meat. It clarify what triggered this provision, what is, and 
why it remains valid if, according to the text, was established in 2000. 
Answer 
The Quarantine Act 1908 (Cth) differentiates the appointment of officers responsible for human 
quarantine from officers responsible for animal and plant quarantine (sections 9 and 9AA). Because of this differentiation human quarantine is the delegated responsibility of the Department 
of Health (Health). Health is responsible for providing regulatory and risk assessment advice in 
relation to the management of human health risks associated with imported goods including 
biological products. The Import Risk Analyses (IRAs) described in 3.2.7.2.3 are undertaken by the Department of Agriculture (assessing the sanitary  and phytosanitary risks). The risk assessment 
mentioned in paragraph 3.62 relates to IRAs  undertaken by Health (assessing the human 
quarantine risks). 
In relation to the review of advice that is currently  underway, there is – as yet – no advice that will 
change import requirements from a food safety pe rspective. We anticipate that future reviews will 
have this effect – and the Department of Agricu lture will notify the WTO when such advice is 
implemented. Further information on the review, and advice which has already been provided by 
FSANZ can be found on the FSANZ website 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/impo rtedfoods/Pages/FSANZ- advice-on-imported-
food.aspx   
The Quarantine Regulations 2000 were amended in 2007 to regulate keys steps of the import risk 
analysis (IRA) process and included that certain periods of time may be disregarded in 
circumstances where delays are not attributable to the Department of Agriculture. This is known as a 'stop the clock' mechanism. The Chief Executive may choose to stop the clock in the following 
circumstances: 
 Where the Chief Executive believes that further information is essential to complete an IRA 
and that a proposer or another person can provide the information; 
 Where the Chief Executive believes that it is essential to undertake research, or to seek 
substantial expert advice, to complete an IRA; or 
 Where a significant national or international quarantine circumstance exists that limits the 
department's ability to complete an IRA within the time required under the Regulations. 
If the Chief Executive stops the clock, the department issues a notice to this effect on its website.  
The 'stop the clock' mechanism was applied to the IRA for beef from Japan in 2010 following a 
foot-and-mouth disease outbreak which has since been resolved. The 'stop the clock' mechanism 
was applied to the IRAs for beef from Canada an d the United States in 2011 pending provision of 
further information. 
The 'stop the clock' mechanism continues to apply to the IRAs for beef from Canada, Japan and 
the United States while the department considers options to progress those risk assessments. A 
decision is anticipated before the end of 2015. 
3.2.7.2.5 Transparency and technical assistance Question 9 
Aclarar a qué normativas internacionales se refier en en el párrafo 3.66, cuando explican que las 
normas australianas sobre alimentos con OGM se consideran consistentes con las normativas internacionales. Codex Alimentarius, como organismo regulador alimentario, cuenta solamente con 
cuatro normas en la materia: principios de análisis de riesgo y tres directrices para la evaluación 
de inocuidad de alimentos obtenidos de plantas, microorganismos y animales recombinantes. Por WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 34 - 
 
  lo tanto no todas las normativas aplicables a alimentos que contienen OGM- por ejemplo, el 
establecimiento de un porcentaje máximo de ingredientes OGM- se basa o es consistente con normas internacionales.  
Clarify what international regulations refer in paragraph 3.66, when explaining that the Australian 
rules on GMO foods are considered consistent with international standards. Codex Alimentarius as 
a food regulatory agency, has only four standards in the field: risk analysis principles and three 
guidelines for the safety assessment of foods derived from plants, microorganisms and 
recombinant animals. Therefore not all regulations applicable to foods containing OGM- for 
example, the establishment of a maximum percentage of ingredients OGM- based or consistent with international standards. 
Answer 
We acknowledge the absence of any 'international standards' for GM food. Codex Alimentarius 
(Codex) has issued four documents dealing with 'principles' and guidelines' that are relevant to the assessment of the safety of GM foods, which ha ve been agreed through the Codex procedures. 
Australia's protocol for conducting safety assessments of GM foods is based on the scientific 
principles and approaches outlined in these Codex documents.  
We note that a decision not to make any further GM food notifications to the WTO was made by 
FSANZ in 2007, because there were no SPS issues and the approvals to date have been trade 
liberalising. 
3.2.7.3 Labelling and packaging Question 10 
Se solicita especificar si se consideraron las normas del Comité del Codex sobre Etiquetado de los 
Alimentos en las normativas elaboradas por FSANZ, detalladas en el párrafo 3.68. A su vez, se solicita explicar a qué se refieren con "Perceptible information principle" y cuál es la justificación de 
establecer un etiquetado que especifique el país de origen de los alimentos. 
Al igual que en la sección anterior, se solicita especificar en qué normativas internacionales se 
basan las normas de etiquetado de alimentos OGM.  
A modo de observación, el párrafo 3.70 hace refere ncia a materias relativas a Obstáculos Técnicos 
al Comercio, y por lo tanto, no correspondería que este texto estuviera situado en esta sección. No aplicaría estrictamente esto a los párrafos anteriores por tratarse de materias relativas a inocuidad y protección de la salud del consumidor.  
Are requested to specify whether the rules of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling in 
regulations issued by FSANZ, detailed in paragraph 3.68 were considered. In turn, requested explain what you mean by "Perceptible information principle" and what is the justification for 
establishing a label specifying the country of origin of food. 
As in the previous section, we request international regulations specify what the rules for labeling 
GM foods are based. 
As an observation, paragraph 3.70 refers to matters relating to TBT, and therefore does not 
correspond to this text was located in this section. Not strictly apply this to the preceding paragraphs for being matters relating to safety and health protection of consumers. 
Answer 
Australia's country of origin labelling framework is aimed at assisting consumers to make informed 
choices about the origin of food. 
The Perceptible Information Principle is one of seven principles of universal design developed 
in 1997 from the disability rights movement in  the USA. The principle is that the design 
communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 35 - 
 
  the user's sensory abilities. The principle can be applied to the format and presentation of 
mandatory information on food labels. 
As outlined in the answer provided to the previo us question from Chile, Australia's protocol for 
conducting safety assessments of GM foods is ba sed on the scientific principles and approaches 
outlined in these Codex Alimentarius documents.  
GM foods, whether grown in Australia or overseas, are not approved for sale unless they have 
been assessed as safe for human consumption by Food Standards Australia and New Zealand 
(FSANZ). Any approved foods must be labelled in accordance with the Australia New Zealand Food 
Standards code to enable consumers to make informed choices. 
Further information regarding the labelling of GM foods is available on the FSANZ website at: 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/ gmfood/labelling/p ages/default.aspx . 
III.4 Services, Investment, Transportation 
Question 11 
2.1 Overview. El párrafo 2.1 señala que el Gobierno de Australia ha implementado reformas para, 
entre otras cosas, crear un ambiente regulatorio menos gravoso para los negocios y los 
ciudadanos.  
Pregunta: Se solicita se indique qué medidas efectivas se han tomado para hacer menos gravoso 
el ambiente regulatorio para los negocios, en especial, en materias relacionadas con la inversión 
extranjera. 
2.1 Overview. Paragraph 2.1 states that the Government of Australia has implemented reforms to, 
among other things, create a less burdensome regulatory environment for business and citizens. 
It asks what effective measures have been taken to indicate make less burdensome regulatory 
environment for business, especially in matters related to foreign investment. 
Answer 
A major focus of the Government's deregulation policy is to reduce the cost to business in 
complying with Commonwealth regulation. This includes several key reforms to alleviate compliance costs for small business, who often feel a disproportionate impact of regulation. 
To reduce the stock of existing regulations, the Government has a red tape reduction target of 
$1 billion per year for businesses, individuals and community organisations. Since the 2013 election, the Government has announced more than $2.45 billion in red tape savings. To stem the flow of new regulation, all regulatory proposals must be accompanied by a Regulation Impact 
Statement. Any change in the burden imposed by a new regulation must be costed and any 
increase must be offset. 
Because the way regulators administer regulation ca n also have a major effect on productivity, the 
Government has developed a Regulator Performance Framework that will apply from 1 July 2015. 
This will allow for the comprehensive assessment of regulator performance and their engagement with stakeholders. 
Reducing the regulatory burden regulation assist s Australian and foreign business by freeing up 
time that would otherwise be spent meeting red ta pe requirements, by reducing barriers to entry 
in the marketplace and by alleviating barriers to growth. With lower compliance costs, business will 
have more time and resources to focus on deve loping and expanding their business, leading to 
greater wealth and employment.  
Question 12 
2.6 Framework for Business and Investment. El párrafo 2.34 señala que, para asegurar que los 
intereses australianos estén protegidos, el Gobierno de dicho país lleva a cabo un procedimiento WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 36 - 
 
  de revisión de la inversión extranjera. A su vez, el párrafo 2.37 describe someramente el 
procedimiento por el que pasan dichas solicitudes, señalando que el FIRB puede aceptar, aceptar con condiciones y rechazar las propuestas de in versión. Se destaca, a la vez, que ninguna 
propuesta fue rechazada en 2012-2013.  
Pregunta: Se solicita se indique cómo se lleva a cabo dicho proceso y los criterios utilizados 
durante los procesos de revisión. También se señale ejemplos de condiciones que han sido impuestas a los inversionistas extranjeros, al aceptar su inversión con condiciones. 
El párrafo 2.39 señala que el gobierno Australiano reducirá los umbrales existentes a la inversión 
extranjera para compras de tierras agrícolas, que serán sometidas al procedimiento de revisión, y que introducirá un registro de propiedad extranjera. 
Pregunta: Se solicita se indique en cuánto de bajará el umbral anteriormente mencionado y la 
forma en que se implementará el registro de propiedad extranjera. 
Framework for Business and Investment. Paragraph 2.34 states that, to ensure that Australian 
interests are protected, the Government of that country conducts a review procedure of foreign 
investment. In turn, paragraph 2.37 briefly describes the procedure for passing these requests, 
noting that the FIRB can accept, conditionally acce pt and reject investment proposals. Stands, at 
once, that no proposal was rejected in 2012-2013. 
Question: It is requested indicating how this proc ess takes place and the criteria used during the 
review process. Examples of conditions that have been imposed on foreign investors, in accepting investment conditions are also noted. 
Paragraph 2.39 states that the Australian government will reduce existing foreign investment for 
purchases of farmland thresholds, which will be submitted to the review procedure, and introduce 
a register of foreign ownership. 
Question: It is requested is indicated on how to lower the aforementioned threshold and the way in 
which the registration of foreign ownership will be implemented. 
Answer 
The Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (the Act) provides the legislative framework for 
our screening regime. The Act allows the Treasurer or his delegate to review investment proposals 
to decide if they are contrary to Australia's national interest. 
Foreign investment proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure they are not 
contrary to Australia's national interest. Proposals subject to review when value of the target 
business exceeds a monetary screening threshold.  
Types of proposals that are screened include: 
 Acquisitions of 15 per cent or more in Australian businesses valued above $252 million (or 
the higher threshold of $1,094 million for count ries where Australia has given preferential 
treatment through free trade agreements). 
 All direct investments, establishment of new businesses and land acquisitions by foreign 
government investors. 
 Acquisitions of rural land where the cumulative value of rural land that the foreign person 
already holds exceeds, or immediately following the proposed acquisition is likely to exceed, $15 million (apply to all non-government investors except those countries where 
Australia has given preferential treatment through free trade agreements). 
For business acquisitions, assessing the national interest allows the Government to balance 
potential sensitivities against the benefits of foreign investment. 
The Government typically considers the following factors when assessing foreign investment 
proposals in any sector: WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 37 - 
 
   national security; 
 competition; 
 impact on other Government policies (including taxation); 
 impact on the economy and the community; and 
 the character of the investor. 
Treasurer has the power to prohibit, or place cond itions upon, proposals subject to the Act that 
involve a foreign person obtaining control of an Australian company that would be contrary to the 
national interest. However, Treasury does not comment on the application of the foreign 
investment screening arrangements as they apply or could apply to particular cases.  
Question 13 
4.5.5 Financial services. El párrafo 4.74 menciona que las normas sobre Offshore Banking Unit 
proporcionan una tasa impositiva de 10% sobre las rentas obtenidas de ciertas actividades 
bancarias llevadas a cabo en el extranjero. 
Pregunta: Se solicita se indique qué requisitos es necesario cumplir para poder acceder a esta tasa 
reducida. 
4.5.5 Financial services. Paragraph 4.74 states that the rules on Offshore Banking Unit provides a 
10% tax rate on income derived from certain banking activities conducted abroad. 
Question: what is requested stated requirements mu st be met to be eligible for this reduced rate. 
Answer 
The tax laws provide a concessional tax rate of 10 per cent on income derived from a range of 
eligible activities with offshore persons.  
For a transaction to be considered an offshore banking (OB) activity it must, in almost every 
situation, be entered into with an "offshore person".  
If more than 10 per cent of activities of the offs hore banking unit (OBU) do not meet the eligibility 
requirements, then all OBU activities lose access to the concessional tax treatment. 
Introduced in 1992, the range of activities eligible for the concessional tax rate included: 
 borrowing or lending money (AUD transactions are generally not allowed);  
 providing certain types of guarantees;  
 eligible contract activity;  
 trading in certain contracts, securities, non-resident shares or trust units, gold, silver or 
platinum bullion or rights in respect of such bullion and foreign currency;  
 making and managing certain investments;  
 providing financial advice; and  
 hedging against interest rate and currency exposure risks in respect of borrowing and 
lending activities. 
While the broad framework of eligible activities  has remained unchanged since 1992, activities 
falling within the framework were expanded in 1996 and 1999.  
The Australian Government has announced it would introduce targeted integrity rules and other 
reforms to modernise the OBU regime. Reforms th at are intended to encourage OBU activities 
include modernising the existing list of eligible activities to ensure that the OBU regime operates as intended by attracting mobile financial sector  activity. (See response to no 47 for more info.) 
Question 14 
4.5.6.1 Telecommunications. El párrafo 4.98 destaca que, desde 2011, reformas regulatorias 
llevadas a cabo por la Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) incluyen medidas WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 38 - 
 
  para mejorar la protección al consumidor, cambios al manejo de la numeración para acomodar 
nuevas tecnologías, usos y entradas, entre otros. 
Pregunta: Se solicita se explique con más detalles en qué consisten las medidas que han sido 
llevadas a cabo por la ACMA. 
Telecommunications 4.5.6.1. Paragraph 4.98 states that, since 2011, regulatory reforms 
undertaken by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) include measures to improve consumer protection, changes to the management of numbering to accommodate new 
technologies, applications, tickets and other . 
Question: It is requested explain in more detail what these measures have been undertaken by the 
ACMA. 
Answer 
Consumer protection In 2012, the ACMA registered a new Telecommunications Consumer Protection Code which 
requires improved disclosure in advertising and point of sale and better complaints-handling 
arrangements. 
In 2012, the ACMA registered a new Mobile Premiu m Services industry code which strengthened 
requirements for providers to provide information about the cost of calls. This has led to high 
levels of industry compliance and lower levels of consumer complaints.  
In 2013, the ACMA introduced arrangements to streamline identity checking processes for 
obtaining pre-paid mobile services. In 2014, this process was enhanced by enabling additional and 
more convenient methods for identifi cation verification to be used.  
In 2013, the ACMA made a standard on international mobile roaming which requires providers to 
give consumers information about the cost of roam ing when overseas and to enable them to opt 
out of roaming services, in order to help mini mise the risk and incidence of bill shock. 
Numbering 
In 2011, the ACMA amended numbering arrangements to enable geographic numbers to be used 
with nomadic VOIP services in most circumstan ces. In 2013, the ACMA reduced barriers to entry 
for small service providers by removing annual num ber charges of $100,000 from the use of short 
company ID codes. In 2013, the ACMA registered a new code for local number portability to improve and streamline the arrangements.  
More recently, the ACMA contracted a new prov ider, ZOAK, to manage number allocation and 
administration using improved and more cost-e ffective technology. In 2015, the ACMA made a 
new streamlined Numbering Plan which enabled the automation of most numbering allocation decision-making and significantly reduced the amount of repetition in this area. 
Equipment labelling 
As noted in the report, in 2013 the ACMA commenced a three year transition period to consolidate 
its existing labelling arrangements for equipment from three to one. 
The ACMA is responsible for regulating customer equipment, customer cabling, 
radiocommunications devices, electrical and electronic devices, vehicles and devices with internal combustion engines in relation to their telecommunications, radiocommunications, electromagnetic energy and electromagnetic compatibility. 
Formerly, there were three separate compliance marks relating to compliance with 
telecommunications standards (the A-tick), radiocommunications (the C-tick) and the general Regulatory Compliance Mark (RCM) to affix to a device as a visible indication of its compliances 
with applicable technical standards and associated record-keeping requirements.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 39 - 
 
  Under the new arrangements, the RCM will now indica te that a device complies with all applicable 
regulatory arrangements and with applicable state and territory electrical equipment safety requirements. 
Question 15 
4.5.6.2 Television broadcasting and film produc tion. El párrafo 4.105 señala que la propiedad 
sobre el 5% en el sector de medios, requiere notificación y aprobación de la Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB). 
Pregunta: Se solicita se señale si se encuentran establecidos los requisitos que deben cumplirse 
para obtener la aprobación de la FIRB, o si dicha agencia otorga la aprobación a su discreción. 
4.5.6.2 Television broadcasting and film production. Paragraph 4.105 indicates that above 5% 
ownership in the media sector, requires notice and approval of the Foreign Investment Review 
Board (FIRB). 
Question: Are there defined conditions to be met in order to obtain approval from FIRB when 
ownership is above 5%, or does FIRB exercise discretion, assessing each case on its own merits, in 
deciding whether to grant approval. 
Answer 
All foreign persons need to notify the Government and get prior approval to make investments of 5 
per cent or more in the media sector, regardless of the value of the investment.  
The Foreign Investment Review Board is a non-statutory body that assesses foreign investment 
proposals and advises on national interest implications. Foreign investment proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure they are not contrary to Australia's national interest. 
The Treasurer (or authorised decision maker) is responsible for making the final decision on 
approving or rejecting foreign investment proposals. 
Question 16 
4.5.7.2 Air transport El párrafo 4.137 señala que el enfoque general de las actuales negociaciones o renegociaciones de 
Acuerdos de Servicios Aéreos, por parte de Au stralia, es empujar por acuerdos liberales, 
ofreciendo acceso sin restricciones a aeropuer tos fuera de las cuatro ciudades "puerta". 
Pregunta: Se solicita se aclare en qué se traduce, en concreto, es decir, en el otorgamiento de qué 
derechos de tráfico específicos, este enfoque liberal , tanto respecto de las cuatro ciudades "puerta" 
de Australia, como del resto de sus aeropuertos. 
El párrafo 4.138 señala que Australia, por regla general, no permite el cabotaje en servicios de 
aviación, pero que, sin embargo, se pueden ha cer excepciones que son analizadas caso a caso, 
cuando se considera que dichos derechos pueden resultar en beneficios demostrables para el país. 
Pregunta: Se solicita se señale qué criterios son considerados, al otorgar permisos excepcionales 
para permitir el cabotaje en servicios de aviación. 
Paragraph 4.137 states that the general approach of  the current negotiations or renegotiations Air 
Services Agreements, by Australia, is pushing for liberal agreements, offering unrestricted access 
to airports outside the four cities "door". 
Question: It is requested clarification on what results, in particular, that is, in granting what traffic 
rights, this liberal approach both for the four cities "door" of Australia, and the rest of their 
airports. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 40 - 
 
  Paragraph 4.138 states that Australia, as a rule, does not allow cabotage in aviation services, but 
which, however, exceptions can be made which are analyzed case by case, when you consider that these rights may result in demonstrable benefits country. 
Question: It is requested is signaled what criteria are considered in granting exceptional 
permissions to allow cabotage in aviation services. 
Answer 
In its bilateral agreements, Australia typically seeks to negotiate third and fourth freedom rights in 
two separate capacity allocations. Third and four th freedom rights at Australia's four "gateway" 
points (Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth) are often subject to a weekly capacity limit, 
expressed either in a maximum number of serv ices or maximum number of seats that can be 
offered by airlines of both sides. In many bilate ral arrangements Australia also looks to negotiate a 
separate entitlement – the 'Regional Package' – which provides for unrestricted third and fourth 
freedom rights to/from the rest of Australia's international airports (i.e. at all airports except those in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth). 
At present, the Australian Government only permits cabotage in exceptional circumstances (except 
for New Zealand carriers, who are able to operate domestically under the Single Aviation Market and related arrangements between New Zealand and Australia). Usually, this is when a demand 
exists that no Australian operator is able to sati sfy e.g. the carriage of oversize mining equipment 
requiring extra-large aircraft, or the large movements of horses associated with the Melbourne Spring Racing Carnival. 
Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
Question 17 
I.1. Defensa Comercial 
2.5.6 Reformas antidumping (puntos 2.25., 2.26., 2.27.) 
Se señala que Australia publicó un estudio denominado "Examen de las disposiciones antidumping" 
("examen Brumby") en donde se formulan varias  conclusiones y recomendaciones, y citan la 
creación de un nuevo organismo antidumping depend iente directamente del Ministro de Industria. 
Posteriormente, en el párrafo 27, se explica que el  Gobierno transfirió las competencias en materia 
antidumping del Ministro del Interior al Ministro de Industria: 
- ¿De qué manera se toman en consideración temas de competencia de otros Ministerios para 
este tipo de investigaciones? 
- Con lo establecido en el párrafo 27, ¿esto significa que el organismo detallado en el párrafo 
26 dejó de existir?  
1.1 . Trade Protection  
2.5.6 Antidumping Reforms (sections 2.25, 2.26, 2.27) 
It is noted that Australia published a study entitled "Review of the antidumping provisions" 
("Brumby Review") where several conclusions an d recommendation were developed, citing the 
creation of a new anti-dumping body reporting dire ctly to the Minister of Industry. Subsequently, 
in paragraph 27 , it is explained that the Govern ment transferred the powers in antidumping from 
the Interior Minister to the Minister of Industry : 
- How are considered issues of competition from other Ministries such research ? 
- With the provisions of paragraph 2 , does this mean that detailed in paragraph 26 body ceased to 
exist ? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 41 - 
 
  Answer 
Issues relating to competition are generally not raised during investigations from other 
government departments. However, issues related to an anti-dumping investigation can be raised with the investigating Authority, or directly with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for 
Industry and Science, and may be considered in the final decision on whether to impose measures. 
Prior to the commencement of operations by the Anti-Dumping Commission from 1 July 2013, the 
Australian anti-dumping system was administered by a branch of the Australian Customs and 
Border Protection Service (ACBPS). A new Commiss ioner was appointed to lead the Anti-Dumping 
Commission. Effective 27 March 2014, the Anti-D umping Commission was transferred from the 
ACBPS to the Department of Industry (now the Department of Industry and Science).  
Question 18  
I.2 Propiedad Intelectual 
3.7 Propiedad intelectual, punto 3.26. Se afirma 'Australia ha firmado varios acuerdos de libre 
comercio que contienen capítulos relativos a la protección y observancia de la propiedad 
intelectual'. 
Pregunta: agradeceríamos entregar más información acerca de cuáles son estos países, y qué 
materias e instituciones relacionadas con Propiedad Intelectual cubren estos acuerdos. 
I.2 Intellectual Property 
3.7 Intellectual Property, paragraph 3.26. It says 'Australia has signed several free trade 
agreements containing chapters on the protection and enforcement of intellectual property'. 
Question: kindly provide more information about what these countries are, and what materials and 
related intellectual property institutions cover these agreements. 
Answer 
Since Australia's last Trade Policy Review in 2011, Australia has signed Free Trade Agreements 
with Malaysia, Korea, and Japan, and concluded negotiations with China. The intellectual property 
chapters of these agreements contain a range of specific obligations in relation to the protection of intellectual property rights, including for patent s, trademarks, designs, plant breeder's rights, 
geographical indications, copyright and related rights, internet service provider liability, border 
measures and enforcement.  
The Malaysia-Australia Free Trade Agreement (MAFTA) entered into force on 1 January 2013. 
Alongside specific obligations on intellectual property rights there are also provisions for 
cooperation between the Parties, including on enforc ement, to assist in the implementation of the 
Chapter. The Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement (KAFTA) entered into force on 12 December 2014, and the Japan-Australia Economic Partnership Agreement (JAEPA) entered into force on 15 
January 2015. Under both of these agreements a Committee is established under the chapter to 
monitor and assess the implementation of the chap ter, provide a mechanism for discussion of any 
issues related to IP, and oversee ongoing cooperation in relation to the protection and 
enforcement of IP. On 17 November 2014, Aust ralia and China announced the conclusion of 
negotiations for a China-Australia Free Trade Agreement (ChAFTA), with .signature of the Agreement to take place once both sides have co mpleted the legal review and translation of the 
text. 
More detail on the content of each of these agreements, including chapter summaries outlining the 
specific intellectual property obligations in each of the agreements can be found at www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements /Pages/trade-agreements.aspx . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 42 - 
 
  Other questions 
Question 19, 20 & 21 
 In regard to technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures, how does the 
coordination work between the Government and the industry? Are there specific committees?  
 Does Australia carry out regulatory impact assessment of its regulations? How does it work? 
 Question 5 of the seven Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) questions in the Guide to 
Regulation asks; 'Who will you consult about these options and how will you consult them?' 
Answers 
Of the 10 principles for Australian Government policy makers in the Australian Government Guide 
to Regulation, two are related to consultation: 
 Policy makers should consult in a genuine and timely way with affected businesses, 
community organisations and individuals. 
 Policy makers must consult with each other to avoid creating cumulative or overlapping 
regulatory burdens. 
There are four consultation options that can be taken when developing a RIS: full public, targeted, 
confidential or post-decision. Full public consultation is the appropriate level of consultation for all proposals unless compelling case is made for a limited form of consultation (such as a need for 
confidential consultation because of market sensitivity). 
A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) is required for all Cabinet submissions. This includes 
proposals of a minor or machinery nature and proposals with no regulatory impact on business, community organisations or individuals. 
A RIS is also mandatory for any non-Cabinet decision made by any Australian Government entity if 
that decision is likely to have a measurable impact on businesses, community organisations, individuals or any combination of them. 
In addition, best practice regulation requirements  apply to decisions of the Council of Australian 
Governments, Ministerial Councils, and National Standard Setting bodies.  
The Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR) maintains a public website to report on portfolio RIS 
compliance, RIS activity and Post Implementation Reviews.  
Further information on the RIS requirements is available at: http://ris.dpmc.gov.au/ . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 43 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CHINA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Page 12, Para 1.1 The economy has now entered a transition period towards mining production and export as well as 
to broader-based drivers of activity in non-resources sectors. 
Question 1 
Please specify the non-resources sectors that the government aims to promote in this economic 
restructuring? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is aware of the challe nges faced by the economy as it continues the 
transition to broader based non resources driv ers of growth over the short-to-medium term. 
While the Australian Government does not aim to promote any individual sector of the economy, it 
does, however, aim to facilitate structural adjustment through policies that enhance the flexibility and competitiveness of the economy more broadly.  
Page 14, Para 1.2 
A seemingly overvalued exchange rate, i.e. ab ove most estimates of its fundamental value, 
presents, to some extent, a source of uncertainty for both economic activity and inflation; it 
remains subject to a number of downside risks, including changes in prices of key commodities 
exports, as well as future relative internatio nal interest rate movements. Tough reform seems 
required to avoid falling living standards. The main  external risks include the pace of growth in 
China over the medium term, commodity price de velopments, and surges in global financial 
market volatility. 
Questions 2 & 3 
 Has the overvalued exchange rate affected the overall economy and trading environment of 
Australia? Please give examples. 
 What measures has Australia taken or will it take to deal with or avoid problems arising from 
the overvalued exchange rate? 
Answers 
A stronger dollar helped the economy adjust to rising commodity prices during the mining 
investment boom without sparking inflationary pressures, just as a weaker dollar will assist the transition to growth in other sectors as commodity prices and resources investment ease from 
recent highs. 
A high Australian dollar presents challenges for Australian businesses exposed to international 
competition. However, a high dollar also brings benefits for businesses and households. Australian 
businesses can purchase cheaper imported intermediate inputs, and take the opportunity to invest 
in imported machinery and equipment to lift future productivity and competitiveness. Benefits also flow to consumers, who can purchase cheaper imported goods and services. 
Since it was floated in 1983, the value of the Australian dollar has been determined by market 
factors. The floating exchange rate acts as a shoc k absorber for the Australian economy, helping to 
moderate changes in the global economy and facilitating a smoother course for the Australian economy when patterns of production and growth change at home.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 44 - 
 
  The most important contribution the Government can make is to run disciplined and prudent fiscal 
policy, to relieve upward pressure on interest rates and the exchange rate.  
Page 19, Para 1.12 To ease the tax burden on businesses and on SMEs in particular, simplified and more generous 
amortisation rules allowing "carry back" losses to offset past taxable income have been in place 
since July 2012. According to the OECD, the tax structure is relatively inefficient; the general consumption tax burden is relatively low (below OECD average) while headline corporate income 
tax is comparatively high (above OECD average) for a capital-importing country like Australia 
(section 3.4.1.2). 
Question 4 
How will Australia further relieve the tax burden of SMEs? What measures will be taken to better 
safeguard the interests and reduce the tax burden of foreign-invested SMEs in Australia? 
Answer 
Australia is keenly aware of the burden that  the tax system places on small and medium 
enterprises, particularly with respect to compliance and complexity. The Government's objective is 
to achieve a better tax system that delivers taxes that are lower, simpler and fairer, including for SMEs. To achieve this we have commenced a discussion and review process which will ultimately 
deliver a white paper on tax reform. This process will promote a community-wide conversation on 
how we can create a tax system that supports hi gher economic growth and living standards, 
improves our international competiveness and adjusts to a changing economy and new opportunities." 
Page 26, Para 2.3 
However, higher screening thresholds for non-sensitive sectors are increasingly being incorporated 
into RTAs. As at the time of Australia's previous Review, proposed investments are almost always 
allowed, but conditions are often attached, particularly in the real estate sector. 
Questions 5 & 6 
 What are the departments involved in the review of foreign investment in Australia? 
 Which RTAs have incorporated "higher screening threshold"? Specifically which investment 
areas have been covered? 
Answers 
The Foreign Investment Review Board is a non-statutory body to advise the Treasurer on 
Australia's Foreign Investment Policy and its administration. The Board's functions are advisory 
only. The Treasury provides secretariat services to  the Board and is responsible for the day to day 
administration of the arrangements. As part of the assessment process, Treasury consults with 
relevant government agencies when re viewing foreign investment proposals. 
Responsibility for making decisions rests with the Treasurer.  Australia's regime for foreign investment screening with Free Trade Agreement (FTA) partners has 
been developed in the context of each individual negotiation. 
The general screening thresholds are listed below: 
 Acquisitions of 15 per cent or more in Australian businesses valued above $252 million; 
 Acquisitions of rural land where the cumulative value of rural land that the foreign person 
already holds exceeds, or immediately following the proposed acquisition is likely to 
exceed, $15 million;  
 All direct investments, establishment of new businesses and land acquisitions by foreign 
government investors. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 45 - 
 
   The FTAs that are currently in force where Australia has made investment commitments 
include: 
 Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations 1983 
 Singapore Australia Free Trade Agreement 2003 
 Thailand Australia Free Trade Agreement 2005 
 Australia United States Free Trade Agreement 2005 
 Australia Chile Free Trade Agreement 2009 
 Korea Australia Free Trade Agreement 2014 
 Japan Australia Economic Partnership 2015 
The thresholds listed below apply instead of the general screening thresholds above. 
Country Foreign investment screening regime commitments 
Chile 
 $1,094 million (indexed annually) for most business acquisitions and developed 
commercial real estate (including agriculture). $252 million for business acquisitions in prescribed sensitive sectors. 
Japan 
 $1,094 million (indexed annually) for most business acquisitions and developed 
commercial real estate. $252 million for business acquisitions in prescribed sensitive 
sectors. $15 million (cumulative) threshold for investments in agricultural land and the 
provision has been made to apply a $53 million threshold for agribusiness investments. 
Korea  $1,094 million (indexed annually) for most business acquisitions and developed 
commercial real estate. $252 million for business acquisitions in prescribed sensitive sectors.
 $15 million (cumulative) threshold for investments in agricultural land and the 
provision has been made to apply a $53 million threshold for agribusiness investments. 
New Zealand 
 $1,094 million (indexed annually) for most business acquisitions and developed 
commercial real estate (including agriculture). $252 million for business acquisitions in 
prescribed sensitive sectors. 
Singapore 
 $50 million for primary production businesses. 
Thailand 
 $50 million for primary production businesses. 
United States 
 $1,094 million (indexed annually) for most business acquisitions and developed 
commercial real estate (including agriculture). $252 million for business acquisitions in prescribed sensitive sectors. 
Note: China will receive the same thresholds as Japan and Korea when the China-Australia FTA 
enters into force. 
Page 28, Para 2.12 
Current procedures do not provide for an independent and transparent analysis of the final text of 
a proposed agreement after negotiation but before signing. Although it is not a constitutional 
requirement, treaties are in practice put before Parliament's Joint Standing Committee on Treaties 
post signature, but pre-ratification, allowing fo r review by this body.…… A tabled treaty is 
accompanied by a National Interest Analysis (NIA) and a Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS), if it 
affects business or restricts competition. 
Questions 7 & 8 
 A trade (investment) agreement is subject to  the review of Australian Parliament and 
accompanied by the NIA and the RIS post-signature but pre-ratification. How will the problems 
identified in this process be addressed, if any? 
 Does Australia have any plan to adjust and modify the current procedures to make it more 
independent and transparent? 
Answers 
Committees of the Australian Parliament have oversight and the ability to review all of Australia's 
FTAs, and to report to the Australian Parliament including prior to entry into force. The 
Government thoroughly considers all findings and recommendations of the Committees, in light of 
the public interest, and may seek to rectify any concerns that may be identified prior to ratification. Australia's FTAs can be further am ended, and reviewed as they are implemented 
including through "built-in agendas" in many cases. The Government continues to consult closely 
on Australia's FTAs, and as part of this ongoing engagement is always looking at ways to make the WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 46 - 
 
  current procedures more transparent, without compromising the confidence required in negotiating 
FTAs. 
Page 32, Para 2.28 Concerns have been expressed by the business community about the relatively high cost of labour 
in Australia and the need for a more flexible approa ch to granting visas so as to engage skilled and 
semi-skilled foreign workers where needed. Concerns have also been raised regarding high levels of regulatory burden, particularly in the areas of industrial relations, employment, occupational 
health and safety, and compliance with various tax payment requirements. Transport costs and 
shortcomings have also been identified as an impe diment to trade and the operational efficiency of 
businesses. 
Question 9, 10 & 11 
 What specific measures has the Australian Government taken to introduce skilled foreign 
workers? How the effective are these measures? In addition to safety factors, what elements are considered by Australia in granting visas to skilled workers? 
 What measures has Australia taken or will it take to reduce the regulatory burden that is 
prevalent in the country? 
 What measures has Australia taken or will it take to improve transport conditions in Australia?  
Answers 
The Temporary Work (Skilled) visa (subclass 457) programme is Australia's temporary skilled 
migration programme. The programme allows employ ers to address labour shortages by enabling 
businesses to sponsor skilled workers from outside Australia when an equivalently skilled and 
experienced Australian cannot be found. It is uncapped, demand driven and designed to be 
responsive to immediate business needs. The Aust ralian Government is committed to ensuring the 
457 programme remains flexible and responsive to the economic cycle in line with employer 
demand.  
Businesses operating in Australia can sponsor skilled overseas employees under the 457 
programme through: 
 the standard business sponsorship arrangement; or 
 a labour agreement, resource sector labour agreement, designated area migration 
agreement, enterprise migration agreement. 
International businesses that have a contractual obli gation to perform work for, or provide services 
to, an Australian business, can sponsor skilled overseas employees under the 457 programme 
through an overseas business sponsorship.  
To be eligible for a 457 visa, workers must meet visa application requirements, such as 
demonstrating a good level of English proficiency and holding the requisite skills necessary to 
perform the nominated occupation.  
Further information is available from the Department of Immigration and Border Protection's 
website at: http://www.immi.gov.au/Visas/Pages/457.aspx .  
While well designed and targeted regulation can co ntribute to economic growth and minimise risks 
for the community, removing unnecessary regulation can help increase Australia's productivity. 
To reduce the stock of existing regulations, the Government has a red tape reduction target of $1 
billion per year for businesses, individuals and co mmunity organisations. Since the 2013 election, 
the Government has announced more than $2.45 billio n in red tape savings. To stem the flow of 
new regulation, all regulatory proposals must be accompanied by a Regulation Impact Statement 
and regulatory burden costing, and any burden imposed by a new regulation must be offset. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 47 - 
 
  The way regulators engage with people is just as important as what the regulations themselves 
impose. To review regulator behaviour, the Government has developed a Regulator Performance Framework that will apply from 1 July 2015.  
In relation to the issues raised in the pre-amble to this question, the recent Productivity 
Commission inquiry into Public Infrastructure (the Inquiry) found that there was limited evidence 
of large cost differentials in infrastructure between Australia and comparable countries. In particular, the Inquiry concluded that skills shortages were unlikely to be a major cost driver for 
large infrastructure projects in Australia. However, the Inquiry did identify a need for reforms to 
achieve better labour and construction markets. 
In response to these issues, the Australian Government has committed to acting to improve 
workplace relations in the construction industry through the re-establishment of the Australian 
Building and Construction Commission, a specialist regulator with increased powers to address 
unlawful industrial action, unlawful picketing, coercion and discrimination.  
Additionally, the Australian Government has undertaken reforms to the Australian Government 
Building and Construction OHS Accreditation Scheme (the Scheme), which came into effect on 1 
January 2015. These changes to the Scheme are de signed to cut regulatory burdens on builders, 
boost competition and ensure that safety standards are enhanced. Arrangements now exist under 
the scheme that allow both international and domestic builders who have not yet been accredited 
under the Scheme to participate in Australian Government-funded construction, if participating in joint ventures with accredited builders. The Federal Safety Commissioner, who is tasked with the enforcement of the Scheme, will also undertake consultations to identify further opportunities to 
improve access for international firms in order to increase competition and utilisation of 
international expertise, while ensuring competitive neutrality for domestic firms. 
Australia's large land mass and dispersed population centres mean that transportation costs can be 
significant. The Australian Government is committe d to improving the productivity of the transport 
sector, including though: investments - a record AUD $50 billion investment in infrastructure and better project prioritisation and selection, supported  by a national infrastructure audit and 15-year 
plan; deregulation – removal of inefficient and unne cessary transport regulations, and a nationally 
consistent approach for rail, maritime and heavy vehicle regulation; coastal shipping - review of options to improve the competitiveness and efficiency of domestic shipping; and foreign investment - the Government is actively seeking to attract and retain foreign investment for 
infrastructure to build Australia's infrastructure capabilities. 
Page 32, Para 2.31 Australia has also implemented reforms to its Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) Framework in 
order to limit the flow of new regulations. For several years, policy-makers have been required 
under this Framework to draw up a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) before a decision is taken either to introduce or abolish a regulation. In March 2014, the Commonwealth Government made 
changes to RIS requirements designed to support the Government's red tape reduction target (see 
above). Key changes introduced were that all Ca binet Submissions now require a RIS and all RISs 
must quantify the regulatory costs to business, community organizations and/or individuals of new 
regulations and identify offsetting regulatory cost s. Agencies are encouraged to issue an early RIS 
assessment to assist consultation. The Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR) is charged with 
administering the RIA requirements. 
Question 12 
According to the new RIS requirements, all RIS must quantify the regulatory costs to business, 
community organizations and individuals before deciding on introducing or abolishing a regulation. Please introduce the main contents of the RIS and its effects in the society? 
Answer 
The content of a RIS depends on the type of Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) prepared.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 48 - 
 
  A long form RIS contains answers to all seven RIS questions, analysis of genuine and practical 
policy options, analysis of the likely regulatory impact, evidence of appropriate public consultation, a formal cost-benefit analysis; and a detailed pres entation of regulatory costings and offsets. 
A standard form RIS contains answers to all seven RIS questions, analysis of genuine and practical 
policy options, analysis of the likely regulatory impact, evidence of appropriate public consultation, 
and a detailed presentation of regulatory costings and offsets.  
A short form RIS contains a summary of the proposed policy and any options considered, an 
overview of the likely impacts and an outlin e of regulatory costs and cost offsets.  
The seven RIS questions are:  
 What is the policy problem you are trying to solve? 
 Why is government action needed? 
 What policy options are you considering? 
 What is the likely net benefit of each option? 
 Who will you consult about these options and how will you consult them?  
 What is the best option from those you have considered?  
 How will you implement and evaluate your chosen option?  
Further information on the content of RI Ss can be obtained at ris.dpmc.gov.au 
The Australian Government Guide to Regulation sets out ten principles for Australian Government 
policy makers. The first principle is that regulation should not be the default option for policy makers: the policy option offering the greatest  net benefit should always be the recommended 
option. The second principle is that regulation should only be imposed when it can be shown to 
offer an overall net benefit. 
Page 33, Para 2.33 Under the Australian Jobs Act 2013 (which entere d into force on 27 December 2013) and its 
accompanying Australian Jobs (Australian Industry Participation) Rule 2014, proponents of major 
projects in Australia with a capital expenditure of  $A 500 million or more, are required to prepare 
and implement an Australian Industry Participation (AIP) plan. This should outline how such 
projects will provide full, fair and reasonable opportunities for Australian industry to supply goods 
and services 
Question 13  
According to Australian Jobs Act 2013 and its accompanying Rule 2014, AIP needs to be provided 
for major investment projects. What impact will this policy have on the investment of foreign 
companies? 
Answer 
The Australian Industry Participation plan requirement is not expected to have any impact on 
foreign investment. 
Page 35, Para 2.39 
In its report, released in November 2014, the Co mmittee noted shortcomings both in terms of data 
collection and monitoring of compliance with policy requirements. It recommended that the current framework for foreign investment in residential real estate should be maintained and supplemented by new data collection, audit, comp liance, and enforcement processes, financed by 
administrative fees. 
Question 14 
Has Australia adopted the recommendations of  the Committee and begun to take relevant 
measures? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 49 - 
 
  Answer 
The Australian Government has recently consulted on a number of changes to improve compliance 
and enforcement of the rules for foreign investment in residential real estate and agricultural investments as part of the response to the recommendations of the House of Representatives 
Standing Committee on Economics report.  
The proposals include creating a specialised compliance and enforcement area in the Australian 
Taxation Office to identify and investigate breaches of the foreign investment rules, new civil and 
increased criminal penalties for foreign investors and third parties who breach the foreign 
investment rules, introducing an application fee on all foreign investment proposals to fund the strengthened foreign investment framework, increased scrutiny around foreign investment in agriculture, increased transparency on the levels of foreign ownership in Australia through a 
comprehensive land register and a more modern  and simpler foreign investment framework. 
The Government will move quickly to implemen t the reforms, taking into account the views 
provided through the consultation process. 
Page 37, Para 3.2 
In line with long-standing, though decreasing, se ctoral support to textiles, clothing and footwear 
(TCF) and passenger motor vehicles (PMV) products, the applied MFN tariff rates on the latter 
remain considerably higher than the average. 
Question 15 
Does Australia plan to reduce the level of high tariff rates for related products? Answer 
Australia's tariff rates are already very low with  m o r e  t h a n  9 9 %  o f  t a r i f f  l i n e s  h a v i n g  a  M o s t  
Favoured Nation rate between 0% and 5%. In addition, over 47% of tariff lines are duty free. In 2015 Australia reduced tariffs on textiles, clothing and footwear to 5%.  
Page 38, Para 3.6 
Efforts to streamline state participation in areas where Commonwealth Government involvement is 
necessary included "bonus" payments to state governments that sell public assets and use the 
proceeds for infrastructure projects. 
Question 16 
What is the coverage of the "bonus" payments? Answer 
The incentive payments are made from the Commonwealth Government to state/territory 
governments. States/territories are eligible for an incentive payment if they agree to sell an 
existing state-owned asset and invest the proceeds into additional infrastructure. This is no limit 
on the range of asset sales, but the additional infrastructure must meet specified criteria. This 
scheme is referred to as the "Asset Recycling Initiative".  
Further details on the Initiative is available from: 
https://www.coag.gov.au/sites/de fault/files/Signed%20Nationa l%20Partnershi p%20(without%20A
tt%20A).pdf . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 50 - 
 
  Page 38, Para 3.8 
The Integrated Cargo System (ICS), a single wind ow for the vast majority of international trade 
related transactions, continues to provide an interface for industry to connect electronically for coordinated customs and quarantine clearance. 
Question 17 
Please introduce the basic processes and implementing effects of the coordinated customs and 
quarantine clearance in Australia. 
Answer 
The Integrated Cargo System (ICS) is an integrat ed software application that replaced previous 
import and export reporting and processing procedur es with a single, integrated IT system. It is 
the only method of electronically reporting the legitimate movement of goods across Australia's 
borders. To communicate with the Australian Cust oms and Border Protection Service (ACBPS) via 
the ICS, a digital certificate is required. 
ACBPS uses the ICS for the efficient management of  all import and export functions including:  
 the collection of duties 
 effective cargo risk assessment 
 to establish and maintain a comprehensive register of client information and roles 
 to track the movement of cargo, and  
 to interact with clients and other agencies both Government and non-Government. 
For example, an import declaration contains information that relates to the goods being imported, 
including: 
 importer/broker details 
 value of the goods 
 transport details of how the goods arrived in Australia 
 tariff classification of the goods, including instrument, dumping, preference and valuation 
details 
 additional tax associated with the goods 
 quarantine processing information, includin g types/codes, permits, container details, 
document and package details 
 community protection information associated with the goods 
 lodgement declarations. 
In order for any shipment to receive a CLEAR status from the ICS, linking fields must be reported 
correctly and consistently between documents relating to that line of cargo (e.g. impending arrival, cargo report, import declaration). Goods are available to importers once payment of applicable 
duty, taxes and charges has been made and an Au thority to Deal (ATD) has been issued. An ATD 
is generated by the ICS when the status of both  the import declaration and the cargo report are 
set to CLEAR by Quarantine and ACBPS. 
Please refer to the diagram on page 6 of Import Declarations Overview: 
http://www.cargosupport.gov.au/site/documents/ICS_ICC_15_0.pdf . It shows the process flow for 
saving, submitting and lodging an import declaration 
Page 42, Para 3.18 
Tariff escalation is a potential impediment to the efficient allocation of resources; it also constitutes 
an obstacle to local processing of primary and semi-finished goods produced in exporting countries, thereby impeding the industrialization of these developing countries whose exports are 
not eligible for preferential duty free access to Australia's market. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 51 - 
 
  Question 18 
Will the implementation of Australian tariff escalation result in discrimination against developing 
countries? If yes, what measures will be taken to eliminate the possible discrimination and impacts? 
Answer 
Australia's tariff rates are already very low with  m o r e  t h a n  9 9 %  o f  t a r i f f  l i n e s  h a v i n g  a  M o s t  
Favoured Nation rate between 0% and 5%. Given th e low level of tariffs, any differences that exist 
between tariff rates are unlikely to discriminate against developing countries. 
Page 48, Para 3.33 In April 2013, the Australian Customs and Border Pr otection Service (Customs) issued an update 
of its Transfer Pricing Policy Practice Statement. This Statement outlines Customs policies in 
relation to transfer pricing and provides procedur al guidelines for applicants seeking a prospective 
transfer pricing valuation advice (VA), including advice on how importers can support their transfer pricing valuation advice applications and demonstrate that related party dealings have not 
influenced the price of imported goods. 
Question 19 
Please elaborate on the relevant stipulations and specific practices of the Australian Customs 
regarding transfer pricing. Has the Australian Customs established a mechanism for coordination 
with enterprises and domestic tax authorities, so as to promptly and effectively solve the related problems caused by transfer pricing arrangements? 
Answer 
Australian Customs and Border Protection Service have a mechanism in place that allows for the 
exchange of information between the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service and the Australian Tax Office, and vice-versa.  
Page 48, Para 3.35 
According to a 2014 Productivity Commission report, the most frequent rules for determining 
origin are now based on a CTC test but there is considerable variability in how such rules are 
combined with other product-specific/individual rules and how they are applied. The range and 
variable application of rules adds to the compliance costs for firms engaging in trade. Recent studies suggest that the costs associated with these requirements could be as high as 25% of the value of goods traded within ASEAN. It appears that  the authorities' views in this area differ from 
the findings of the Productivity Commission report. 
Question 20 
According to the Report, both the range and variab le application of rules increase the compliance 
costs for firms. Please provide more details on the calculation of the ratio of the legal business 
costs of a firm complying with the Rules of Origin vs. the trade value? 
Answer 
The Commission did not calculate the 25% figure referred to in paragraph 48. The Commission 
sourced it for its 2014 report (Trade and Assistance Review 2-12 13, p.118) from: 
APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) 2009, APEC Elements for Simplifying Customs 
Documents and Procedures Relating to Rules of Origin, http://www.apec.org/Groups/Committee-
on-Trade-and-Investment/~/media/ .  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 52 - 
 
  http://www.apec.org/Groups/ Committee-on-Trade-and-
Investment/~/media/Files/Groups/ROO/App3 _09_cti_rpt_Simplifying%20Procedures.ashx  
(accessed 11 November 2013). 
Page 57, Para 3.57 
All dealings involving release (DIR) of a GMO into the environment must be licensed by the Gene 
Technology Regulator, an independent statutory office holder, unless otherwise authorized under 
the Act. All licence applications are subject to ca se by case scientific risk assessment and risk 
management. 
Questions 21 & 22 
 Please introduce in detail the requirement of licensing application for releasing GMO 
(Genetically modified organisms) into the environment. For instance, which department is in 
charge of issuance of the licenses? Are there an y opportunities available for the public to make 
comments? What materials and processes are required for licensing application? 
 What methods has Australia adopted to assess the licensing application? Who takes the lead in 
assessing the environmental risks for releasing GMO into the environment? 
Answers 
Requirements for licence applications and a description of the assessment process for releasing 
GMOs into the environment are outlined on the O ffice of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) 
website at http://www.ogtr.gov.au .  
Application forms detail information requirements and the Regulator may seek additional 
information necessary to inform the assessment. Licences are issued by the Gene Technology 
Regulator (the Regulator), the independent decisi on maker under the Gene Technology Act 2000. 
The Regulator is supported by the OGTR (with staff provided by the Health Department).  
In considering a licence application, the Regu lator must prepare a risk assessment and risk 
management plan (RARMP) and, as part of this process, written submissions are invited from the 
public. 
The Australian Gene Technology Regulations 2001 li st matters to be taken into account for risk 
assessment. A full list is found at Reg 10(1)(b) (Risk Assessment – Matters to be taken into 
account) and includes the potential of a GMO to ad versely affect ecosystems, to transfer genetic 
material to other organisms, or to be toxic to other organisms.  
A key document that informs the approach adopted by the Regulator in undertaking risk analyses, 
and arriving at risk management decisions and licence conditions, is the Risk Analysis Framework 
(RAF). The risk assessment approach is detailed in RARMPs, and provides case by case assessment with focus on credible pathways to harm from the genetic modification. The RAF was developed 
within the OGTR and is available at the OGTR website: 
http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet /ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content /risk-analysis-framework.  
The Risk Analysis Framework is most cl osely aligned with AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk 
Management—Principles and guidelines. However, a number of relevant international standards 
were also considered; thus, the RAF is consistent with OECD guidance and Annex III of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.  
In addition, Australia's post-border weed risk a ssessment methodology (PBWRM) is a valuable tool 
used in risk assessment of GM plants conducte d by the Regulator. Australia's PBWRM has also 
been adopted for use by the FAO http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/core-
themes/theme/biodiversity/weeds/issues/it/ . 
The Regulator has the lead role in assessing environmental risks for releasing GMOs in the 
environment. The Regulator must also seek advice from the Environment Minister, other government bodies and experts, and the final risk assessment must take this advice into account. 
Other aspects of environmental risk assessment may be considered by the Department of WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 53 - 
 
  Agriculture (biosecurity/quarantine) or the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority 
(safety and efficacy of agricultural and veterinary chemicals). 
Page 58, Para 3.59 During the review period, Australia conducted science-based risk assessments, including IRAs, 
under a regulated process involving a specified timeframe for completion of an assessment (within 
either 24 months or 30 months). 
Question 23 
Please elaborate on the concrete basis, methods and processes for import risk assessment in the 
context of specific products, for the sake of transparency and predictability of the system. 
Answer 
The Australian Government Department of Agriculture undertakes a range of risk assessments in 
response to market access requests from other countries and from Australian businesses to import 
animals, plants and/or other goods into Australia, where the plants, animal or goods have not been imported into Australia before, or have not been imported into Australia from a particular 
country or region.  
The department uses risk assessments as a tool to assist in considering the level of biosecurity risk 
that may be associated with the importation of a good, and to identify ways to manage these 
risks.  
There are two types of risk assessments used by the department; an import risk analysis (IRA) 
which is conducted through a regulated process provided for in the Quarantine Regulations 2000 and non-regulated risk assessments (such as scientific reviews of existing policy or technical 
advice from within the department). 
In prioritising import risk assessments, the department takes the following criteria into account 
(where relevant): 
 National interest 
 Alignment with the department's objectives 
 Expected benefits 
 Challenges 
 Practical considerations. 
The time taken to initiate a risk assessment is dependent upon the assignment of a priority based 
on these criteria. 
A risk assessment which does not meet the criteria for an IRA is undertaken as a non-regulated 
risk assessment. The department undertakes a ra nge of non-regulated risk assessments when 
assessing proposals to import animals, plants or other goods into Australia or reviewing import 
conditions for goods already entering Australia.  
Risk assessments are undertaken through an administrative process and must also meet 
Australia's international obligations. The department has separate, formally agreed processes for 
undertaking weed risk assessments and biological control agent risk assessments, both of which 
are available on the department's website http://www.agriculture.gov.au/ . 
The department uses a formal methodology to assess biosecurity risk. The method used by 
Australia follows internationally agreed principles  outlined by the SPS Agreement and the OIE and 
IPPC codes and standards relating to import and pest risk analyses.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 54 - 
 
  Page 65, Para 3.85 
During the review period, Australia has not made any notifications of TRIMs under the WTO 
Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measur es, thereby indicating the absence of such 
measures.  
Question 24 
Does Australia have any plan to improve the relevant measures? 
Answer 
Australia notifies of relevant measures under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Investment 
Measures where necessary. 
Page 68, Para 3.98 The level of official support depends on the degree  of local/national content ("Australian activity" 
or "Australian content") involved: export contracts with over 50% local content may receive 
support for up to 85% of the eligible contract value (ECV) (sum of the imported components into the buyer's country, i.e. Australian plus third country activities plus the local cost which must be 
the lower of 30% of ECV or the local cost amount). 
Question 25 
The proportion of local/national content is closely connected to the ceiling of EFIC support. In 
determining the proportion of local/national cont ent, are there any specific criteria to judge 
"Australia activity" and "Australia content" as mentioned in this Para? If yes, which organization is authorized to make the judgment, EFIC or a third party? 
Answer 
The amount of export finance EFIC will consider for a contract reflects the value of the Australian 
content in that contract plus any foreign content that EFIC also deems eligible for finance. The following is used as a guide only as EFIC has the discretion to vary the policy according to the 
circumstances. 
Australian content represents the export from Australia of goods or services that are produced or 
manufactured wholly or substantially in Australia. 
EFIC will consider support for foreign goods and services if; 
 they are essential to the contract;  
 they cannot be sourced competitively within Australia; and  
 it is impractical to finance the foreign goods and services elsewhere.  
The foreign goods and services must usually be incorporated into the contract in Australia. 
In cases where an Australian export has significant foreign content, it is usual for the Export Credit 
Agency of the country from where the foreign content is sourced to provide finance or insurance 
for that portion of the transaction.  
Page 75, Para 3.118 The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), an independent statutory 
authority, is charged, inter alia, with administering the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA) 
(section 3.4.3.1.2); th e ACCC and the Australian Energy Re gulator (AER) are responsible for 
regulating the electricity and gas, and the teleco mmunications and transport sectors, respectively. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 55 - 
 
  Question 26 
How does ACCC coordinate and cooperate with competent authorities in the specific antitrust cases 
occurring in the relevant industries? 
Answer 
The AER does not have responsibility for anti-t rust enforcement. Coordination and cooperation 
with other competent authorities on anti-t rust matters is conducted by the ACCC.  
The ACCC may seek assistance from the AER in un derstanding the relevant regulatory framework 
and how that framework impacts on market structure or competition. 
Page 76, Para 3.121 The CCA covers virtually all business activities, including government business; nevertheless, a 
long list of special regimes and exemptions derogating the CCA is maintained. 
Question 27 
What regulations regarding exclusion and except ion, block exemption and individual exemption 
has Australia promulgated? What considerations are behind their introduction? Is the parallel 
exemption principle applicable between the CCA and local antitrust laws? 
Answer Subsection 51(1) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 provides that all jurisdictions can 
exempt specific conduct from competition laws by way of regulations or legislation. The Acts and 
Regulations that contain these exemptions are listed on the ACCC's website. ACCC 2015, Exceptions under commonwealth, state & territory legislation, viewed 10 April 2015, http://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/australian-competition-consumer-
commission/legislation/exceptions-under-commonwealth-state-territory-legislation . 
Conduct exempt from competition laws by way of regulations or legislation is subject to a range of 
conditions, and must go through a particular procedure. 
The Harper Review has recommended that restrictions in Australia on parallel imports should be 
removed unless it can be shown that: the benefits of the restrictions to the community as a whole outweigh the costs; and the objectives of the re strictions can only be achieved by restricting 
competition.  
The Government is currently considering the 56 recommendations in the Final Report and 
undertaking public consultation on the recommendat ions before announcing next steps. This input 
will inform the Government's response to the report later in the year. 
Page 77, Para 3.125 
Certain prohibited anti-competitive practices in in dustries and professions can be authorized when 
public benefits are deemed to exceed detriments. 
Question 28 
What is the connotation of public benefits? What  specific criteria are cited by the competition 
authorities in determining whether the public benefits exceed detriments? 
Answer 
The authorisation provisions of the CCA recognis e that in certain circumstances arrangements 
which restrict competition can nonetheless be in the public interest, for example, where there is WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 56 - 
 
  market failure or impediments to competition and addressing that market failure or those 
impediments can encourage economic efficiency and thus enhance welfare.  
The ACCC's Authorisation Guidelines explai n the legal and analytical framework.  
What constitutes a public benefit or public detriment is not defined in the CCA and the ACCC 
adopts a broad approach based on the particular circumstances relevant to the application. A 
public consultation process informs the ACCC's deci sion to grant or dismiss authorisation, and the 
ACCC utilises the principles of economic analysis in its assessment. 
Page 77, Para 3.127 
In 2013/14, the ACCC considered 297 (377 in 201 0/11) matters for compliance with the merger 
and acquisitions section of the CCA. Of these, 242 (236 in 2010/11) were assessed as not requiring a public review (pre-a ssessed).The ACCC held  a public or confidential review of 55 
mergers (141 in 2010/11). 
Question 29 
Does the "public review" refer to a detailed review of the case? What are the conditions and 
procedures for launching such a review? Under what  circumstances will the review be or not be 
open to the public? 
Answer 
Acquisitions that are in the public domain and that the ACCC has determined cannot be pre-
assessed undergo a public merger review. Of the mergers that undergo a public review, a proportion of these may proceed to the ACCC publishing a Statem ent of Issues where the ACCC 
has come to a preliminary view that a merger raises competition concerns that require further 
investigation or a more detailed review. 
For each merger, the ACCC will ma ke an initial assessment based on the information available to 
determine whether a public review will be requ ired. Where the ACCC is satisfied, based on the 
information provided, that there is a low risk of a merger substantially lessening competition, the 
ACCC may decide that it is not necessary to co nduct a public review of that merger. These 
mergers are described as being 'pre-assessed'. 
Both public and confidential mergers can be pr e-assessed and are done so on the basis of the 
information provided by the parties and other information the ACCC has before it. 
A decision to pre-assess a merger without market inquiries is not taken lightly and is dependent on 
the ACCC's familiarity with the relevant industry and the adequacy of the information provided by 
the merger parties to support such a finding, incl uding supporting evidence. For example, claims of 
ease of entry are given greater weight when supported by examples of recent new entry or expansion. 
Page 78, Para 3.128 
In 2012/13, six cartel litigations involving air cargo companies and a cable supplier were concluded 
securing over $A 41 million in fines; litigation was under way in four alleged cartel conduct cases 
(air cargo, cable, forklift gas, wire harnesse s), two alleged misuse of market power (flyash, 
dynamic currency conversion services), and tw o alleged anti-competitive agreements cases. 
Question 30 
What are the respective illegal decision principles for a cartel and a misuse of market power in the 
CCA? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 57 - 
 
  Answer 
The CCA not only prohibits cartels under civil law, but makes it a criminal offence for businesses 
and individuals to participate in a cartel. Unlawful cartel conduct under the CCA includes: 
 price fixing, when competitors agree on a pricing structure rather than competing against 
each other 
 sharing markets, when competitors agree to divide a market so participants are sheltered 
from competition 
 rigging bids, when suppliers communicate before lodging their bids and agree among 
themselves who will win and at what price 
 controlling the output or limiting the amount of goods and services available to buyers. 
Misuse of market power occurs where a business with a substantial degree of power in a market 
uses this power for the purpose of eliminating or substantially damaging a competitor or to 
prevent a business from entering into a market. 
Page 79, Para 3.131 
Competition (and consumer protection) legislation is contained in the Competition and Consumer 
Act 2010 (CCA)……As indicated, the ACCC conducts formal price surveillance on aviation and 
airport services and facilities, fuel, electricity, telecommunications, postal services, and container 
stevedoring. 
Question 31 
Please detail the price regulatory approach of th e Australian government for air transportation as 
well as airport services and facilities. Does an airline or airport have independent pricing power for 
the services it provides? 
Answer 
Australian regular passenger transport (RPT) air transportation services are not price-regulated. 
Airlines and airports independently have responsibility for setting the prices of their aeronautical, 
aviation, airport-related and other services. 
Airservices Australia (an Australian Government Business Enterprise) is required to seek approval 
from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) for pr oposed increases to 
prices for certain monopoly services. 
The ACCC has responsibility for:  
 monitoring prices, costs and profits and quality of aeronautical services and car parking at 
Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney airports; 
 assessing notifications of proposed price increases from Sydney Airport in relation to 
regional air services; and 
 assessing notifications of proposed price increa ses from Airservices Australia, which provides 
air traffic control and aviation fire-fighting and rescue services to airports and airlines. 
Page 82, Para 3.142 
To improve the robustness of its IP laws and system, Australia passed the IP Laws Amendment 
(Raising the Bar) Act 2012, its biggest IP system overhaul in twenty years that came into full 
effect on 15 April 2013. The changes included updates to the Patents Act 1990, Trade Marks Act 1995, Designs Act 2003, Plant Breeder's Rights Act 1994, and Copyright Act 1968. The 
amendments address the following key areas: raisin g the quality of granted patents; free access to 
patented inventions for regulatory approvals and research; reducing delays in the resolution of 
patent and trade mark applications; assisting the operations of the IP profession; improving 
mechanisms for trade mark and copyright en forcement; and simplifying the IP system. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 58 - 
 
  Question 32 & 33 
 Please elaborate on the main amendments of IP Laws Amendment Act 2012 to Copyright Act 
1968, especially those involving copyright enforcement. 
 Please introduce the measures taken by the Australian government to fight online copyright 
infringement. 
Answer 
The IP Laws Amendment Act (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 introduced new mechanisms to improve 
copyright border enforcement measures, particularly improving the system for confiscating 
imported infringing copyright goods (the 'notice of objection' scheme).  
The amendments were designed to address pre-existing loopholes that enabled importers of 
infringing goods to retain the goods and avoid prosecution, as well as difficulties faced by 
copyright owners in obtaining the information necessary to determine if they should institute 
infringement proceedings.  
Specifically the amendments: 
 enabled the Customs Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to provide the copyright owner with 
information regarding the exporter as well as the importer so that copyright owners could address infringement at its source; 
 enabled the Customs CEO to provide the copyright owner with access to multiple samples of 
the seized copies. Previously, the copyright owner could only access a single sample, which was problematic for the purposes of determining whether the consignment contained infringing copies; 
 revised the previous scheme for dealing with seized copies. Previously, seized copies needed 
to be returned to the importer within a certain time period if the copyright owner did not institute infringement proceedings, but the importer could frustrate attempts to institute 
proceedings by being uncontactable within this  timeframe. As a result of the amendments, 
the importer could only reclaim the copies by submitting a claim for release in which they provide sufficient information to be contactable;  
 enabled the Customs CEO to deal with forfei ted copies by disposing of them, and to 
compensate importers of non-infringing goods that are disposed of and subsequently found by a court to be non-infringing; and 
 provided that decisions made by the Customs CE O could be reviewed on their merits by the 
Administrative Appeals Tribunal. 
On 10 December 2014, the Attorney-General and the Minister for Communications announced new 
measures to tackle online copyright infringement: 
 an industry code to be developed by Internet  Service Providerss and rights holders, under 
the Telecommunications Act 1997, to be submi tted to the Australian Communications and 
Media Authority by 8 April 2015, for the develo pment of an education and warning notice 
scheme, and  
 a new legislative measure which enables rights holders to apply to a court for an order 
requiring an Internet Service Provider to block access to a website located outside Australia that facilitates access to infringing copyright material.  
The Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015 was introduced into Parliament on 26 
March 2015 to implement the second measure. If pa ssed, this Bill would enable a copyright owner 
to apply to the Federal Court of Australia for an  order requiring a Carriage Service Provider (CSP) 
to block access to an online location (e.g. a website) that has the primary purpose of infringing or 
facilitating infringement of copyright.  
Page 87, Para 3.159 
The Circuit Layout Amendment Regulations 2003 contain the list of eligible countries to which 
Australia extends reciprocal protection of circuit layouts designs; they were last amended in 2008 WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 59 - 
 
  to ensure that eligible foreign countries are Members of the WTO. This mechanism enables the 
Regulations to self-update each time a new Member joins the WTO. 
Question 34 
Please enumerate the "eligible countries". What are the criteria for their eligibility? 
Answer 
Under Regulation 3 of the Circuit Layouts Regula tions 1990, an 'eligible foreign country' includes: 
 a member of the World Trade Organization; or  
 a separate customs territory that is a member of the World Trade Organization; or  
 a territory (however described) of a memb er of the World Trade Organization whose 
membership is extended, in accordance with international law, to include the territory.  
Page 89, Para 4.1  
In addition, a number of activities, including cargo-liner shipping conferences and essential 
infrastructure facilities (some of which are considered to be "natural monopolies"), such as electricity networks, rail tracks, natural gas pipelines, water, communications networks, and post, 
continue to benefit from special regimes or  exemptions that restrict competition. 
Question 35 
Please provide details on the price regulation in the electricity, natural gas and other energy 
pipeline networks, e.g. institutional arrangement, staffing, working mechanism, approval of costs, 
and the decision-making process, etc. 
Answer 
The Australian Energy Regulator (AER) is Australi a's national energy market regulator. The AER 
has an independent Board, with its staff, resources and facilities provided by the Australian 
Competition and Consumer Commission. The AER's functions primarily relate to electricity and gas markets in eastern and southern Australia.  
The AER works to promote efficient investment in, and efficient operation and use of, energy 
services in the long term interests of consumers. It does this through setting network prices that are efficient, ensuring wholesale energy market s operate competitively, and by educating and 
protecting consumers. 
The AER regulates the electricity and gas industri es, determining the revenue that energy network 
businesses can recover from customers for providing the electricity poles and wires and gas pipelines that transport energy and monitoring th e wholesale electricity and gas markets to ensure 
suppliers comply with the National Electricity Law and Rules and the National Gas Law and Rules.  
Since assuming responsibility for the regulation of the retail energy markets in some jurisdictions, 
the AER has further monitoring and enforcement roles and functions under the National Energy 
Retail Law and the National Energy Retail Rules. These functions include authorising retailers to 
sell energy and administering the national retail er of last resort scheme aimed at protecting 
customers and the market in the event of a retail business failure. 
Formal decisions of the AER are made through its Board. The AER Board has one Commonwealth 
member and two state/territory members. These members are Government appointees. 
Page 89, Para 4.1 Australia has maintained its relatively open trade regime since its last Review. At the same time, 
however, despite certain policy changes, it has co ntinued to provide general and industry specific 
support in different forms to virtually the same sectors.……The fact that some activities remain WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 60 - 
 
  protected or otherwise assisted more than others (e.g. manufacturing compared to agriculture) 
continues to constitute a potential impediment to efficient reallocation of resources in the economy as a whole. 
Page 90, Para 4.5 
Industry-specific support for the textiles, clothing, footwear and leather industries was drastically 
cut and the elimination of two remaining programmes is under consideration. 
Page 107, Para 4.56 
Question 36 
The Australian government has given considerable support to manufacturing in both financial and 
policy terms to improve labour productivity and guarantee employment in the sector. Has Australia taken any other measures in addition to these to promote the development of its manufacturing? 
Answer 
The Australian Government does provide support for structural adjustment in manufacturing 
through regional Innovation and Investment Funds, which emphasise new business development 
that leads to sustainable job creation. However, other Australian Government support for 
manufacturing does not guarantee employment in the manufacturing sector. Rather, this support, e.g. the Manufacturing Transition Programme, aims to assist Australian manufacturing firms 
undertake new business development projects that build innovative capabilities and lead to higher 
value manufacturing activity, including develo pment and adoption of new technologies and 
processes. Manufacturing support emphasises tran sition by manufacturing firms to higher-value 
added activities through new capital investments, investments in innovation, worker upskilling or 
reskilling and R&D, and expansion into new market s. Such support also assists the manufacturing 
sector to adapt to increasing competition through the reduction or phasing out of tariffs and other trade barriers. It is through the production of g oods and related services for which there is market 
demand that jobs can either be created or sustained. 
There are measures that indirectly support manufactu ring the funding of the research activities by 
public research organisations including CSIRO,  AIMS, or the Rural Industries Research and 
Development Corporation. These measures assist manufacturing sectors through knowledge 
transfer of industry relevant research and not through direct financial support. The Australian Government's Industry Growth Centres Initiative (the Initiative) is an initiative in the Government's Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda and aims to lift competitiveness 
and productivity by focusing on areas of competitive strength and to help Australia transition into 
smart, high value and export focused industries. The $188.5 million Initiative is a key element of 
the government's new industry policy direction. It will identify opportunities to reduce regulatory 
burden, increase collaboration and commercialisa tion, improve capabilities to engage with 
international markets and global supply chains, and enhance management and workforce skills. Initially, five Industry Growth Centres (Growth Centres) will be established in key growth sectors 
of the Australian economy within the Industry Portfolio: Advanced Manufacturing; Food and 
Agribusiness; Medical Technologies and Pharmaceuticals; Mining Equipment, Technology and Services; and Oil, Gas and Energy Resources.  
A key activity of each Growth Centre will be to set a long-term strategy for their sector. This will 
be outlined in the Sector Competiveness Plan, which will describe how to lift the capability of the 
sector, boost productivity, skills, create jobs, and engage with international opportunities. Initially 
Chairs, in consultation with their sectors, will lead the development of a Growth Centre proposal 
for the Minister's consideration. During this phase Chairs will focus on the strategic intent of the 
Growth Centre, initial activities, the expected governance arrangements and locations of the 
Growth Centre, and generating momentum.  
Growth Centres will develop national networks between business, research and government to 
deliver tangible benefits to business. They will wo rk with business, researchers and government on 
practical ways to grow the sectors, boost productivity and create jobs. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 61 - 
 
  It is expected that the Advanced Manufacturing; Food and Agribusiness; and Mining Equipment, 
Technology and Services Growth Centres will start operating from the middle of the year. 
Page 95, Para 4.22 In line with its commitment to repeal the Carbon Tax (section 3.4.1.3 and 3.4.3.2), the 
Commonwealth Government has reviewed funding a rrangements related to the Carbon Tax, made 
the necessary adjustments to associated programmes and did not proceed with any new projects under the Carbon Farming Futures programme. Through its Direct Action Plan, the Government 
will introduce a mix of new policies, including the Emissions Reduction Fund to provide ongoing 
opportunities for farmers and land-managers to part icipate in emission reduction projects with a 
bill on the Emissions Reduction Fund being introduced in June 2014. 
Question 37 
Implementation of a carbon tax once made Australia one of the most forceful countries outside the 
European in limiting carbon emissions. As the Carbon Tax was repealed after over two years' implementation, the plan for gradually establishi ng a carbon emissions trading scheme from 2015 
was also cancelled, which made Australia the first developed country to abolish the carbon tax 
related law. What assessment has the Australian Government made in implementing and repealing the carbon tax? What burden has the carbon tax imposed on businesses and individuals? What 
effects has it had on improving the environment? 
Answer 
The Australian Treasury has estimated that the repeal of the carbon tax will see household costs 
fall by around AUD$550 per year, on average across all Australian households, compared to what 
they would have been with a carbon tax (which  was fixed at AUD$25.40 per tonne of emissions 
in 2014 15). 
Total revenue collected through the carbon tax over  two years was AUD$15.4 billion. In addition to 
this, administrative and compliance costs were estimated to be AUD $85 million per year. 
Australia's total annual greenhouse gas emissions fell by 2 %, or 12 million tonnes, during the two 
years of the carbon tax (July 2012 to June 2014). However the Australian Government is not 
readily able to attribute any particular amount of an observed movement in emissions to the 
impact of specific factors – whether that is the carbon tax or any other factor.  
One factor that is likely to have played a significant part in that fall in emissions was an 
unsustainably high level of hydroelectric generation during the two years of the carbon tax that 
saw dam water storage levels fall to below-average levels.  
Page 100, Para 4.36 The Plan is accompanied by proposals to provide significant levels of financial support for 
innovation in clean energy technologies, including through: ……as well as the creation of a new 
institution, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA), which would separately administer $A 3.2 billion in government funding for existing research and development, demonstration and 
commercialisation of renewable energy. 
Question 38 
Please explain how the ARENA management fund am ong other subsidy funds is operated under the 
"Climate Change Program". Are there any specific  implementation plans? Do such government-
funded subsidies customized for the clean energy industry constitute actionable subsidies under 
the WTO law? Are domestic and foreign new energy companies treated equal in the granting of these subsidies? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 62 - 
 
  Answer 
The Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) is established, and operates, under the 
Australian Renewable Energy Agency Act 2011 (Cth). This Act is available on www.comlaw.gov.au .  
ARENA has two objectives: to improve the competit iveness of renewable energy technologies, and 
to increase the supply of renewable energy in Australia. 
ARENA is supportive of all renewable energy technolo gies and projects across the various stages of 
the innovation chain – from research in the la boratory to large scale technology projects. 
Further information on how ARENA operates is set out in ARENA's General Funding Strategy and 
Investment Plan. Both of these documents are available on ARENA's website, http://arena.gov.au/about-arena/corporate-publications/ . 
ARENA has a number of funding programmes. The framework for implementing these programmes 
is set out in programme guidelines and information manuals. 
Further information on ARENA's current programmes including relevant guidelines and information 
manuals can be found at http://arena.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/ . 
Domestic and foreign companies are treated equal in the granting of these subsidies. 
Generally speaking, ARENA's programmes require that applicants for funding must be an entity 
able to contract with ARENA within its constitutional limits as defined in the Australian Renewable 
Energy Agency Act 2011 (Cth), such as the corporat ions power in the Constitution (which relates 
to foreign corporations, and trading or financial corporations formed within Australia). Incorporation in Australia also assists in contracting and administration, and is not considered a barrier to foreign entities who wish to apply to ARENA for funding. 
Page 110, Para 4.60 
Between December 2012 and October 2013, an automotive industry advocate was to develop, 
inter alia, an action plan to increase the purchase of Australian-made vehicles by public sector 
fleets. 
Question 39 
Is this plan still in implementation or will it continue to be implemented? Will Australia further 
strengthen financial support to its automobile industry? 
Answer 
As per the Australian Government's response to the Productivity Commission's Report on 
Australia's Automotive Manufacturing Industry, the Australian Government will be removing the 
fleet procurement policy that requires government agencies to purchase vehicles manufactured in 
Australia, in light of the closure announcements by local vehicle producers. 
The three motor vehicle producers currently active in Australia have all announced that they will 
cease manufacturing in Australia by the end of 2017. As such, the Automotive Transformation 
Scheme (ATS) will come to a natural close at the end of 2017. The Government currently has a number of programmes in place to continue to provide support to the Australian automotive 
industry through this transition. 
Page 110, Para 4.61 It was mainly delivered through the industry-specific components of the New Car Plan for a 
Greener Future (i.e. the Automotive Transformation Scheme, the Green Car Innovation Fund), and 
general export support from Tradex. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 63 - 
 
  Question 40 
Do the subsidies given to the automobile industry mentioned in the Report violate WTO rules on 
subsidies? Please describe in detail various subs idies outlined in paragraph 4.61, including the 
standards for granting subsidies and the list of  recipient enterprises of such subsidies. 
Answer 
To ensure the assistance available under the Automotive Transformation Scheme (ATS) is 
consistent with Australia's international trade obligations, the ATS includes a sales-based cap for 
payment of assistance. 
Subregulation 3.11(1) of the ATS requires assistance paid to an ATS participant (other than an 
ATS participant carrying on business for the first time in the automotive industry) must not exceed five per cent of the annual sales values of an ATS participant's goods and services for the previous 
year. 
Subregulation 3.11(2) of the ATS also requires participants who are carrying on business as a 
motor vehicle producer (MVP), automotive compon ent producer (ACP), automotive machine tools 
producer (AMTP) or automotive service provider (ASP) for the first time must not exceed 15 per 
cent of the participant's eligible start-up investment amount. Eligible start-up investment amounts include expenditure on land, buildings, structure,  plant, equipment, materials or other assets. 
New Car Plan for a Greener Future 
The New Car Plan for a Greener Future provided $6.2 billion, in programs and funding, to make 
the automotive industry more economically  and environmentally sustainable by 2020. 
The plan implemented the recommendations of the Review of the automotive industry, including a 
reformed Automotive Transformation Scheme, an expanded Green Car Innovation Fund, and 
measures to promote industry competitiveness. 
Automotive Transformation Scheme 
The Automotive Transformation Scheme (ATS) prov ides $1.6 billion in capped, and approximately 
$A 348 million in uncapped, assistance to the automotive industry between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2017. 
The ATS provides assistance in the form of cash payments to eligible participants for production of 
motor vehicles, investment in R&D to a maximu m rate of 50%, and investment in plant and 
equipment to a maximum rate of 15%. The ATS covers motor vehicle producers, automotive component producers, automotive machine tool and automotive tooling producers, and automotive 
service providers. Certain segments of the indu stry including the truck and bus assembling and 
many firms in the aftermarket parts segments , operate without the benefit of the ATS. 
Green Car Innovation Fund (GCIF) 
The GCIF provided $1.3 billion in assistance to Au stralian companies for projects that enhance the 
research and development and commercialisation of Australian technologies that significantly reduce fuel consumption and/or greenhouse gas emissions of passenger motor vehicles. 
Under the GCIF, the Australian Government matched industry investment in green cars on a $1 
dollar to $3 dollar basis over a ten year period from 2009. 
The GCIF was closed in 2011, as part of the Australian Government's saving measures to support 
the rebuilding of infrastructure damaged by the floods over large areas of eastern Australia. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 64 - 
 
  General export support from Tradex 
The Tradex Scheme allows an importer to gain an up-front exemption from Customs duty and GST 
on eligible imported goods that are intended for export. 
Automotive Industry Structural Adjustment Program (AISAP) 
The Government has extended the AISAP to 30 June 2018 to provide intensive tailored 
employment assistance to help displaced automotive workers find new employment. The AISAP has been extended to ensure assistance is availa ble to workers as they are displaced, including 
following the closure of motor vehicle manufacturing at the end of 2017.  
Automotive Supply Chain Programme (ASCP) Support for the Australian automotive supply chain to diversify is now being provided though the 
Automotive Diversification Programme (ADP). 
The ADP is a $20 programme established to suppo rt employees, businesses and regions affected 
by the closure of Australia's car manufacturing industry by 2017. 
The programme provides grants to assist Australian automotive supply chain companies to 
diversify out of the domestic automotive manufacturing sector, and retain manufacturing capability 
in Australia. 
List of recipient enterprises of such subsidies 
Consistent with the Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines, lists of recipient enterprises are 
available on individual program websites. However, these lists may no longer be publicly available 
for closed programs. Some details may also be withheld where information was considered commercial in confidence. 
Page 111, Para 4.62 
The Growth Fund, which forms part of the Indu stry Investment and Competitiveness Agenda 
(section 4.4), is to help generate future jobs and supply chain business opportunities in Victoria 
and South Australia affected by the closures. 
Question 41 
What is the source of the relevant funds? Which industries are granted these funds? What are the 
requirements and restrictions for the enterprises to apply for these funds? 
Answer 
The Growth Fund includes a number of programmes and initiatives, the $60 million Next 
Generation Manufacturing and Investment Programme, the $30 million Regional Infrastructure 
Programme, the $20 million Automotive Diversification Programme, the $30 million Skills and 
Training Initiative, and a $15 million increase in funding to extend the Automotive Industry Structural Adjustment Programme. 
The programmes and initiatives which come under the Growth Fund have different funding sources 
and different eligibility and merit criteria: 
 The Next Generation Manufacturing Investme nt Programme (NGMIP) is funded by the 
Australian Government, which has contributed $36 million and the South Australian and 
Victorian Governments which have contributed $12 million each.  
 The NGMIP does not specifically require a business applicant to belong to a particular 
industry to be eligible, though eligible projects must take place in Victoria or South 
Australia, and be manufacturing related. The NGMIP is a merit based, competitive grants WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 65 - 
 
  programme, which requires eligible applicants to be competitive against several merit 
criteria.  
 For applicants to be eligible, they must meet a number of eligibility criteria, including the 
requirement that they be a trading corporat ion (within the meaning of section 51(xx) of 
the Australian Constitution), incorporated in Australia, that is non ‐income tax exempt and 
registered for the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Further details on eligibility are available 
from the Programme Guidelines: http://www.business.gov.au/grants-and-
assistance/growth-fund/Next-Generation-Manufacturing-Investment-
Programme/Documents/NextGenerationManufacturingInvestmentProgramme-
Guidelines.pdf . 
 The Regional Infrastructure Programme is funded by the Australian Government, which has 
contributed $30 million. Programme delivery arrangements are currently under 
development.  
 The Automotive Diversification Programme (ADP) is a $20 million programme, which 
includes $17 million for competitive merit based grants. The programme is entirely funded 
by the Australian Government. 
 The ADP is open to Australian producers of automotive components, machine tools and 
tooling, and providers of automotive services, which are currently supplying an Australian 
original equipment manufacturer. Note: Australian motor vehicle producers are not eligible 
to apply under the ADP.  
 For applicants to be eligible, they must meet a number of eligibility criteria, including the 
requirement that they be a trading corporat ion (within the meaning of section 51(xx) of 
the Australian Constitution), incorporated in Australia, that is non ‐income tax exempt and 
registered for the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Further details on eligibility are available 
from the Programme Guidelines: http://www.business.gov.au/grants-and-
assistance/growth-fund/Automotive-Diversification-Programme/Documents/ADP-
MinGuidelines.pdf . The ADP is a competitive, merit-based programme. As such, eligible 
applicants also need to be competitive against several merit criteria. 
 The Skills and Training Initiative is funded by Holden and Toyota, who have contributed $15 
million each.  
 The Skills and Training Initiative is designed to help workers from Holden and Toyota 
transition to new jobs in other industries and/or regions as the car manufacturing industry 
winds down in Australia. The initiative will help workers build on existing skills and gain 
new skills that are transferable to other sectors, such as health services, tourism, education, food and agriculture and advanced manufacturing. 
 Holden and Toyota will deliver the majority of the agreed services to their workers while 
they are still in their current job. Some services will continue to be available to workers after they leave their jobs. The Skills and Training Initiative for Holden and Toyota workers 
complements state government programmes fo r eligible component manufacturing supply 
chain workers to help their workers become job ready.  
 The $15 million extension to the Automotive Industry Structural Adjustment Programme 
(AISAP) is entirely funded by the Australian Government. 
 The AISAP is not open to businesses. It is open to eligible workers from an eligible company 
in the automotive manufacturing industry (including component suppliers). 
 Supply chain companies are assessed on a case by case basis for eligibility. Employees can 
register for AISAP three months prior to retrenchment and must register to AISAP no later 
than six months after retrenchment. They also  need to provide a letter of retrenchment 
with a retrenchment date. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 66 - 
 
  Page 114, Para 4.70 
Australia's regional trade agreements (RTAs) with  ASEAN (and New Zealand), Chile, the Republic 
of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, Thaila nd, and the United States include provisions on 
services. Some use a negative-list approach to scheduling services commitments, while others use 
positive list modalities. … As noted in Australia's previous Review, the levels of commitments 
undertaken by Australia vary from one FTA to th e other and often go significantly beyond GATS 
commitments. 
Question 42 & 43 
 How does Australia choose between the positive-list and the negative-list  
 What GATS plus commitments has Australia made in the opening of its financial service? What 
impacts have these commitments had on its domestic finance industry? 
Answer 
While Australia is able to negotiate modalities for trade in services agreements on a case-by-case 
basis, Australia has a strong policy preference to negotiate services commitments in FTAs on a 
negative list basis. Australia considers that negative list commitments tend to have a more 
liberalising effect on trade in services over time. In a positive list, agreed disciplines will only apply to scheduled sectors, whereas they apply across-the-board in negative list agreements (other than 
where reservations are taken). Australia has provided our most ambitious commitments through 
negative lists. 
Australia undertakes its specific commitments on financial services in accordance with the "WTO 
Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services" (hereinafter referred to as the 
"Understanding"). 
The obligations under the Understanding are addr essed additionally to those covered by the 
provisions of Part III of the General Agreement on  Trade in Services and the Annex on Financial 
Services. These specific commitments on financial services are subject to the general limitations 
contained in the "Horizontal Commitments" section of Australia's GATS Schedule. 
Our financial services commitments in many of our Free Trade Agreements reflect many of the 
core elements of the Understanding. Further information on our specific financial services 
commitments in recent FTAs can be found on the DFAT website http://dfat.gov.au/trade .  
The available statistics do not identify the impacts of these commitments on the domestic financial 
industry. However in overall terms, the gross value added of the financial and insurance industry 
to the Australian economy (in volume terms) has increased from $87.2 bn in 2004 (7.8 per cent of 
Australia's total GDP at basic prices) to $134 bn in 2014 (9.1 per cent of Australia's total GDP).  
Australian exports of financial services rose from $A1.2 bn to $A3.3bn from 2004 to 2014. 
Insurance exports rose from $A404m to $539m over the same period. 
Page 113-114, Para 4.72 The financial system remains supervised by three institutions: the Reserve Bank of Australia 
(RBA), Australia's central bank; the Australian Pr udential Regulation Authority (APRA) (deposit 
taking institutions, general and life insurance companies, and superannuation funds (i.e. pension funds); and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) (overall market conduct, consumer protection, and competition in financial services). The Council of Financial 
Regulators ensures coordination between these bodies. 
Table 4.4 Structure of the financial system assets, June 2009 to June 2013 Question 44 
According to Table 4.4, "the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)" regulates 
the securitization vehicles". What do the "securitization vehicles" cover? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 67 - 
 
  Answer 
Securitisation involves a loan originator selling a portfolio of loans to a special purpose vehicle 
(SPV). The SPV raises the funds to purchase thes e loans by issuing debt securities (bonds or 
commercial paper) to investors. The cash flow from the loans is used to meet the principal and 
interest repayments on the securities. ASIC regulates these SPVs. 
Page 114, Para 4.73 The Treasurer reviews whether applications are in the national interest on a case-by-case basis, 
taking into account all relevant considerations, such as prudential requirements and the impact on 
the economy and competition 
Question 45 & 46 
 What are the prudence considerations for Australia to turn down an application in the financial 
sector? Please provide three actual cases. 
 What key prudence measures has Australia taken in the financial sector, especially related to 
Securities? 
Answers 
There is no statutory definition of what is in the 'national interest', however the following factors 
have typically been taken into account in determining whether a proposed acquisition is in the 
'national interest': 
 whether the proposed acquisition is likely to adversely affect the prudent conduct of the 
affairs of the company; 
 whether the proposed acquisition is likely to result in an unsuitable person being in a 
position of influence over the company; 
 whether the proposed acquisition is likely to substantially lessen competition and whether it 
is likely to result in an undue concentration of power in the Australian financial system; 
and 
 whether the proposed acquisition is expected to create a more efficient and effective 
corporate structure which will benefit shareholders and customers. 
Any approval given under the Financial Sector (Shareholdings) Act 1998 can be made subject to 
any conditions that the Treasurer considers appropriate.  
Australia has not made significant changes to its prudential framework for securities regulation 
following the global financial crisis. 
Page 115, Para 4.75 
The Commonwealth Government is supportive of the development of an Asia Region Funds 
Passport which will provide the regulatory framework for the cross-border offer of collective 
investment schemes in participating economies. 
Question 47 
Please share the progress of "Asia Region Funds Passport". Have related products been issued? 
Please elaborate on the issuance of main products, if any. 
Answer 
The latest development in advancing implementati on of the Asia Region Funds Passport was the 
release on 27 February 2015 of the proposed rule s and arrangements for public consultation. The 
deadline for submissions is 10 April 2015. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 68 - 
 
  Formal consultations are expected to occur in the six working group countries: Australia, Korea, 
New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand.  
Securities regulators in some other regional countries may choose to consult their industry on the 
arrangements and/or make a submission.  
Following completion of the public consultations, the working group will consider feedback received 
and decide on any amendments to the arrangements. 
The Asia Region Funds Passport is expected to commence during 2016.  
Following the signing of the ministerial statement of understanding at the APEC Finance Ministers' 
Meeting in September 2015 and the multilateral memorandum of understanding at an IOSCO meeting in September 2015 , each signatory will take the steps necessary in their domestic regulatory frameworks to implement the Asia Region Funds Passport throughout the remainder of 
2015 and into 2016. 
The Asia Region Funds Passport can commence when two economies have completed those steps. Membership will remain open to eligible countries. 
Further information can be obtained from http://fundspassport.apec.org/ . 
Page 117, Para 4.81 
Concurrently, the RBA will establish a Committed Liquidity Facility (CLF) allowing participating 
ADIs to have access to sufficient liquidity in the event of an acute stress scenario. 
Question 48 
Please provide operational details of CLF. For in stance, under what criteria and circumstances can 
an institution apply for CLF? 
Answer 
See http://www.rba.gov.au/media-r eleases/2014/mr-14-16.html  for the CLF Terms and 
Conditions; and CLF Operational Notes. 
Page 117, Para 4.83 
In the 2013 Economic Statement, the previous Government announced the creation of a Financial 
Stability Fund, to be funded by a levy on bank deposits covered by the Financial Claims Scheme 
(FCS); its target size was to be 0.5% of total deposits protected by the FCS. 
Question 49 
Please give some details regarding this Financial Stability Fund, such as its function, working 
mechanism and objective.  
Answer 
The Government, as part of its response to the Financial System Inquiry, is still working out the 
details of the Financial Stability Fund. 
Page 119, Para 4.94 
Aggregate foreign equity ownership of Telstra is capped at 35%; individual foreign investors are 
permitted to own only up to 5%. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 69 - 
 
  Question 50 
The footnote to the last sentence is Australian "Productivity Commission". The Commission is said 
as one of affiliated institutions of the Australian De partment of Finance, and a famous think-tank in 
Australia. Are the investment caps developed by it? 
Answer 
The investment caps are not developed by the Productivity Commission. 
Page 119, Para 4.97 
The ACCC remains in charge of enforcing competitio n rules under the CCA. It sets wholesale prices 
and wholesale terms of access for "declared" services… 
Question 51 
What does the "declared service" refer to? 
Answer 
In relation to Australian telecommunications services, the ACCC may declare services, with the 
consequence that the provider of the declared service must provide access on agreed terms, or if 
no agreement can be reached, terms arbitrated by the ACCC.  
Where a service is declared the ACCC determines pr icing principles relating to that service, to 
which the ACCC must have regard when arbitrating an access dispute. 
Page 120, Para 4.100 
The national broadband network operates on a wholesale-only, non-discriminatory basis; full 
completion is expected by 2020.In its 2012-15 Corporate Plan, NBN Co. indicated it was seeking to maximise local content as part of its procurement processes; by mid 2012, local content level 
achieved was 51% of contract value. 
Question 52 
According to this paragraph, "NBN Co. indicated it was seeking to maximize local content as part 
of its procurement processes in its 2012-15 Corpor ate Plan". Is this provision of compulsory 
nature? What's coverage of "local content"? Can the "non-discrimination basis" be upheld in the tender of equipment procurement? 
Answer 
Projects in Australia involving a capital expendit ure of $500 million or more need to prepare and 
implement an Australian Industry Participation (AIP) plan. An AIP plan outlines how a project 
proponent or proponents of a major project will provide full, fair and reasonable opportunity to 
Australian industry to supply goods and services to the project. An AIP plan does not prescribe 
local content requirements. Local content is not compulsory. NBN Co's key objective in procuring goods and services is in getting the best value for money possible. The reference to 'non-
discrimination' that is quoted refers to NBN Co's supply of services to its customers. Procurement 
is separate and a matter for the company subjec t to the arrangements described above. The 
reference to NBN Co achieving 51% local content in its Corporate Plan was intended as a 
statement of fact, reflecting, amongst other things, the inherently local nature of a construction 
project, rather than a report against any mandatory requirement or target. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 70 - 
 
  Page 125, Para 4.127 
Limited exemptions from the anti-competitive conduct provisions of the CCA are available to 
shipping lines allowing them to enter into agreements to supply shipping services to Australian exporters and importers. 
Question 53 
Please introduce the provisions on protecting fair competition in CCA. Are other departments 
invited for the review of liner shipping alliance? Wh at is the review process? Please illustrate under 
what circumstances a liner shipping alliance would be denied. When fixed routes, capacity, 
schedules and rates are allowed in the liner allianc e agreement, what specific regulatory measures 
can be taken to prevent exclusion and limited competition in the market, in a bid to earnestly safeguard the market order of fair competition. 
Answer 
The CCA currently contains provisions for protecting fair competition. Part X of the Act is meant to 
specifically consider exemptions for liner shipping companies. Liner shipping exemptions are 
granted on a case by case basis by the Registra r of Liner Shipping and the Australian Competition 
and Consumer Commission are notified whenever an exemption is granted. The review process 
involves three stages a preliminary assessment which provides provisional registration (this does 
not allow shipping services to commence), a second stage for negotiations between the liner 
shipping companies and peak shipping bodies (i mporters and exporters) and a final third stage 
(shipping services under the agreement can only commence 30 days after final registration is granted). The entire process from provisional to final registration can take approximately 25 to 45 
days.  
The exemptions for liner shipping are currently under review by the Australian Government. The 
final review report is available online on at the following address 
http://competitionpolicyreview.gov.au/ .  
Page 126, Para 4.129 
State/territory land use controls apply to port development and their adjacent land areas, 
including road and rail access. Commonwealth port related activities include: environmental 
assessments on port developments 
Question 54 
Please introduce in detail the Australian environmental assessment on port development, such as 
the methods and subject for assessment, and the measures taken. 
Answer 
Activities relating to land use controls for Ports and the surrounding land are generally managed 
by State Governments, including road and rail access. However, certain activities relating to 
activities on Port land may require approval by the Australian Government. 
In particular, the Australian Government regulates activities that are likely to have a significant 
impact on matters of national environment sign ificance under the Environment Protection and 
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. An outline of the matters that are assessed and the assessment process can be found at: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/file s/resources/1fc6c462-effe-4b17-afac-
d26e26ed6902/files/project-assessments-basics_1.pdf . 
Port activities that would generally require Australian Government approval under the EPBC Act 
would involve greenfield developments or developments in sensitive marine environments, such as 
the Great Barrier Reef. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 71 - 
 
  The Australian Government also regulates dredging requirements of most Ports that require 
disposal of dredged material offshore under the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981. Australia fulfils its international obligations under the London Protocol to prevent marine pollution by controlling dumping of dredged material under that Act. 
An outline of the process for assessing dredging activities can be found at: 
http://www.environment.gov.au/system/file s/resources/877667 5b-4d5b-4ce7-b81e-
1959649203a6/files/guidelines09.pdf . 
Australia reports to the International Maritime Organisation on permits given to dispose of dredged 
material at sea every year. 
The assessment process, methods and measur es for matters of national environmental 
significance apply equally to domestic and foreign resident proponents. 
Further published information is provided by the EPBC weblink and sea dumping guidelines listed 
above. 
Page 127, Para 4.134 
There are five major airlines registered in Australia: Qantas Airways Ltd., Virgin Australia Holdings 
Ltd., Jetstar Airways, Regional Express Airlines and Tigerair Australia. 
Question 55 & 56 
What's the Australian policy for the allocation of international airline traffic rights? Is there any tailor-made regulation for Low Cost Carrier? Answer 
Capacity available to Australian airlines under relevant bilateral air services arrangements is 
allocated by the International Air Services Commission (IASC). The IASC can allocate capacity for 
passenger and freight services, as well as for joint services where such capacity is limited under the relevant arrangements. Where capacity is cont ested on a particular route the IASC can assess 
the relevant applications against public benefit criteria, such as the expected benefits to 
competition, tourism, trade, industry and the travelling public. 
Australia does not allocate commercial entitlements  to foreign airlines to operate services to 
Australia; this is a matter for foreign governments to consider. 
There are no tailor-made regulations for low-cost carriers. Page 127, Para 4.135 Aggregate foreign investment in Australia's international airlines is limited to 49%…… 
Question 57 & 58 
 In Australia, foreign investment is subject to di fferent equity ratio for "international airlines" 
and "domestic airlines". What is the reason for that? How are the respective equity ratios 
determined? Does Australia plan to further relax such limitation on foreign investment? 
 Does Australia impose any restrictions on foreig n investment in general aviation, airports, air 
traffic control, as well as aircraft maintenance, air cargo warehousing, aviation sales agents, 
aviation fuel, computer ticket-reservation systems and other auxiliary activities besides the 
public air transport enterprise? What are the specific restrictions, if any? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 72 - 
 
  Answers 
The Australian Government reviews foreign investment proposals on a case-by-case basis to 
ensure they are not contrary to the national interest. 
In general, proposals to acquire an interest of 15 per cent or more in any business valued at over 
$252 million (or the higher threshold of $1,094 million for countries where Australia has given 
preferential treatment through free trad e agreements) are subject to approval. 
However, transport (including airports, port facilities, rail infrastructure, international and domestic 
aviation and shipping services provided within, or to and from, Australia) is one of the prescribed 
sensitive sectors, where the higher screening threshold of $1,094 million does not apply to 
investors from free trade agreement countries.  
Page 127, Para 4.136-4.137 
In August 2014, a total of 51 airlines operated international scheduled flights (passenger and 
freight) to and/or from Australia … All international flights operate under bilateral Air Services Agreements (ASAs) which are negotiated by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional 
Development's Air Services Negotiations Team. 
Question 59, 60, 61, 62 & 63 
 Please introduce the provisions and procedures for Australia to grant operating license to 
foreign airlines. 
 How are the violations by foreign airlines penalized by Australia? Is a deposit required to be 
paid? 
 Can non-designated enterprises of foreign airlines conduct sales in Australia? What are the 
conditions if they are allowed? Are offices required to be registered in advance? 
 What provisions and procedures does Australia follow in approving code-sharing in Australia 
between the public airlines from China and Australia, and between those from China and a third 
country? 
 Please introduce the provisions and procedures fo r Australia to approve foreign airlines to use 
aircrafts wet-leased from a third country to fly Australian routes. 
Answers 
An International Airline Licence (IAL) issued by the Australian Department of Infrastructure and 
Regional Development is required for all scheduled international services to/from Australia by both foreign and Australian airlines. In order to receive and maintain a valid IAL, airlines are required to 
show they satisfy, and continue to satisfy, several conditions, including: maintaining a designation 
by their home government; holding a valid certificate of insurance; holding an Air Operators Certificate and Transport Security Program respecti vely issued by Australia's safety and security 
regulatory authorities; having a published Australian phone number and – where necessary for 
Australian carriers – holding an allocation of capacity from the International Air Services Commission on the relevant route/s. IALs are subject to periodic review by the Department of 
Infrastructure and Regional Development. 
There are provisions at Reg 24 of the Air Naviga tion Regulations 1947 allowing for the penalty of 
airlines for offences relating to timetables, such as operating an unapproved service, selling without Government approval without mentioning said fact etc. 
We understand that this question refers to airlines which commence ticket sales for scheduled 
services before regulatory approval has been granted by Australian agencies.  
In addition to the allocation of air traffic rights under bilateral air services agreements, airlines 
must also obtain other regulatory approvals, in cluding safety and security approvals, prior to 
operating a service.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 73 - 
 
  Airlines are permitted to sell tickets for a service prior to obtaining all relevant approvals but must 
include the caveat 'subject to regulatory approval'. 
Provisions for code share by Australian and Chinese airlines is provided for in the Australia-China 
air services arrangements. From an economic regulatory perspective, the marketing carrier is 
required to hold the traffic rights on which it is intending to offer services. In offering a code share 
service on a specified route, the carrier operating the service is required to hold operating authorisations, such as safety or security approv als. Both the operating and marketing carrier are 
required to submit a timetable for approval to the Department of Infrastructure and Regional 
Development for all relevant services. 
Australia's approach to regulation of wet-leasing arrangements requires that only the operator 
need hold the relevant authorisations from Australia's safety and security regulatory authorities – 
the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the Office  of Transport Security. Economic approval is 
required from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development through the process for approving and amending timetables, under the Air Navigation Act 1920. 
Page 128, Para 4.139 
Australia operates a Regional Aviation Access Programme (RAAP) under which it subsidizes regular 
non-commercial air services (for both passengers and goods) to 363 remote communities and 
cattle stations as well as providing funding for works to assist access and safety at these airstrips. 
Question 64 
Please introduce the contents and funding source of RAAP. Does Australia have a subsidy program 
for commercial air services? Please give a brief introduction if so. 
The Australian Government provides targeted support for air services and some aerodrome 
infrastructure in remote areas where they are not commercially viable. This funding is provided through the Regional Aviation Access Programme (RAAP).  
The Funding Components of the RAAP are: 
 the Remote Air Services Subsidy (RASS) Scheme; 
 the Remote Aerodrome Upgrade (RAU) Programme; and 
 the Remote Aerodrome Inspection (RAI) Programme. 
The RASS Scheme provides some 260 communities in  remote and isolated areas of Australia with 
improved access through the subsidy of a regular ai r transport service where it is not commercially 
viable. The 260 directly serviced locations include 86 Indigenous communities. The service is 
typically weekly utilising light aircraft, for the carriage of passengers and goods including fresh 
food, educational materials, medicines and other ur gent supplies. Mail is also delivered via RASS 
flights, which is managed through separate contractual arrangements between Australia Post and 
the air operator. During the 2013-14 financial year, the Scheme carried 7,061 passengers and 
233,988 kilograms of mail and other freight. 
Commercial air operators are contracted directly by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional 
Development to conduct the subsidised air service. Contract periods vary and can be from 1 to 4 
years. The Department conducts periodic op en tender processes to renew air operator 
arrangements across ten geographical regions.  
RAU assists remote communities by enhancing safety and access at their aerodromes.  RAU is a 
competitive, merit-based programme providing one-off grant funding assistance for approved 
aerodrome upgrade works, generally up to 50 pe r cent of the cost. The programme excludes 
running costs, general maintenance, sta ffing costs and landside infrastructure. 
RAI provides aerodrome technical safety inspections to 59 remote Indigenous communities across 
northern Australia. The technical advice from the reports assists these communities comply with aviation safety requirements and to maintain essential air access. The department conducts open 
procurement to identify and contract inspection services.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 74 - 
 
  The Australian Government's Airservices Australia Enroute Charges Payment Scheme provides 
funding assistance for eligible services to regional and remote areas including scheduled commercial passenger services and aeromedical services. The funding assistance offsets all or part of the Enroute air navigation charge levied by Airservices Australia. Eligible commercial flights can 
obtain assistance of up to 60 per cent of the enroute charge; with up to 100 per cent offset 
provided for new routes for a period of up to three years. Aeromedical flights can receive assistance of 100 per cent of the charge. The Scheme has an annual budget allocation of $2 
million. 
Eligibility criteria for a route to receive assistance include: 
 that services are regular scheduled passenger services open to the public;  
 that the route is to/from a Regional or Remote location; 
 that the route has a single airline operator; 
 that the route has no more than 15,000 passenger movements per annum; and 
 that aircraft used on the route have a maximum take-off weight of 15,000Kg or less; and 
 that the route is shown to have an economic and/or social impact on the community. 
Under the Australian Constitution, intra-state travel is the responsibility of the relevant State or 
Territory Government. Two States, Queensland and West Australia subsidise a number of regular 
passenger transport air services to regional areas. 
Page 128, Para 4.141 Twenty-one airports are owned by the Federal go vernment, all of which are operated by private 
sector entities under leases with the Government, under the conditions set out in the Airports Act 
1996. 
Question 65 
Does "leases" of airports mean service outsourcing or franchising? How does the government 
manage the airports not owned by the Federal government? 
Answer 
The major airports in Australia are leased to private companies which are responsible for the full 
operation and development of the airports. The government's interests are managed through the 
provisions of the lease document and the Airports Act 1996. 
Where airports are not owned by governments, they  are required to be compliant with provisions 
for safety and security set by regulators such as the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the Office 
of Transport Security and meet planning and deve lopment standards as set by the local or state 
governments. 
Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
Page 4, Para 1.4 
In seeking enhanced international opportunities across all sectors, Australia has entered into, or is 
negotiating, several bilateral, regional, and plurilateral trade agreements to complement its 
multilateral endeavours. Australia continues to undertake unilateral and negotiated tariff 
reductions.  
Question 66 
What does "undertake unilateral tariff reductio ns" refer to? Which members have benefited from 
such unilateral tariff reductions? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 75 - 
 
  Answer 
The most significant reforms to the Australian economy have occurred when the Australian 
Government undertakes unilateral action to remove the barriers to Australia's trade and investment without the agreement of others to do likewise. It is widely acknowledged that 
unilateral tariff reduction can be a powerful contributor to productivity raising economic reform. 
Over the past 30 years Australia has gradually reduced its once high tariff rates. The last phase of Australia's tariff reduction program is for textiles , clothing and footwear products, with clothing 
and certain other textile lines reduced from 10 to 5 percent in 2015. 
All importers into the Australian market can benefit from unilateral lowering of tariffs. Page 11, Para 3.2 Global trade reform in agriculture, manufacturing, environmental goods, services, intellectual 
property, energy and resources, investment and tourism are all priorities for the Australian 
Government. 
Page 16, Para3.40 
Australia's objectives in negotiations on trade and environment issues are to liberalize international 
trade in environmental goods and services, recognizing the important role that trade can play in addressing climate change and pursuing other environmental goals. 
Question 67 
What concrete actions has Australia taken in the liberalization of environmental services? What 
plans does Australia have next? 
Answer 
Australia is seeking to liberalise environmenta l services through the pursuit of meaningful 
outcomes on environmental services as part of tr ade negotiations, including the Trade in Services 
Agreement. 
Page 12, Para3.5 
Australia's major agricultural exports are wheat, beef, wool, dairy products, cotton and wine. 
Around 60% of Australia's agricultural production is exported. Wheat, beef and veal, and wool are 
the three largest agricultural exports by value. These exports have almost tripled in value (real 
terms) since the mid-1970s. In many rural and regional parts of Australia the agriculture sector makes a vital economic contribution and is a sign ificant employer. Over the last 20 years there has 
been a shift in emphasis from European to Asian markets and this trend is expected to continue. 
Questions 68 & 69 
Please provide the number of labor force by produc t type engaging in the planting and cultivation 
of wheat, barley, sorghum, cotton, sugar, wool, dairy products, cattle and sheep, grapes and other 
products. 
Please describe the cost-benefit situation of the above products by product type. 
Answers 
The number of persons employed within various agricultural sectors in Australia in 2011 is 
provided in the table below: 
INDP - 4 digit level Australia 
Sheep Farming (Specialised) 18,726 
Beef Cattle Farming (Specialised) 44,851 
Beef Cattle Feedlots (Specialised) 556 WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 76 - 
 
  INDP - 4 digit level Australia 
Sheep-Beef Cattle Farming 10,545 
Grain-Sheep or Grain-Beef Cattle Farming 26,290 
Rice Growing 24 
Other Grain Growing 18,181 
Sheep, Beef Cattle and Grain Farming, n.f.d.* 978 
Sugar Cane Growing 5,184 
Cotton Growing 1,760 
Dairy Cattle Farming 18,727 
Grape Growing 7,568 
Other 65,879 
Total agriculture 219,269 
* n.f.d. = not further defined.  
Source: 2011 Census of Population and Housing. 
The financial performance of Australian broadacre farms is discussed in the following publications:  
Australian farm survey results 2012-13 to 2014-15: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/publicat ions/display?url=http://1 43.188.17.20/anrdl/DAFFS
ervice/display.php?fid=pb_afsr_p9absf20150327_11a.xml  
Australian grains: financial performance of grain producing farms 2011-12 to 2013-14: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/publicat ions/display?url=http://1 43.188.17.20/anrdl/DAFFS
ervice/display.php?fid=pb_agfpgd9aasg20140910_11a.xml  
Australian lamb: financial performance of slaughter lamb producing farms, 2011-12 to 2013-14: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/publicat ions/display?url=http://1 43.188.17.20/anrdl/DAFFS
ervice/display.php?fid=pb_alfpfd9aabf00320140826_11a.xml  
Australian beef: Financial performance of be ef cattle producing farms, 2011-12 to 2013-14: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/publicat ions/display?url=http://1 43.188.17.20/anrdl/DAFFS
ervice/display.php?fid=pb_abfpfd9aabf00420140819_11a.xml  
Australian lamb: financial performance of slaughter lamb producing farms, 2011-12 to 2013-14: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/publicat ions/display?url=http://1 43.188.17.20/anrdl/DAFFS
ervice/display.php?fid=pb_adfpfd9aas20141216_11a.xml  
Page 13, Para 3.13 
The Manufacturing Transition Programme provides grants to firms to assist them to move away 
from low-tech commodity style production that may not be globally competitive, to advanced manufacturing where specialised knowledge and skills gives Australia an advantage. 
Question 70 
Which companies have received grants under  the "Manufacturing Transition Program"? 
Answer 
Successful applicants of the Manufacturing Tr ansition Programme are yet to be announced. 
Page 14, Para 3.25 A number of intellectual-property related legislative developments have occurred since Australia's 
last WTO Trade Policy Review: 
 The Therapeutic Goods Legislation Amendmen t (Copyright) Act 2011 amended the Copyright 
Act 1968 to provide that copyright in product information for particular medicines would not be infringed by actions required under the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989. 
 Australia approved the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement in 2007. Australia is 
currently progressing legislation to implement this Protocol. This would enable Australian WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 77 - 
 
  medicine producers to manufacture and export patented pharmaceuticals to countries 
experiencing health crises, under a comp ulsory licence from the Federal Court. 
Question 71 & 72 
 What progress has Australia made in building the legal system for the manufacturing and 
import of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) products since TCM was written into Australian 
law in 2012? 
 In its thousands years of practices, it is fo und that some TCM is toxic when used alone. 
However, their toxicity is decreased when used combined with other TCM. The toxic TCM, when 
reasonably used, has benefited the Chinese people over long period of time. However, the Australian government prohibits the use of this kind of TCM. Does the Australia government 
plan to establish a set of norms to recognize e ligible TCM practitioners, and certify them to 
prescribe this kind of TCM, so as to bring maxi mum benefit of TCM products to the local people? 
Answers 
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) regulates therapeutic goods. It does not regulate 
health practitioners. The national regulatory framework for therapeutic goods in Australia is set out 
in the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (the Therapeutic Goods Act). The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) administers the Nation al Registration and Accreditation Scheme of 
practitioners across Australia. In July 2012, national registration of Chinese medicine practitioners 
and Chinese herbal dispensers was implemented; however, this does not affect the status of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) products within the therapeutic goods framework.  
TCM medicines are regulated like all other medicine s under the national framework for therapeutic 
goods in Australia. Generally, all medicines must be included on the Australian Register of 
Therapeutic Goods (ARTG) before they can be legally imported, exported, manufactured or supplied in Australia. The TGA has a risk-based approach to regulating medicines, with lower risk 
medicines being listed, rather than registered, on the ARTG. In Australia, most complementary 
medicines, including TCM, that are available fo r general consumer use, are listed medicines. 
Consistent with a risk-based approach to regulation, listed medicines may only include well-known, 
low risk, ingredients which have been pre-approved by the TGA.   
Although the TGA does not regulate practitioners, there are a number of specific provisions in the 
Act which provide exemptions for health practitioner s, including: medicines that practitioners make 
up for their individual patients are exempt from being included on the ARTG [Schedule 5, Item 6 of 
the Therapeutic Goods Regulations 1990] and from being made in a licensed premises by a 
licensed manufacturer applying the principles of Good Manufacturing Practice [Schedule 8, Item 
(4) of the Therapeutic Goods Regulations].  
Importation of some goods to Australia is subject to restrictions, for example: those Schedule 4 or 
8 of the Poisons Standard or in the Prohibited Im ports List under the Customs (Prohibited Imports) 
Regulations 1956. The Poisons Standards, an instru ment made under Part 6-3 of the Therapeutic 
Goods Act, provides the basis for a uniform system of access controls for goods containing 
scheduled substances. The scheduling of substances allows restrictions to be placed on their supply to the public, in the interests of public health and safety. These requirements are implemented by State and Territory governments wi thin Australia. Additional requirements from 
other State and Territories legislation and authorisation requirements may also be applicable. 
There are a number of specific provisions in  the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 which exempt 
medicines from the requirement to be included in  the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods. 
This includes medicines (other than medicines used for gene therapy) that are dispensed, or 
extemporaneously compounded, for a particular person for therapeutic application to that person (Schedule 5, Item 6 of the Therapeutic Good s Regulations 1990).This exemption allows TCM 
practitioners to prepare medicines for individual patients that do not need to be assessed or 
evaluated by the TGA for quality, safety or efficacy.  
Most herbal ingredients may be used for preparing medicines that are dispensed or 
extemporaneously compounded by a practitioner. However, some ingredients are subject to TGA 
regulation and access to some medicinal ingredients is restricted by State and Territory drug and WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 78 - 
 
  poisons legislation. Some ingredients, such as ingredients included in Schedule 4 of the Standard 
for the Uniform Scheduling of Medicines and Poisons (Poisons Standard), are not available for dispensing or extemporaneous compounding by many health practitioners.  
Under the Poisons Standard, Schedule 4 is for "sub stances, the use or supply of which should be 
by or on the order of persons permitted by State or  Territory legislation to prescribe and should be 
available from a pharmacist on prescription." Theref ore, it is the responsibility of the individual 
Australian States and Territories to determine who is an authorised person to prescribe such 
substances. Following national registration of TCM practitioners in 2012, the State of Victoria made 
amendments to the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 to provide a pathway for legitimate access to otherwise unavailable Chinese medicines. This was by using Schedule 1 of the Victoria Poisons Code to list traditional Chinese medicines available only to persons registered by 
the Chinese Medicine Registration Board of Victoria. 
In 2012, the Chinese Medicine Board of Australia proposed a national process to enable Australian 
registered TCM practitioners and endorsed dispense rs to access Chinese medicines included in the 
Poisons Standard. No changes to specifically account for TCM under the poisons scheduling 
framework for national scheduling, nor in the th erapeutics goods framework, has been progressed. 
As discussed, TCMs are treated like other medicines under the national therapeutic goods regime 
in Australia. 
Page 16, Para3.41 Three of Australia's finalised FTAs also contain specific chapters on the environment: Australia-
United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA), the Australia-Chile Free Trade Agreement (ACI-
FTA) and the Australia-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KAFTA).  
Question 73 & 74 
 How does Australia decide on whether to have  a separate environment chapter in its FTA 
negotiations? What is the consideration behind such decisions? 
 What is the environment chapter of Australia FTAs mainly covered? Why are these contents 
incorporated in the agreements? 
Answers 
Successive Australian Governments have sought to consider environment provisions in FTA 
negotiations on a case–by–case basis. A mutual desire by parties to include environment provisions is necessary. 
Australia has included provisions on environment in three of our FTAs: with Chile, Korea and the 
Australia United States FTA (AUSFTA). 
The environment chapters of Australia's FTAs , where included, mainly cover clauses that; 
 Recognise the right of each party to establish its own levels of environmental protection and 
encourage high levels of environmental protection; 
 Promote public awareness of environment laws; 
 Recognise that flexible, voluntary and market based mechanisms can contribute to the 
achievement and maintenance of high levels of environmental protection and encourage 
the development of such mechanisms; 
 Recognise the importance of strengthening ca pacity to protect the environment and to 
promote sustainable development in concert with strengthening bilateral trade and 
 investment relations; WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 79 - 
 
   Acknowledge the importance of ongoing join t, regional and multilateral environment 
activities; 
 Recognise the importance of implementing multilateral environmental agreements and 
acknowledging their role in protecting the environment globally and domestically, including 
through the World Trade Organization. 
These contents are included in Australia's agreements to enhance cooperation on trade and 
environment matters of mutual interest, and to actively discourage the misuse of environmental 
issues for trade protection purposes. 
Page 19, Para3.61 Australia is the current chair of the negotiations, which commenced in July 2014. Question 75 
As the Chair for EGA negotiations, how does Australia plan to further promote the talks? Answer 
The negotiations towards an Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA) are open to other WTO 
Members similarly committed to liberalization. Three new members joined in early 2015. Current 
members of the EGA have briefed the Committee on Trade and Environment on progress in the EGA and are readily available to consult with anyone interested in the negotiations, as is the chair 
of our negotiating group. EGA members will continue to provide further updates as the 
negotiations move forward. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 80 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF COLOMBIA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 3.4.6.2 Industrial Property 
3.4.6.2.1 Patents 
Question What is the difference between a standard patent and an innovation patent? It is not very clear 
what the difference is as presented in this paragraph. 
What are the measures taken by Australia which support the statement "(...) Patents no longer 
delay nor have negative effects in testing and a pproval for generic manufacturers, which provides 
certainty for researchers and manufacturers and allows them to work without worrying about patent litigation (...)"?  
Answer 
Innovation patents are an Australian-specific fo rm of protection for 'lower-level' inventions 
analogous in operation to the 'utility model' approach to IP protection provided in some foreign 
jurisdictions.  
Compared to standard patents, innovation patents require a lower level of innovation. Standard 
patents award time-limited exclusive rights to inventions that are new, useful, and involve an 
inventive step. An inventive step means that the invention cannot be an obvious improvement 
over what has gone before.  
Innovation patents have a lower threshold of inventiveness (i.e. an 'innovative step') that makes it 
easier to obtain the right whilst harder for competitors to invalidate. Unlike a standard patent, you 
only pay to have an innovation patent examined when you need to stop others from copying your 
invention. This, combined with the lower threshold of inventiveness, provides more certainty for researchers and manufacturers as they can get the same high level of protection more simply. 
Innovative step requires only that the invention vary from the prior art base in some way that 
makes a substantial contribution to the working of the invention. 
Innovation patents are available for broadly the same subject matter as standard patents – that is 
they must be for a 'manner of manufacture'. 
An innovation patent is registered (or granted)  after a formalities check and without substantive 
examination. This registration process provides the patent owner with a right that is relatively quick and cheap to obtain and sufficiently long (eig ht versus twenty years for standard patents) to 
encourage investment in developing and marketing the innovation. However, an innovation patent 
owner can only enforce their rights after its patent has undergone the substantive examination process and been certified. 
In contrast to a standard patent, where there is no limit on the number of claims, an innovation 
patent may have no more than 5 claims.  
3.4.3.1.3 Exemptions from CCA 
Paragraph 3.125   
Question: 
How does this authorization affect international commitments on market access? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 81 - 
 
  Answer 
The authorisation process is not known to affect international commitments on market access. 
Question Can the authorization turn the company into monopoly provider? 
Answer 
While it is possible for authorisation to be granted to a transaction that would result in a monopoly 
if public benefits were shown to outweigh the detriment, applications for merger authorisation are 
made directly to the Australian Competition Trib unal rather than to the ACCC. However there are 
examples where the ACCC has authorised conduct or arrangements associated with monopoly 
assets (such as the automotive terminals operated by Australian Amalgamated Terminals) but this is in circumstances where the relevant monopoly exists quite independently of the authorisation. 
Paragraph 3.126 
Question 
How does this authorization affects international commitments on Telecommunications? 
Answer 
Persons can be authorised to engage in conduct that is proscribed under Part IV of the Competition 
and Consumer Act 2010 where such practices carry public benefits that outweigh any public 
detriments. Authorisation may be sought by participants in any sector of the market, and the rules 
apply equally to domestic and foreign businesses operating in Australia. Applications for authorisation are subject to review by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). 
The ability to seek authorisation does not apply to telecommunications access obligations. Those 
access obligations are contained in Part XIC of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. Part XIC sets out measures for the ACCC to declare certain wholesale services and then sets out obligations 
on service providers to provide access to those declared services. These obligations are known as 
the standard access obligations.  
Furthermore, Section 152CK of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 clarifies that access to 
telecommunications services is dealt with under Part XIC, not under the National Access Regime.  
Providers of declared services are able to apply for exemptions from standard access obligations 
for services that are not yet declared, but which they consider may at some future point be declared. In reaching a decision on such an ap plication, the ACCC may impose conditions on the 
service provider and must consider whether the application is in the long-term interests of end-
users. 
Question 
How is "essential facility" defined for the telecommunications sector? 
Answer 
In Australia, telecommunications law does not distinguish whether a facility is 'essential' or not. 
Telecommunications facilities are defined under the Telecommunications Act 1997 as being either 
any part of the infrastructure of a telecommunications network, or any line, equipment, apparatus, tower, mast, antenna, tunnel, duct, hole, pit, pole or other structure or thing used, or for use, in or in connection with a telecommunications network. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 82 - 
 
  Owners of infrastructure used to supply telecommunications services to the public, known as 
carriers, are required to comply with facilities access obligations under Schedule 1 of the Telecommunications Act 1997. They must provide other carriers access to such infrastructure in order that those carriers may provide competitive facilities and competitive carriage services, or 
establish their own facilities. 
Additionally, carriers and carriage service pr oviders are required to comply with the 
telecommunications access regime under Part XIC of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. 
Under Part XIC, the Australian Competition an d Consumer Commission (ACCC) has the power to 
'declare' certain telecommunications services. Once services are declared, carriers and carriage service providers who provide such services ar e required to comply with standard access 
obligations in relation to those services. These include providing interconnection, supplying the 
declared service, and providing access to customer  equipment which is required to supply an end-
user with a service. 
Question 
Can all companies have "critical infrastructu re" or just the major operators (dominant)? 
Answer 
Companies who own network units and want to use those units to supply carriage services to the 
public must hold a carrier licence provided by the Australian Communications and Media Authority 
(ACMA). There are no restrictions on who can apply for a licence or the number of licences issued by the ACMA, other than that the holder of a carrier licence must be: a constitutional corporation; or an eligible partnership; or a public body. There are no licensing requirements that apply 
specifically to critical infrastructure; any carrier could own critical infrastructure.  
The telecommunications access regime applies to carriers and carriage service providers 
regardless of their market power. Once a service is declared by the ACCC, any service provider 
who is capable of supplying the declared service is subject to the standard access obligations. 
Policy 3.4.3.3 consumer pr otection Paragraph 3.133 
Question 
Among the measures aimed at protecting consumers "compulsory establishment" (translator's 
note: possibly meaning 'presence'?) is included? What criteria are used to establish such an obligation? 
Answer 
There is some uncertainty about the term "compulsory establishment" or "presence" in the 
question.  
In enforcing compliance with provisions of the CCA, the ACCC's main goals are to: 
• maintain and promote competition and remedy market failure, and 
• protect the interests and safety of consumers and support fair trading in markets. With these goals in mind, the ACCC takes action to: 
• stop unlawful conduct 
• deter future offending conduct • where possible, obtain remedies that will und o the harm caused by the contravening conduct 
 (for example, by corrective advertising or securing redress for consumers and businesses 
 adversely affected) WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 83 - 
 
  • encourage the effective use of compliance systems 
• where warranted, take action in the courts to obtain orders which punish the wrongdoer by 
 the imposition of penalties or fines and deter others from breaching the Act. 
The ACCC exercises its discretion to direct resource s to the investigation and resolution of matters 
that provide the greatest overall benefit for competition and consumers. Question 
Does the research related to online trading have international implications? Answer 
The ACCC's determination of enforcement and comp liance priorities are fo cused on addressing 
market failure within Australia. The ACCC gives consideration to intern ational research which 
suggests any impact on Australian consumers. 
Question 
How are international cooperation procedures developed with consumer protection agencies in 
other countries to investigate practices that lead to errors in e-commerce? 
Answer 
The ACCC is a member of the International Cons umer Protection Enforcement Network (ICPEN), 
whose aim is to: 
• protect consumers' economic interests around the world 
• share information about cross-border commercial activities that may affect consumer 
 welfare, and 
• encourage global cooperation among law enforcement agencies. The ICPEN is concerned with online and offline markets around the globe. 
4 TRADE POLICY BY SECTOR  
4.1 Overview 
Question How is the independence of the regulator in relation to Telstra ensured? Is there a special regime 
for Telstra? 
Answer 
Telstra is fully privatised. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) and the 
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission have regulatory oversight of the telecommunications sector. Both the ACMA and the ACCC are independent statutory authorities 
that hold no financial or other interests in Telstra. There is no regulatory regime that specifically 
applies to Telstra.  
Question With which countries does Australia have co-production agreements? 
Answer 
Australia has entered into film and audio-visual co-production agreements with twelve countries 
under the International Co-production Program: Canada, China, France, Germany, the Republic of 
Korea, Ireland, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Si ngapore, South Africa and the United Kingdom. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 84 - 
 
  4.5 Services 4.5.2  Domestic Support  
Question: 
Can you briefly explain the programs on "tariff assistance" and "budget support"? How is 
assistance provided in each of the sectors? 
Answer 
'Tariff assistance' refers to the effe ct tariffs have on the different indu stries in Australia. This effect 
is captured by the concept of 'output assistance' – i.e. the effect of tariffs for producers. The effect 
of tariffs on imported goods also raises the co st of inputs for Australian businesses and thus 
penalises local user industries. This is described as the 'input penalty'. 
'Net tariff assistance' is therefore the effective assistance accruing to industry through Australia's 
tariff regime – calculated by 'output tariff assistance' less the 'input penalty'. Net tariff assistance 
(Y2012/13) for Australian industry -- services: minus $4.7billion. 
'Budgetary assistance' is made up of actual paym ents (outlays) and industry and sector specific 
tax concessions that have industry policy objectives. Such measures include (inter alia) R&D 
assistance and tax concessions, small business tax concessions, regional assistance and 
investment promotion measures. Services industry received: outlays of $1.5bn and tax concessions of $.1.7bn (Y2012/13). 
Paragraph 4.107 
Question: 
What is the flexibility given to radio broadcasters? Answer 
The commercial radio industry in Australia is regulated by the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. 
Australian music content requirements on commercial radio are governed by the Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice. 
Commercial Radio Australia Codes of Practice  requires: 
• varying minimum levels of Australian music based on the category of radio service: o A – Mainstream Rock, Album Oriented Rock, Contemporary Hits, Top 40 and Alternative – 
 25 per cent minimum Australian music 
o B – Hot/Mainstream Adult Contemporary, Count ry and Classic Rock – 20 per cent minimum 
o C – Soft Adult Contemporary, Hits and Memories, Gold (encompassing Classic Hits) and Hip  Hop – 15 per cent minimum 
o D – Oldies, Easy Listening, Easy Gold and Country Gold – 10 per cent minimum 
o E – Nostalgia, Jazz and Smooth Jazz – 5 per cent minimum. 
• sub-quotas for new Australian music. The sub-quota only apply to categories A, B and C.  
o A – at least 25 per cent of all Australian music played must be new Australian music.  
o B – at least 20 per cent of all Australian music played must be new Australian music. o C – at least 15 per cent of all Australian music played must be new Australian music. 
To classify as Australian, the performer must be a citizen or ordinary resident of Australia. New 
Australian music must be a previously unpublished recording which has been on sale for less than 12 months from the date of its initial release, as reported by the Australian Recording Industry Association. 
No legislation has been recently introduced to increase flexibility in meeting these quotas. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 85 - 
 
  Question: 
Have preferential rules for content quotas been established in the Trade Agreements? Answer 
Australia's audiovisual sector is critical to the achievement of the Australian Government's broader 
social and cultural policy objectives – to deve lop and reflect a sense of national and cultural 
identity. The Australian Content Standard 2005 came  into effect on 30 December 2005 and sets 
the minimum levels of Australian programming for commercial free-to-air television services. The 
object of this Standard is to promote the role of commercial television broadcasting services in 
developing and reflecting a sense of Australian identity, character and cultural diversity by supporting the community's continued access to television programs produced under Australian creative control. 
Australia has reserved its position in relation to broadcasting services in the WTO treaties and 
excludes broadcasting content from the Schedule of services in its Free Trade Agreements. This 
approach provides Australia with policy flexibility to adopt or maintain measures under the 
Australian Content Standard 2005 with respect to  transmission quotas for local content on both 
free-to-air commercial television broadcasting services and free to-air radio broadcasting services. 
Para 3.4.6.2, 3.4.6.2.1  
Question: What is the difference between a standard patent and an innovation patent? It is not very clear 
what the difference is as presented in this paragraph. 
Answer 
Innovation patents are an Australian-specific fo rm of protection for 'lower-level' inventions 
analogous in operation to the 'utility model' approach to IP protection provided in some foreign jurisdictions.  
Compared to standard patents, innovation patents require a lower level of innovation. Standard 
patents award time-limited exclusive rights to inventions that are new, useful, and involve an inventive step. An inventive step means that the invention cannot be an obvious improvement 
over what has gone before.  
Innovation patents have a lower threshold of inventiveness (i.e. an 'innovative step') that makes it 
easier to obtain the right whilst harder for competitors to invalidate. Innovative step requires only that the invention vary from the prior art base in some way that makes a substantial contribution 
to the working of the invention. 
Innovation patents are available for broadly the same subject matter as standard patents – that is 
they must be for a 'manner of manufacture'. 
An innovation patent is registered (or granted)  after a formalities check and without substantive 
examination. This registration process provides the patent owner with a right that is relatively quick and cheap to obtain and sufficiently long (eig ht versus twenty years for standard patents) to 
encourage investment in developing and marketing the innovation. However, an innovation patent 
owner can only enforce their rights after its patent has undergone the substantive examination process and been certified. 
In contrast to a standard patent, where there is no limit on the number of claims, an innovation 
patent may have no more than 5 claims. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 86 - 
 
  Para 3.4.6.2, 3.4.6.2.1 
Question: 
What are the measures taken by Australia which support the statement "(...) Patents no longer 
delay nor have negative effects in testing and a pproval for generic manufacturers, which provides 
certainty for researchers and manufacturers and allows them to work without worrying about 
patent litigation (...)"? 
Answer 
The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Rai sing the Bar) Act 2012 ('RTB Act') amended a 
number of areas of the Patents Act and introduced two new exemptions from patent infringement. 
1. Acts for obtaining regulatory approval The RTB Act also introduces an exemption for activities undertaken solely for the purpose of 
gaining regulatory approval to market or manuf acture a patented technology. This expands the 
existing exemption for pharmaceutical inventions to all technologies; recognising that technologies other than pharmaceuticals may also suffer delays in bringing products to market as a 
consequence of pre-market and pre-manufacturing regulatory approval processes.  
2. Acts for experimental purposes The experimental use exemption amends the Patent s Act to leave researchers free to conduct their 
experiments without worrying about the patent sy stem. The amendments are designed to clarify 
that research and experimental activities relating to patented inventions are exempt from infringement. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 87 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 1.2 Recent Economic Developments 
1.2.1 Growth, income, and employment 
Table 1.2, page 15 and paragraphs 15 and 16 
Questions 1 & 2 
 Could Australia provide the figures showing the statistical evolution of the postal sector?  
 Then, would it be possible to have the figures in terms of a) letter mail item and (b) parcels? 
Answers 
Table 1.2 on p. 15 is based on Australian Bure au of Statistics National Accounts data. The 
published data does not separate postal items (or letter mail or parcels) as a standalone sub-
category within the 'transport, postal and warehousing' line item.  
Alternatively, the Universal Postal Union (UPU) publishes postal statistics. Statistics relating to 
Australia can be accessed through http://www.upu.int/en/resources /postal-statistics/query-the-
database.html  , selecting 'data by country' and selecting Australia. Data is available from 2009 to 
2013 on a range of measures, including letter and parcel volumes. However, it should be noted 
that this data is collected from Australia's designated postal operator for the UPU (Australia Post), 
and does not include statistics for other market players that operate in the non-reserved parts of 
Australia's postal sector.  
2.3 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives 
2.6.3 Trade-related development assistance (Aid for Trade) 
Paragraphs 2.34-2.42, page 9 
The Abbott government announced in 2014 significant cuts to Australia's $5 billion foreign aid 
program as part of general budget savings in its Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. According 
to calculations by the Development Policy Centre at ANU, Australia's aid will fall to 0.22 per cent of 
Gross National Income in 2016-17.  
Question 3  
Could Australia elaborate on the impact of the ab ove mentioned budget cuts to 'Aid for Trade' 
programs, giving an indication of the estimated le vel of funding for Aid for Trade for the upcoming 
financial year? 
Answer 
The Government has set a target of increasing Australia's aid for trade investments to 20 per cent 
of the total aid budget (or official  development assistance) by 2020.  
‐ in line with this trajectory, we estimate aid for trade investments for 2014-15 to be 14.7 per 
cent of the total aid budget, an increase from 13.4 per cent in 2013-14. 
3.2.2.4 Tariff-rate quotas Paragraph 3.21 and 3.22, page 44  
The cheese TRQ was introduced in 1987. The size of the quota has not varied for 28 years. As 
noted in the WTO Secretariat's report, the tariff-rate quota fill-in ratio for most types of cheese WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 88 - 
 
  and curd has exceeded 99% since 2008-09 and new importers are only able to access quota on 
transfer from an existing quota holder. This is  a clear indication that there is a demand for 
imported cheeses covered by the more expensive out-of-quota imports. 
Question 4  
Is Australia considering an increase in the size of the TRQ, or even its abolishment? Answer 
The stated objective of this scheme, as per the Customs Department website is "to improve the 
competitiveness of the Australian dairy industry through a combination of quota restrictions and 
tariff reductions." The ad-valorem equivalent for the out-of-quota rate would vary from around 24% for a CIF-value cheese of $A5/kg to 8% for a CIF-value cheese of $A15/kg.  
Question 5 
Could Australia explain whether they have assessed the effects of the TRQ on competition and 
what have been the results? 
Answer 
Australia is not considering either an increase to the size of the TRQ, or the abolition of the TRQ. 
Australia considers that the TRQ mechanism is consistent with Australia's policy objectives with regard to the dairy industry. 
3.2.2.6.3 Other tariff concession schemes 
Paragraph 3.28 and 3.29, page 47 Question 6 
Could Australia describe the criteria for a company to be eligible under the AIP plan and/or under 
the EPBS, clarifying in particular whether: i) foreign and domestic companies are equally eligible 
under the schemes, and ii) the "early identificati on" requirement applies equally to domestic and 
foreign companies? 
Answer 
Companies are eligible for the EPBS if the project: 
 Is in an eligible sector; and 
 Involves the procurement of eligible goods valued at $10 million or more; and 
 Develops and implements an approved AIP plan; and  
 Equivalent goods are not produced in Australia, or the imported goods are more 
technologically advanced, more efficient or more productive than goods produced in 
Australia. 
A company's foreign or domestic status is not relevant. Thus, foreign and domestic companies are 
equally eligible.  
The AIP plan requires all applicants to detail a co mmunication strategy that provides for the early 
identification of opportunities for Australian industry. The objective/intent is to ensure Australian industry has the same opportunity afforded to other global supply chain partners. Both domestic 
and foreign companies can meet this requirement. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 89 - 
 
  3.2.6.1 Anti-dumping and countervailing measures  
Paragraphs 3.39 and 3.40, pages 51-53 According to the report, Australia is one of the world's major users of anti-dumping measures. 
Since 2011, Australia has announced a series of reforms to its anti-dumping regime. The most 
recent policy announcement made by Minister Ia n Macfarlane and then-Parliamentary Secretary 
Baldwin on 15 December 2014 stated that those reforms were aimed at "bolstering Australia's anti-dumping system". 
Question 7  
Could Australia provide an explanation of the relati vely high use of AD measures compared to the 
volume of trade, indicating also how many of the AD investigations carried out during the period under review terminated with the imposition of measures? 
Answer 
The Brumby Report proposed that the sustained strong Australian currency and surplus production 
in Asian markets has been driving the expanded use of anti-dumping measures in Australia over 
recent years. The report can be found here – http://www.adcommission.gov.au/reference-
material/documents/Brumby-Anti-Dumping-Review-Final-Report.pdf .  
3.2.7.1.1 Voluntary an d mandatory standards 
Paragraph 3.46, page 54 
Question 8 
Could Australia provide further information on the breakdown by sector of voluntary standards that 
have become mandatory by way of re ference in technical regulations? 
Answer 
Mandatory standards primarily relate to electrical safety, consumer product safety standards and 
building and plumbing standards. 
3.2.7.2 Sanitary and phytosanitary regulations 
Paragraph 3.55, page 56 Food Standards Australia-New Zealand (FSANZ) de scribes itself as a "bi-national Government 
agency." 
Question 9 
In view of the bi-national approach to the food standards-setting process, would it be reasonable 
to expect that Australia would align its risk-management policy with regards to Porcine Respiratory 
and Reproductive Syndrome (PRRS) to New Zealan d's (a pH lower than 5 or higher than 7)? 
Answer 
FSANZ is responsible for developing and administ ering the Australia New Zealand Food Standards 
Code, which lists requirements for foods such as additives, food safety, labelling and genetically 
modified foods. The Australian Government Depart ment of Agriculture has primary responsibility 
for managing Australia's biosecurity system, including setting the import conditions under which 
commodities, including food, can be imported into Australia.  
All of Australia's bilateral and multilateral trade agreements, including the Closer Economic 
Relations Trade Agreement between Australia and New Zealand, allow Australia to set its own WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 90 - 
 
  biosecurity and quarantine conditions for the importation of animals, plants and their products, 
based on technical analysis of the risk of diseases and pests.  
In February 2004, the Department of Agriculture released Australia's Generic import risk analysis 
(IRA) for pig meat, which recommends risk management measures to reduce the biosecurity risks 
associated with the importation of pig meat to acceptable levels. New Zealand's risk management 
policy for the importation of pig meat does not affect the measures Australia has in place to protect its industries and consumers from the impact of exotic animal diseases. 
3.2.7.2.2 Biosecurity  
Paragraph 3.58, page 57 The Australian government introduced the Biosecurity Bill in 2014.  Questions 10 & 11 
Could Australia provide further details on what is the current timetable for the new legislation to 
be fully operational? Furthermore, could Austra lia present the main changes with respect to 
previous bio-security legislation and how this will impact on imports from oversees? 
Answers 
On 7 July 2014, the Australian Government announced its plan to progress the Biosecurity Bill 
2014 (the Bill) to the Australian Parliament to replace the Quarantine Act 1908. The legislation 
package was debated and passed the House of Representatives on 9 February 2015. It was 
introduced to Australian Parliament's Upper House (Senate) on 10 February 2015 and is currently 
being considered. 
The Bill is largely based on the legislation previously introduced into Parliament in 2012 and has 
been designed to be consistent with Australia's rights and obligations under the WTO and the 
World Health Organization (WHO) International Health Regulations.  
The Bill will provide a modern regulatory framework for the Australian Government to manage the 
risk of pests and diseases entering Australian territory and causing harm to animal, plant and 
human health, the environment and the economy.  
The Bill can be broadly broken up into three topics—operational chapters to support day to day 
biosecurity business, stand-alone chapters that support specialised biosecurity situations and 
general administrative chapters to support ot her functions and powers in the legislation. 
The Biosecurity Bill differs from the Quarantine Act in that it: 
 includes a definition of Appropriate Level of Protection (ALOP). This provides additional 
certainty to importers and trading partners that  the ALOP is applied when undertaking risk 
assessments to determine if, and under what  conditions, goods may be brought into 
Australia. 
 regulates the use of ballast water and management of sediment by Australian and foreign 
vessels in Australian seas. It creates a single, Australia-wide ballast water and sediment management regime. 
To enable a smooth transition, the Biosecurity Bill 2014 and its supporting Bills, are currently 
drafted to start twelve months after they receive passage through Parliament. Information on the Biosecurity Bill has been provided in previous SPS notifications and Australia will update WTO Members through future SPS notifications when the status of the legislation changes. 
We do not expect any significant or adverse changes for trading partners with the introduction of 
the new legislation.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 91 - 
 
  Further information on the Biosecurity legislation will be released at: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/bio securitylegislation%20as%20th e%20Australian%20Parliamentar
y%20process%20advance?wasRedirectedByModule=true . 
Question 12 
How long does it take for Biosecurity Australia on average to process individual countries' requests 
to assess their OIE-declared status? 
Answer 
Australia notes that apart from the self-declared disease status that members provide to the OIE, 
the OIE undertakes 'official' disease status recognition for a small number of animal diseases. Unfortunately, the OIE processes for achieving this recognition are not particularly transparent, and Australia and a number of like-minded members have been seeking to improve the 
transparency of OIE processes so that OIE recognised or self-declared animal health status can be 
more usefully considered when assessing a market access request. 
The time to assess a trading partner's OIE-declared animal health status is determined by several 
factors including: 
 The complexity of any assessment that is required to determine whether measures can be 
applied to allow the importation of the commodity requested in accordance with Australia's 
appropriate level of protection. 
 Priority of the trade to the exporting country and the provision of relevant information for 
such an assessment. 
 The time taken by trading partners to provide any requested information. 
 The availability of staff with relevant expertise to undertake the assessment. 
 The priority assigned to competing assessment proposals. 
 The scope to combine assessments to allow economies of scale in the assessment of 
multiple proposals for similar products. 
 The extent of existing trade in similar products or level of understanding of the country's 
animal health systems and the competency of agencies responsible for sanitary matters.  
Where Australia needs to undertake a regulated import risk assessment, the time period allowed 
by Australia's biosecurity regulations is either 24 months or 30 months depending upon the timely provision of information from the applicant trading partner. 
3.2.7.2.3 Import risk analyses (IRAs)  
Paragraph 3.61, page 58 
The Department of Agriculture has commenced an examination of the Import Risk Analysis (IRA) 
process, undertaking a consultation process from 11 July 2014 until 10 September 2014. Any 
recommendations for administrative and regulatory changes to the IRA process will be presented 
for government consideration. On average Australia receives approximately 5 to 10 market access requests annually. 
Questions 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 
 Could Australia provide information on the numbe r of outstanding market access requests for 
which a risk assessment is yet to commence?  
 Could Australia provide the list of completed IRAs that have enabled new market access for 
foreign-origin/EU-origin agricultural products?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 92 - 
 
   Could Australia explain whether there is any prioritizing of IRAs, indicating as well what is the 
average time for initiating a risk assessment from the time of receiving the initial market access request?  
 How many IRAs and other risk assessments are currently in the pipeline? 
 With reference to the results of the consultation process for the IRA's review, could Australia 
clarify whether there will be the opportunity to comment on any resulting revisions to the IRA Handbook? 
Answers 
In March 2015, Australia has around 180 current market access requests. 
List of final IRAs can be found here for plant and animal: http://www.agriculture.gov.au/biosecu rity/risk-analysis/ira/final-plant  
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/biosecuri ty/risk-analysis/ira/final-animal  
In prioritising import risk assessments, the department takes the following criteria into account 
(where relevant): 
• National interest 
• Alignment with the department's objectives • Expected benefits 
• Challenges 
• Practical considerations. 
The time taken to initiate a risk assessment is dependent upon the assignment of a priority based 
on these criteria. 
Lists of current IRAs in the pipeline ca n be found here for plant and animal: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/biosecuri ty/risk-analysis/ira/current-animal  
http://www.agriculture.gov.au/biosecuri ty/risk-analysis/ira/current-plant  
3.2.7.3 Labelling and packaging 
Paragraph 3.68, page 60  In view of recent public concern about potential sa fety issues with regards to some imported food 
products (frozen berries imported from China infected with hepatitis A), the Ministers for Industry 
and Agriculture are working on a Country of Origin labelling proposal, which they are expected to take to Cabinet by the end of March.  
For their part, "Australian Made" recently stated that "Australian consumers have the right to know 
where their food has been made and grown, and it is important that we strengthen country-of-
origin labelling for the benefit of Australia's farmers and manufacturers as well – it is a vital asset in these trade-exposed sectors." 
In 2011 TPR, Australia said that (Q76, 2011) "The Australian Government does not sponsor an 
'Australian Made' policy. The ownership of the Australian Made logo (now the Australian Made, Australian Grown Logo) was deeded to a private not-for-profit business, Australian Made Company 
Limited (AMCL), in 2002. While the Australian Gove rnment maintains some residual rights under 
the deed (such as agreement to any changes to the certification code of practice), it does not otherwise support or interfere with the administration of the logo by AMCL as a means of indicating to Australian consumers the origin of the products licensed by AMCL to carry the logo."  
However, Austrade's website states that Australian Made is backed by the government. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 93 - 
 
  Question 18 
Could Australia clarify what is the purpose of the co untry of origin logo, indicating whether it is to 
help the consumer in making informed decisions based on the country of origin or is it rather to promote the demand for local products to the detriment of imports? 
Answer 
The AMAG scheme is a voluntary labelling scheme that allows businesses to indicate to consumers 
that goods are produced, grown or made in Austra lia. We have found no reference to the AMAG 
scheme being "backed by Government" on the Austrade website. 
3.2.8 Government procurement  Paragraph 3.71, pages 61 Question 19 
Given Australia is looking to accede to the GPA, could Australia indicate what changes it foresees 
as necessary in its domestic regulatory framework to comply with the GPA?  
Answer 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. 
The Australian Government incorporates its international procurement obligations into the 
Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs), and similar changes may also be required at the sub-
central (state and territory) level. 
Paragraph 3.72, pages 61-62 According to the report, there are some deficiencies in Australia's data on GP. For example, it 
appears not possible to determine the level of stat e and territory spending on GP. Also, it appears 
that data on government trading enterprises' involvement in the GP markets of all levels of government is less accessible now than during the period covered in Australia's previous TPR.  
Question 20, 21, 22 & 23  
 More in particular, what measures is Australia putting in place to ensure it will meet the data 
sharing requirements incumbent on GPA members?  
 Could Australia provide the information on the year–wise value of government procurement 
from foreign sources during 2013 - 2014?  
 Could Australia provide information on the total value of the Australian government 
procurement market (including Commonwealth procurement and state/territory procurement, 
and to the extent possible, on procurement by  Government trading enterprises; "GTEs")? 
Please explain also what is the split in terms of percentage between Commonwealth procurement, state/territory procurement and GTEs procurement?  
 Could Australia provide more information on the administrative status GTEs which may carry 
out infrastructure works and services at central, state/territory and local level without bidding? 
 Comprehensive data on government procurement at the State and Territory level is currently 
not available. The Commonwealth is in discussions about the availability of such data. 
Answers 
The Commonwealth Government does not discriminate by collecting information on a supplier's 
nationality for government procurement contracts. While supplier addresses are reported in 
contract notices, this is not a definitive indicator of whether a local or foreign firm has been WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 94 - 
 
  awarded the contract. Commonwealth Government procurement contracts reported during 2013-
2014 that reported a foreign supplier address totalled $5,414 billion.  
Data on procurement by Government Business Enterprises is not collected by the Commonwealth 
Government, as they are not subject to the Commonwealth procurement framework. 
The Commonwealth Department of Finance website provides information on the Commonwealth's 
Government Business Enterprises. See: http://www.finance.gov.au/property/gbe/ . 
Paragraph 3.74, page 62 
According to the report all Australian Government levels have their own procurement framework 
and policies.  
Questions 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 & 31  
 Does the Commonwealth government regulate procurement by states/territories or local 
government entities? In particular, please clarify whether the Commonwealth government 
imposes any mandatory requirements on states, territories or local government entities and whether the Commonwealth has enforcement power with regard to States. 
 Does the Commonwealth government regulate procurement in relation to "public-private-
partnerships"? 
 Do the state governments impose any mandatory requirements on local government entities? 
 What legislation governs procurement by states/territories and local authorities? Are States 
free to adopt their own procurement laws?  
 Does the Commonwealth impose on states or other government authorities any obligations to 
buy domestic goods as condition to funding (of infrastructure for example)? 
 Do the states/territories impose any obligations on territories or local governments to buy 
domestic goods as a condition of funding (of infrastructure for example)? 
 What is the administrative status of major public ports, transport operators and utility 
providers? Are they Government trading ente rprises? Are they subject to procurement 
laws/rules? 
 What are the Commonwealth government's plans to ensure the GP practices at lower levels 
meet internationally accepted standards? 
 The Commonwealth Government does not regulate procurement by States and Territories or 
local government entities. 
Answers 
The Commonwealth Procurements Rules apply to procurement undertaken by Commonwealth 
entities in relation to "public-private partnerships". 
The Commonwealth is in discussions with sub-central authorities to address questions about 
mandatory requirements on local government entities. 
States and Territories determine their own procurement policies consistent with Australia's 
international trade obligations and local governments determine their own procurement policies. 
The Commonwealth does not impose on states and territories any obligations to buy domestic 
goods as a condition to funding. 
The Commonwealth Department of Finance website provides information on the Commonwealth's 
Government Business Enterprises. See: http://www.finance.gov.au/property/gbe/ . Government 
Business Enterprises are not subject to the Commonwealth procurement framework. The 
Commonwealth is in discussion with sub-central authorities to address questions on buying domestic goods as a condition of funding. 
Some ports, transport operators and utility providers are the responsibility of the States and 
Territories. In some instances, provision of those services has been privatised.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 95 - 
 
  State and Territory Governments implement procurement policies consistent with Australia's 
international trade obligations. 
Paragraph 3.76, page 63 According to the report AusTender provides a single portal to Commonwealth procurement 
opportunities. 
Question 32  
What are the legal obligations to advertise procurement opportunities by States, territories and 
local authorities? 
Answer 
The States and Territories and local authorities ea ch set their own procurement policies. Links to 
the procurement operations of State and Territory Governments can be accessed via the 
AusTender website: https://www.tenders.gov.au/?ev ent=public.relatedlink.list . 
Paragraph 3.77, page 63 
The report refers to a 10% SME-target in procurement. 
Questions 33, 34 & 35  
 What is the legal basis for an SME definition? 
 Does this target apply only to Commonwealth procurement or also applied by 
states/territories and local authorities? 
 Do the tender notices automatically reserve specific contracts for SMEs? How is it ensured 
that the target of sourcing from SMEs at least 10% of purchases by value is met? 
Answers 
A small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) is defined in the Commonwealth Procurement Rules as 
an Australian or New Zealand firm with fewe r than 200 full time equivalent employees.  
This SME target only applies to Commonwealth procurement. 
The Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs) do not reserve specific contracts for SMEs. The 
objective of the SME provisions in the CPRs is to ensure SMEs can engage in fair competition for Australian Government business. The CPRs ensure that procurement practices are applied that do 
not unfairly discriminate against SMEs and provide appropriate opportunities for SMEs to compete, 
and in a manner consistent with Australia's trade obligations. More details can be found on page 16 of the CPRs. 
Paragraphs 3.79 to 3.81, page 63 
Australia assumed obligations on government procurement via its bilateral agreements (with US, 
CHILE, KOREA etc).  
According to the report, some States (such as New South Wales and Victoria) promote local 
industry in specific state-wide projects. 
Question 36, 37 & 38 
 How is it ensured that procurement carried out in Australian States is in line with those 
international obligations? 
 How is it ensured that those "Buy local" and other preferences are applied consistently with 
Australian international obligations (in government procurement) in those bilateral agreements?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 96 - 
 
   Could Australia give further information on the type of projects concerned? 
Answers 
Compliance with international obligations is referred to in the procurement rules of the States and 
Territories. 
3.2.9 Local-content requirements  
Paragraph 3.84, page 65 Passenger vehicles purchased for the Australian government fleet must be made in Australia, or 
otherwise a business case must be provided for when no operationally suitable Australian-made 
vehicle exists. Similar policies apply for state and territory government vehicle procurement. 
Question 39 
Could Australia provide information if it plans to discontinue the exemption for motor vehicles from 
the mandatory procurement procedures; in partic ular, have any state/te rritory governments yet 
announced an intention to review their similar local-content requirements for motor vehicles? 
Answer 
The Australian Government has no plans to discontinue the exemption for motor vehicles. The 
Commonwealth Government is not aware of any announcements by State and Territory Government on this matter.  
3.4.1.1 Indirect taxation 
Paragraph 3.104, page 70 As noted in the Secretariat's report, the Luxury Car Tax has been retained and "seems to fall 
disproportionately on imports". Despite three official inquiry reports (Bracks' Review of Australia's 
Automotive Industry (2008); the Henry Review of  Australian Taxation System (2008); and the 
Productivity Commission's inquiry into Australia's Automotive Manufacturing Industry (2014)) which all recommended its abolition, this discriminatory tax remains. 
Questions 40, 41, 42 & 43  
 Could Australia clarify when the Australian Government will complete the Tax White Paper and 
what will be the nature and scope of the proposed reforms?  
 Could Australia clarify whether it intends to maintain Luxury Car Tax, given that local car 
manufacturing will shut down by 2017?  
 Should it be the case, could Australia explain the rational for maintaining the luxury car tax?  
 Will the Australian Government, as part of its White Paper on Taxation Reform, review the 
overall taxation arrangements for alcoholic beverages and introduce taxation of all products 
according to their alcohol content? 
Answers 
The first step in this process was the release of a discussion paper titled 'Re:think' (available at 
www.bettertax.gov.au ) on 30 March 2015.  
Submissions on the discussion paper can be made until 1 June 2015.  
After these initial discussions, the Australian Government will release an options paper in the 
second half of 2015. This will undergo further community consultation on possible reforms to 
improve the tax system. The Australian Governme nt will then put forward final policies for 
consideration by the Australian people before the election.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 97 - 
 
  The Government has commited to considering the luxury car tax in the tax dicussion and review 
process outlined above. 
The Government has commited to considering the luxury car tax in the tax dicussion and review 
process outlined above. 
Alcohol taxation is a complex issue, therefore the Government intends to consider possible 
changes to alcohol taxation arrangements as part of its comprehensive Tax White Paper process. As the first step in the process, the Government has released a discussion paper 'Re:think' 
available at www.bettertax.gov.au .  
3.4.6.2.3 Industrial designs 
Paragraph 3.153, page 85 Question 44 
Could Australia provide further information of the protection available for design furniture and 
unregistered industrial design? 
Answer 
Furniture design protection is available under the current Designs system. There are no special 
concessions for furniture design outside the normal operation of the Designs system. 
Protection of shape trade marks is available for articles where the actual shape of a product is 
distinctive or unusual enough to function as a trade mark. Although shapes with significant 
functional features are difficult to register, Sebel Furniture Limited and Stokke AS both have chairs registered as shape trade marks.  
Unregistered design rights are not available in Australia. The topic was included for consideration 
in the review of the Designs System currently underway by the Advisory Council on Intellectual 
Property (ACIP). ACIP's Final Report was delivered to the Government in March 2015. 
3.4.6.2.5 Geographical indications (GIs) 
Paragraph 3.155, pages 85 and 86 
Many Australian-made food products that display on their labels mentions of European origins, or 
European-style trading names are commonly found in Australian retail stores. in EU's view, this 
could be misleading for consumers. This situation should be put in the context of intellectual 
property policy, as protection is provided through labelling legislation, such as the Commerce Trade Descriptions Act 1905, which prohibits the use of false trade descriptions on labelling. 
Question 45  
Are there any actions that the Australian Competition and Consumers Commission could undertake 
to protect the legitimate intellectual property ri ghts of the European producers and exporters (or 
more in general WTO Members producers and exporters) as well as those of their established 
Australian importers and consumers? 
Answer 
In Australia, intellectual property rights are private rights, and it is the responsibility of a right 
holder to enforce their rights against infringers. If a European producer or exporter considers that 
their trade mark or other intellectual property right is being infringed they may take action under the provisions of the relevant Act to enforce those rights. Whether or not use of a European style name or label would infringe intellectual property protections is not an issue considered under the 
Australian Consumer Law (ACL). WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 98 - 
 
  With respect to the use of labelling legislation for product labels which mention European origins, 
or European style trading names, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission can and does commence court enforcement proceedings to enforce the relevant provisions of the ACL. 
Private rights of action also exist under the ACL. 
The ACL, which is contained in a schedule to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 requires that 
any claims, whether implicit or explicit, made in relation to goods must be accurate and not misleading. In deciding whether a claim, including labelling, is misleading, it is necessary to 
consider what an ordinary member of the target audience would conclude in the circumstances.  
A European style name or label may amount to a claim about the origin of a good. Whether or not 
such a claim is misleading under the ACL must be  considered in all the circumstances which will 
include any explicit statement regarding the orig in of the good, the prominence of any such 
statement and the common understanding of the target audience.  
Further information can be found in the 2014 ACCC publication, Country of origin claims and the 
Australian consumer law – see: 
http://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Country%2 0of%20origin%20and%20the%20Australian%20
Consumer%20Law.pdf . 
3.4.6.4 Enforcement 
Page 87 
This section covers copyright and trademark offences and their treatment.  Questions 46, 47 & 48 
 Could Australia complete this overview by pr oviding information in respect of patents' 
infringements too?  
 In particular, could Australia clarify its 2012 Preliminary Injunction Policy enabling the 
Government to seek compensation from originator pharmaceutical companies for damages to 
the PBS (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) in th e event an injunction has been issued in a 
dispute where the patent is finally declared not infringed?  
 How can such policy ensure that inventors' rights to seek IPR enforcement are adequately 
protected? 
Answers 
As noted at Paragraph 3.4.6.4 Enforcement, Intellectual Property rights (IPRs) holders enforce 
their IPRs through civil action against infringers, as set out in Chapter 11 of the Patents Act 1990. 
In relation to patents, penalties for offences relati ng to IPRs are for the most part confined to acts 
of misrepresentation by legal representatives and patent attorneys. 
The Australian Government does not have a 'Preliminary Injunction Policy'.  
The Australian Government's court action in two separate cases is based upon longstanding 
general law in Australia relating to the recovery of losses suffered by affected persons when an 
ultimately unsuccessful litigant obtained an injunction preventing another party from taking action 
of some kind. It is not specific to intellectual property. 
In seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the entry of a competitive generic product, the 
patent holder provides the 'usual undertaking' to the courts to compensate any persons adversely affected by the operation of the courts' injunction if the litigant is ultimately unsuccessful. 
Preventing the entry of a competitive generic product through a preliminary injunction results in 
two types of losses: 
 First, the generic pharmaceutical competitor lo ses profits because its product has been kept 
out of the market for a period of time.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 99 - 
 
   Second, the Government suffers losses because the prices it pays for pharmaceuticals 
provided to members of the public under th e Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) are 
kept artificially high until the delayed entry of  the generic product into the market triggers 
statutory price cuts.  
The Government's actions are based upon the principle that where the Government suffers losses 
as the result of the actions of another person, the Government is able to seek to recover those losses where it has a legal right to do so.  
The Government's action does not deter companies from enforcing their intellectual property 
rights, including through recourse to provisional measures such as the preliminary injunction.  
This is so for two reasons. First, the originator pharmaceutical company need not seek an 
injunction to keep the generic competitor out of the market – if the originator wins the 
proceedings alleging the infringement, it is entitled to recover from the generic its losses arising 
from the unrestrained market entry of the generic competitor. 
Second, if the originator company wins its patent infringement case, it does not have to pay any 
compensation to anyone under the undertakings it gave to the court to get an injunction. 
However, if after obtaining a preliminary injunction the originator loses the case (that is, it has 
incorrectly claimed a breach of its patent by the generic competitor) it has no intellectual property 
rights to enforce. It is only then that the originator becomes liable to pay compensation to those 
who suffered loss because of the injunction. Such co mpensation is limited to the losses suffered by 
affected persons due to the injunction. It does not deter recourse to the preliminary injunction.  
The Australian Government does not have a policy on preliminary injunction damages. 
Australian law provides for the enforcement of patent and other intellectual property rights 
consistently with the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). 
It allows patent holders to seek preliminary injunctions restraining conduct which they claim to be 
in breach of a patent if they wish.  
Where the courts have determined that no intellectual property rights have been infringed, the 
obligation to pay damages for losses resulting from a preliminary injunction is fully consistent with 
TRIPS. As noted in the response to Q.47, th e damages are limited to the losses suffered by 
affected persons due to the preliminary injunction . They do not deter recourse to the preliminary 
injunction or to the enforcement of intellectual property rights more generally. 
4.5.7.1 Maritime transport 
Paragraphs 4.122 – 4.123, page 124 
Australia is currently reviewing coastal trading legislation enacted by the former Labor Government 
which imposes a temporary licensing process on fo reign vessels, during which Australian General 
Licensed vessels have the opportunity to notify th eir availability to carry out the proposed voyage 
on competitive terms. 
Questions 49 & 50 
 Could Australia provide further clarification on the regulatory changes planned for coastal 
shipping?  
 In particular, could Australia explain which measures are envisaged to redress the 
discriminatory treatment of foreign vessels with respect to its licensing system for coastal 
shipping? 
Answers 
The Australian Government is working to help build a more competitive and efficient shipping 
industry and is committed to reforming the coastal shipping sector. The Australian Government is WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 100 - 
 
  currently considering a range of policy options relating to coastal shipping and will make a public 
announcement regarding any changes to existing policy in due course. 
Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 2.3 Monetary and Fiscal Policy 
Paragraph 2.7, page 5 
According to Australia, a key initiative in th e 2014-15 Budget was a commitment to significant 
infrastructure investment and reforms to the governance of nationally significant projects.  
However, the cost of bidding for large infrastructure projects in Australia is very high compared to 
most of the countries in the world. 
Question 51 
Does Australia consider ways to address bid reimbursement as a way to make bidding more 
sustainable? 
Answer 
As outlined in the government's response to the recent productivity commission inquiry into public  
infrastructure  (the inquiry), the Australian government endorses the use of best practice tendering 
and procurement processes on a case by case ba sis, including bid reimbursement, where these 
practices contribute to better value for money and better management of project and investment 
risk. To support best practice tendering and pr ocurement of major projects by the Australian 
commonwealth and state and territory governments, Australia has national guidelines on public private partnerships, alliance contracting, and traditional contracting for public infrastructure projects. 
2.5.6 Anti-dumping reforms  
Paragraph 2.28, page 8 The EU is interested in having an overview of its latest reforms in anti-dumping arrangements and 
reforms. In 2013 Australia had flagged its intention to modify its current AD legislation to ensure 
that Australia's companies would be competing on a level playing field. The following objectives had been presented: reverse the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations, introduce more 
stringent and rigorous enforcement of deadlines for submissions, and ensure greater cooperation 
by oversees producers on investigations and stre ngthen enforcement of the provisions of the WTO 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  
Question 52  
Could Australia explain, how many have been effectively implemented, and which of these 
objectives have been dropped? 
Answer 
Of the Australian anti-dumping system objectives listed by the European Union, all of the reforms, 
announced on 15 December 2014, are in the process of implementation except for the objective of reversing the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations. The Australian Government has 
instead, committed to place a greater onus on overseas businesses to comply with investigations. 
Legislation was introduced into the Australian Parliament on 26 February 2015. On 18 March 2015, 
the Senate referred the Bills to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 5 May 2015. The Regulation relating to the anti -circumvention framework came into effect on 1 
April 2015. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 101 - 
 
  The reform package includes: 
 Placing a greater onus on overseas businesses to cooperate with investigations; 
 More stringent and rigorous enforcement of deadlines for submissions; 
 Addressing uncooperative exporters; 
 Better assistance for Australian businesses; 
 Addressing circumvention of anti-dumping duties; reducing red tape and improving 
certainty; and  
 Improving the anti-dumping merits review. 
Further information about the Government's reforms can be found here: 
http://www.industry.gov.au/industry/IndustryIni tiatives/TradePolicies /Pages/Levelling-the-
playing-field-changes-to-Australia's-Anti-dumping-laws.aspx . 
3.7 Intellectual Property  
Paragraph 3.27, page 14 Reflecting Australia's long standing sensitivities with regard to geographical indications (GIs), all 
Australia's FTAs contain provisions stating or implying GIs should be protected through trademark 
systems, and protecting trademarks that predate GIs. Many agreements also contain provisions 
requiring consultation on legal and policy developments relating to GIs. 
Question 53 
Australia's FTAs with Japan and Korea have recent ly entered into force. How will these agreements 
deal with third-party geographical indications rights holders, particularly in relation to non-wine and spirits GIs? 
Answer 
On 15 April 2013, the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act 2012 (the "Raising the Bar Act") 
came into effect, resulting in a number of changes to Australia's IP system, including to the system 
of confiscating goods at the border. However, Aust ralian Customs still require a Notice of Objection 
from the IP owner or authorised user to seize goods that infringe IP rights (in contrast to the EU situation, where authorities are able to initially act ex officio).  
Question 54 
How exactly then will the changes help IP rights holders protect their interest from importers of 
counterfeit goods? 
Answer 
Australia provides effective protection for GIs for all goods, through a range of legal means, in 
accordance with our World Trade Organization obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. Australia's long-standing position on GIs is to support transparent, balanced and effective systems for 
protecting GIs, including appropriate checks and balances, which safeguard the interests of 
existing and future traders in the market, fo r example through objections and cancellation 
procedures, recognition of prior rights, and fair use of common names including when used in 
compound terms. These checks and balances do no t prevent particular terms from being protected 
as GIs rather, they ensure a fair process is in place to determine whether terms are generic or already protected in the relevant market and ensure traders can continue to use these terms in the future. A transparent, balanced and effective system for protecting GIs: promotes certainty for 
rights owners, third parties and consumers; rewards innovative effort; and generates greater 
competition and consumer choice. These principles underpin Australia's approach to GIs in our FTAs.  
Australia's Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with Japan and South Korea recognise each party's 
rights and obligations as signatories to the TRIPS Agreement, including provisions for GIs to be WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 102 - 
 
  eligible for protection as trade marks. Some of the recognised advantages of a trade mark system 
are that: it is inclusive of broad subject matter,  is forward looking, and accommodates protection 
for differing kinds of rights. These agreements do not deal with third party GIs rights holders beyond the application of the principles within the FTA in the domestic systems in the signatory 
country. For Australia, entry into force of these FTAs has not changed existing arrangements so 
there is no effect on third party rights holders. Those seeking protection (be they from Australia, Japan, South Korea or some other country) remain subject to the same conditions and eligibility 
requirements for protection as they were before the entry into force of the FTAs.  
In the context of the FTA between South Korea and Australia, the Australian Department of 
Foreign Affairs and Trade wrote to the Korean Mini stry of Trade, Industry and Energy asking for 
further updates or clarifications regarding the provisions of Korea's free trade agreement with the 
European Union that pertain to GIs, in order to assist in explaining the situation to the Australian 
Parliament and other stakeholders. The Korean Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy in 
response, provided information about the scope of protection as GIs for compound terms, clarity 
around the continued use of generic terms, the oper ation of the protection for an asserted GI with 
respect to pre-existing Trade Mark rights, separate  protections for translations, and the availability 
of opposition proceedings. While this correspon dence is not part of the free FTA between South 
Korea and Australia, it provides useful information about this issue. 
There were three significant changes that were implemented in relation to border enforcement 
following the implementation of the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act 2012 (the "Raising 
the Bar Act"). 
1. More information can be given to the rights holder (Objector) 
Under the new provisions the Customs Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is able to give the objector 
any information, including personal information, which the Customs CEO has and believes on 
reasonable grounds may be relevant in assisting the objector in being able to identify and locate 
the importer of the goods/copies. This includes be ing able to provide the objector with the name 
and address of the consignor (supplier) or expo rter. This will enable trade mark and copyright 
owners to track the source of the counterfeit or pirated goods, both locally and overseas.  
Previously, ACBPS was unable to provide supplier/consignor details unless court ordered to do so, following application by the rights holder. 
2. Implementation of a claim process 
Under the new provisions the importer has to make a Claim for the seized goods/copies within a 
10 day claim period. For the Claim to be valid, all mandatory details must be completed. The Claim must have enough detail included to enable the rights holder to identify and contact the importer 
to obtain forfeiture or serve legal documents so the objector can test the matter of infringement in 
court. 
If the importer does not lodge a Claim within th e Claim period the goods will be considered as 
forfeited to the Commonwealth. This ensures that importers are not able to avoid prosecution and 
still retain the infringing goods/copies. 
(The Claim period commences on the day the importer is taken to have received the Notice of 
Seizure).  
3. Release of samples for testing purposes.  
Under the new provisions the Customs CEO (or delegate) can allow the inspection or removal of 
multiple samples of the seized goods. By allowing access to a representative sample the Objector 
will be in a better position to make an accurate determination as to whether, and to what extent, 
the consignment contains infringing goods. This will assist them in determining whether they pursue the matter in court.  
In contrast, under the former scheme, ACBPS could allow the Objector or the importer to inspect 
the seized goods or copies. However, only under the Copyright Act could a sample be released for testing. This was particularly challenging for Trade Mark Objectors who were finding it increasingly WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 103 - 
 
  difficult to make an assessment of infringement on inspection alone. As counterfeiting has become 
more sophisticated, forensic testing is often required especially in circumstances where counterfeit goods have been identified in genuine packaging.  
Australia would also highlight that there are thr ee possible options to suspend the release of goods 
in Australia: 
1. Through the Notice of Objection Scheme;  
2. Via Court Injunction; or 
3. Ex officio action.  
Option 1 and 2 are based on application by the righ ts holder. Option 3 (ex officio action) is taken & 
initiated by the ACBPS. This action is not reliant on whether a Notice of Objection is in place. This action is undertaken by ACBPS through provisions  within the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act 
1905 (CTDA) and not intellectual property legislation. (Under the CTDA, it is an offence for goods 
to have a false trade description or bear a false country of origin.  It is for this reason we are able to apply this legislation in an ex officio capacity , where appropriate, for intellectual property).  
ACBPS has powers under provisions of the Copyright Act 1968 (the Copyright Act), the Trade 
Marks Act 1995 (the Trade Marks Act) and the Olym pic Insignia Protection Act 1987, relating to 
imported goods. This gives rise to Australia's Notice of Objection Scheme. 
3.9 Investment  
Paragraph 3.36, page 15 Australia recently announced that in order to "improve the scrutiny of foreign purchases of 
agricultural land the Government will reduce th e screening threshold from $A252 million to $A15 
million from 1 March 2015". This measure imposes an extra regulatory process on foreign 
investors when purchasing agricultural land valued at $A15 million or more (note that the $A15 million figure is cumulative – i.e. if a foreign investor makes a number of purchases over a period 
of time, once the total value of the purchases reac hes $15 million, FIRB approval will be required). 
Question 55 & 56 
 Could Australia explain the impact of this measure (and other similar measures relating to 
residential property and agribusinesses fore shadowed in the Governments recent options 
paper) on current and future foreign investors? 
Australia states in its report that it "has continued to pursue liberalisation of its foreign investment 
regime to reduce compliance costs and improve Australia's competitiveness as an investment 
destination". 
 Could Australia justify the above-mentioned a ssertion taking into account the existing 
measure on the foreign purchase of agricultural land, the likely imposition of further 
restrictive measures on the foreign purchase of real estate and agribusiness, and the 
imposition of substantial fees on all applications to the Foreign Investment Review Board? 
Answers 
These proposed reforms are designed to increase transparency and scrutiny around foreign 
investment and allow the Government to improv e compliance and enforcement of the existing 
rules. 
The decision to invest in a particular country is based on a wide range of factors. Our assessment 
is that the proposed reform package will not ha ve a material impact on investor behaviour. 
These proposed reforms are designed to increase transparency and scrutiny around foreign 
investment and allow the Government to improv e compliance and enforcement of the existing 
rules. As part of the reform package, the Govern ment has sought feedback from stakeholders on 
options to modernise and simplify the foreign investment framework. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 104 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.37, page 15 
Question 57 
Could Australia provide information on the reasons why Australia does not extend the higher 
foreign investment screening threshold currently applicable to the countries mentioned in this 
paragraph to all WTO Members? 
Answer 
The general thresholds below which foreign investments are not screened by the Foreign 
Investment Review Board (FIRB) are guaranteed in the investment commitments in Australia's 
free trade agreements.  
Foreign investment screening thresholds are based on negotiated outcomes between Australia and 
its trading partners. 
3.11 Trade and environment  
Paragraph 3.41, page 16 Australia mentions in its report to pursue environmental objectives and enhance international 
cooperation in environmental matters of shared interest through FTA negotiations.  
Questions 58, 59, 60 & 61 
 Could Australia clarify whether, during the im plementation of the FTAs agreement (Chile, 
Korea and US are mentioned in the report), has identified situations where the implemented 
environmental standards are lower than agreed/expected?  
 If so, do they have any impact on trade (e.g. trade benefits due to non-compliance with 
demanding environmental requirements)?  
 In such circumstances what kind of mechanisms would be suitable to address inadequate 
approaches?  
 Are these provisions usually submitted to dispute settlement? 
Answers 
The implementation of the trade and environment clauses in Australia's FTAs occurs as parties 
work together through ongoing dialogue, and as the parties advocate for environmental standards 
through their membership of international bodies  and fora. Cooperation on trade and environment 
matters of mutual interest, is for example, reflected in the current negotiations on the EGA now underway between 17 WTO members. To our knowledge,  no party (in the case of Chile, Korea and 
the US agreements) has identified situations where the implemented environmental standards are 
lower than agreed. 
Australia's FTA trade and environment provisions are not usually subject to dispute settlement, 
with the parties addressing common concerns through dialogue. An exception is the AUSFTA, in 
which the parties have access to government-to-government dispute settlement provisions. To 
date, environmental provisions have not been submitted to dispute settlement. 
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION 
Follow-up question 1 
Could Australia indicate the average time needed to complete IRAs?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 105 - 
 
  Answer 
The time taken for initiating a risk assessment is dependent on the assignment of priority. In 
prioritising import risk assessments, the following criteria are taken into account (where relevant): 
 National interest 
 Alignment with the department's objectives 
 Expected benefits 
 Challenges 
 Practical considerations. 
The IRAs are completed using the legislated process outlined in the Import Risk Analysis 
Handbook 2011. They follow legislated timeframes. 
Follow-up question 2 
Notwithstanding Australia's reply to question 35 , paragraph 3.77 of the Secretariat's TPR Report 
notes that "in addition [to the 10% SME sourcing target], for major procurement of information and communications technology (ICT) products and services with an expected contract value of 
$A20 million or more, government agencies must ensure that tenders meet the minimum SME 
participation levels set at 10% of contract value for hardware, and 20% of contract value for software/services." For this type of procurement it appears that SME sourcing targets are required 
to be met at the level of individual tenders. Please provide further information on this kind of 
major ICT procurement, especially with regard to how SME sourcing targets are enforced. 
Answer 
There are no mandatory or preferential mechanisms in place to enforce the minimum SME 
participation levels in Commonwealth Government procurement of ICT goods and services. 
Follow-up question 3 
Could Australia elaborate if there is a mechanism whereby the Commonwealth monitors 
procurement framework and practices of State and Territories with a view to determine possible 
compliance with its international obligations? What steps and measures the Commonwealth could take if a State or Territory is in breach of its international obligations for public procurement? 
Answer 
Under the Australian Constitution treaty-making is the formal responsibility of Executive, rather 
than the Parliament, and the power to negotiate and enter into treaties falls exclusively within the executive power of the Commonwealth, as provided for in section 61 of the Constitution. In 
exercising that power Australia abides by the prov isions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of 
Treaties, including Articles 27, 29 and 46 of that Convention. 
There are a number of consultative mechanisms between the Commonwealth and the States and 
Territories in place, such as the Standing Commit tee on Treaties, regular Ministerial and officials' 
exchanges, in addition to the Council of Australian Governments which brings together the heads of government of each jurisdiction.  
The Commonwealth would undertake consultations with the relevant jurisdiction should questions 
be raised by trading partners about Australia's implementation of its international trade obligations. 
Follow-up question 4 
Could Australia inform Members whether they intend to join the "Hague agreement concerning the 
international registration of industrial designs" in order to enhance protection for designs? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 106 - 
 
  Answer 
The Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (ACIP), an independent body appointed by the 
Australian Government, recently finalised its review on the operation and effectiveness of 
Australia's design system. ACIP's Review Report, released on 5 May 2015, is available at 
http://www.acip.gov.au . Among other matters, ACIP recommended that "Australia should 
commence an investigation into the implications of joining the Hague Agreement, including 
consulting with WIPO. Australia should monitor usage of the Hague system and in particular 
whether usage of the system increases as a resu lt of recent expansions of its membership." 
Any decision regarding Australia potentially joining the Hague Agreement will not be made until 
the Australian Government has had the opportunity to fully consider the ACIP's findings and recommendations. 
Follow-up question 5 
Australia stated in its reply to EU question 53 that Australian Customs require a Notice of 
Objection from the IP owner or authorised user to  seize goods infringing IP rights, on the other 
hand Australia, it its reply to EU question 54 indicated that ex officio action can be envisaged for 
some intellectual property related cases under CTDA (a false trade description or bear a false country of origin). Could Australia further elaborate how the CTDA is applied for IP related 
infringements? Could Australia provide statistics of cases where CTDA ex officio action was used 
for IP infringements? 
Answer 
Australia's Notice of Objection Scheme is the primary mechanism for the seizure of intellectual 
property (IP) infringing goods at the border. It is  considered an effective method for protection of 
IP rights at the border. In the IP context, the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act 1905  (CTDA) is 
used for goods destined for export or upon importation in circumstances where there is no Notice 
of Objection in place where the goods are considered  to represent a consumer safety risk or where 
there would be significant economic impact. 
In general, the CTDA is used to enforce certain labelling requirements on imported and exported 
goods. At its most basic level the CTDA requires goods to have, whenever practicable, a true 
description of the goods and a country of origin  permanently marked in English. Additional 
labelling requirements apply to certain goods within the Commerce (Imports) Regulations 1940. As 
the title suggests the rules are only applied to goods intended for a commercial purpose. Under 
the CTDA, it is an offence for g oods to have a false trade description or bear a false country of 
origin. 
Seizures under the CTDA occur under a magistrates warrant and are seized because the goods are 
considered to be goods with a false trade description. The seizure process and any subsequent 
condemnation action occur under Customs legislation. 
Seizures under the CTDA can take place for a rang e of reasons including IP matters. The statistics 
are not disaggregated, and accordingly data relating to IP related seizures cannot be provided. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 107 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF FIJI 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312  
Section 3.2.5 of the Secretariat's report relati ng to import prohibitions, restrictions and 
import licensing.  
Question - Kava 
We note that table 3 page 49 contains a list of specific restricted goods which includes Kava. The 
measure was imposed by Australia in 2007 to restrict commercial importation of kava, while 
allowing travelers to bring in 2kg for personal use. The stated reason was to protect the health of 
the indigenous communities of Australia. Fiji ha d at the time expressed its concern that this 
measure was a disguised restriction on international trade, and that the measure was not necessary to achieve the statement aim and that a less-trade restrictive measure could be applied 
to meet the stated objective, as is done with other products deemed to have the same health 
effects. 
In this regard, Fiji requests Australia to explain in detail the continued justification for imposing 
this trade restrictive measure on an item without sufficient scientific proof being presented to link 
the necessity of the measure to the stated objective? Could Australia also please refer this delegation to the relevant notifications made  to the WTO in regard of this measure? 
Answer 
Australia notes the health consequences that are associated with excessive consumption of kava, 
arising from the inherent qualities of kava. Australia is also concerned that kava is used at excessive and harmful levels in certain Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory. With this 
in mind, the objective of the kava import restrictions introduced in 2007 is to protect the health of 
Australians. 
Australia notified its import licensing regime for the control of specified narcotic drugs, 
psychotropic substances and related chemicals, including kava, to the WTO Committee on Import 
Licensing in October 2006. 
Question – Fresh Ginger 
The quarantine pathway for fresh ginger has been under negotiations for 9 years and Fiji was 
pleased that exports to Australia of Fiji's fresh ginger were granted in 2013, albeit with specific biosecurity conditions that continue to frustrate ginger exports from Fiji. This does not inspire confidence in our exporters due to the absence of long term market access predictability.   
As per notification (G/SPS/N/AUS/351) Australia is conducting a review of the import conditions for 
fresh ginger imports from Fiji.  
Could Australia indicate whether there are provisions in the annual review to allow for import 
restrictions to be ceased, so that Fijian exporters and their counterpart Australian importers will 
have greater confidence and predictability to trade.  Under what conditions will an annual review no 
longer be required? 
Answer 
The final Import Risk Analysis (IRA) report for fresh ginger from Fiji was completed on 
22 January 2013 and trade commenced on 15 September 2014. The report identified a number of pests of quarantine concern to Australia including a putative intraspecific ginger variant of the 
nematode Radopholus similis  and specified risk management measures required to reduce the risk 
associated with the importation of fresh ginger fr om Fiji to an appropriate level for Australia. 
The final IRA report for fresh ginger from Fiji made a commitment to review the import policy after 
one year of trade, including the quarantine status of the nematode Radopholus similis . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 108 - 
 
  On 17 November 2014 Australia notified Fiji of the commencement of a review of import conditions 
for fresh ginger from Fiji. 
The review is evidence-based and focussed on the science.  A draft report is scheduled to be released shortly for a 30 day consultation period during which all 
stakeholders, including Fijian authorities, may ma ke submissions. A final report is planned for 
release in June 2015, at least one month prior to the expected commencement of trade for the 2015 season. All drafts and final reports will be made available on the Department of Agriculture's 
website and brought to the attention of WTO members through SPS notification addenda on 
G/SPS/N/AUS/351. 
Fiji has been actively involved throughout the review process including hosting a visit by 
Australia's Chief Plant Protection Officer and othe r officials from the Department of Agriculture 
from 10-12 March 2015. If Fijian exporters are frustr ated by the import conditions set by Australia 
for fresh ginger, this has not been communicated to Australia. 
Trade from Fiji is able to continue under the co nditions set in 2013 unless changes are made as a 
result of the review that is currently underway, or as a result of any changes in biosecurity risks. 
Any changes made to import conditions will be based on available scientific evidence and the risk assessment and will be communicated through an SPS notification. 
Question - Giant African Snails  
The report states that during the review period, Australia pursued reforms towards developing a 
modern and responsive system that facilitates trade while managing biosecurity risks offshore , at the border and onshore in live with the recommendations of a 2008 independent review. 
As Australia would know Fijian sea freight shipments to Australia are currently undergoing physical 
inspections for Giant African Snail infestation despite Fiji not being a Giant African Snail host country. This situation dates back to a single case where a shipment originating in another country 
(Samoa), which is has GAS host, was transhipped through Fiji and found in Australia to be 
infested.  
The current regime applicable to Fijian sea fr eight is unduly trade restrictive and in many 
instances, perishable items are no longer marketable as a result of the delays in clearance.  
Would Australia explain the necessity of the measure, given that it would be possible for Australia 
to identify from cargo documents those shipments that have a source which is a GAS host, and undertaken selective inspection on these transh ipped shipments rather than shipments which 
originate in Fiji, where there are no Giant African Snails. 
Answer 
Shipping containers and non-containerised cargo arriving in Australia from Fiji have been found to 
have a higher level of risk of external contamination with biosecurity risk material, including a 
range of pests and other contaminants, such as soil. Pests include, but are not limited to, giant African snails (GAS), black spiny toads and exotic  bees and ants. The Department of Agriculture 
continues to intercept contaminants and pests on containers and cargo arriving in Australia from 
Fiji, and interceptions are undertaken to mitigate the risk posed by this material to Australia's animal, plant and human health, the environment and the economy. 
Implementation of hygiene measures at the ports of origin has demonstrated a reduction in the 
risk posed by GAS, other pests and unacceptable contaminants (including soil). These measures 
can also reduce the costs for importers sourcing goods from the country of origin by reducing 
intervention on arrival in Australia. 
The department co-shares the management of a Sea Container Hygiene System (SCHS) with the 
New Zealand government and industry to manage biosecurity risks associated with sea containers arriving from countries in the Pacific region at the port of loading. This serves to reduce the 
biosecurity risks onshore, allowing for a lower intervention rate at the border. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 109 - 
 
  Australia has been working closely with New Zealand and the Biosecurity Authority of Fiji over the 
last two years to progress the establishment of th e SCHS in the ports of Suva and Lautoka. Once 
the system is established, the majority of contai ners originating from those ports will be exempt 
from mandatory intervention on arrival in Australia and New Zealand (subject to meeting SCHS 
criteria). WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 110 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Question 1 
En el párrafo 1.1 se indica que el descenso de Australia en la clasificación de las economías más 
competitivas del mundo se debe al escaso aumento de la tasa media de productividad 
multifactorial. ¿Ha implementado Australia algún plan estratégico para acelerar este crecimiento?  
Paragraph 1.1 states that the decline in Australia ranking of the most competitive economies in the 
world is due to the small increase in the average rate of multifactor productivity. Has Australia 
implemented a strategic plan to accelerate this growth? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is pursuing a number of reforms to support Australia's productivity 
growth over the medium-term, including by: 
 undertaking a review of the tax system and federation; 
 conducting an independent Competition Policy Review to testing whether Australia's 
competition policies, laws and institutions are fit for purpose against future opportunities 
and challenges for Australia; 
 initiating a review of Australia's workplace relations laws; 
 reducing regulatory burdens by establishing a red and green tape reduction target of $1 
billion per year for business, individuals and community organisations; and 
 pursuing the Industry, Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda, which included initiatives to 
promote national competitiveness and productivity such as options to encourage 
innovation, including employee share schemes, support for research and development and 
commercialising good ideas and economy-wide incentive mechanisms to boost investment in Australia. 
Question 2 
En el párrafo 1.19 se indica que las exportaciones australianas continúan concentrándose 
principalmente en los productos básicos y los productos de minería. Dentro de las reformas 
previstas, ¿se ha proyectado algún tipo de diversificación adicional de las exportaciones?  
Paragraph 1.19 states that Australian exports continue to focus primarily on commodities and 
mining products. Within the planned reforms, has Australia planned some additional diversification of exports? 
Answer 
Non-rural commodities represent a larger share of exports now than in the past due to the 
expansion of the mining sector's production in recent years.  
While Australia has recently progressed trade agreements with major trading partners, the 
Australian Government does not seek to diversif y Australia's export composition. Instead, the 
Australian Government allows market forces to determine the allocation of resources to different 
sectors of the economy, including to sectors of comparative advantage. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 111 - 
 
  Question 3 
En el párrafo 3.116 se explica que en octubre de 2014, fue lanzado un Programa para la 
innovación y la competitividad industriales, por el que se busca fomentar la competitividad en Australia, a lo largo de los próximos 18 meses. ¿Qué tipo de medidores se aplicarán para evaluar 
los resultados de este programa?  
It is explained in paragraph 3.116 that in October 2014, a program was released for innovation 
and industrial competitiveness, by which it seek s to encourage competition in Australia, over the 
next 18 months. What type of measure is used to assess the results of this program? 
Answer 
The aim of the Industry Innovation and Competitiv eness Agenda is to foster the right economic 
conditions to enable business to innovate and create opportunities. The Agenda is a central part of 
the Government's Economic Action Strategy focussed on strengthening the economy and 
delivering benefits to the community, including through less reliance on government, facilitating business to help identify market gaps and capitalise on opportunity, and more long-term 
investment. These measures will improve Australia's competitiveness. 
Individual measures announced in the Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda can be 
measured for success. For example, success of the Industry Growth Centres Initiative will be 
measured by: increased research and developmen t coordination and collaboration leading to 
improved commercialisation outcomes; more businesses integrated into domestic and global supply chains and markets; improved management and workforce skills of businesses; red tape reduction; and improved employment opportunities an d contribution to the creation of high-skilled 
jobs. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 112 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF HONG KONG, CHINA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Insurance (Page 117, Para. 4.88) It was noted that the Australian Government had announced the closure of the Private Health 
Insurance Administration Council (PHIAC). Its functions would be taken up by the Australian 
Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and the Australian Department of Health. 
Questions 1, 2 & 3 
Please share with us the latest development in the closure of PHIAC, including the latest 
administrative progress, arrangements during the transition, and measures to ensure a smooth transfer of functions. Has the Australian Governme nt consulted the industry or the public before 
making the decision? What impact would the closure of PHIAC have on the industry and what 
actions will be taken by the Australian Government to minimise the influence? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is currently preparing legislation to ensure the smooth transfer of 
functions from PHIAC to APRA. The Australian Government has released draft legislation to the 
public for consultation throughout the legislative design process. The Government is continuing to consult the private health insurance industry as it refines the legislation in preparation for 
introduction into Parliament. 
Telecommunications (Page 120, Paras. 4.99 - 4.101) In order to respond to consumer demands for improved broadband capacity and facilitate 
competition among retail service providers, the Australian Government has established a new 
stated-owned company, NBN Co., to build and operate a national, next generation broadband 
network. Retail customers would migrate from th eir existing networks to the NBN. Any future 
privatisation of NBN Co. will be subject to Parliamentary approval. 
Questions 4, 5 &6  
What market factors have been considered before the establishment of NBN Co.? Is NBN Co., 
operating on commercial basis, or is it enjoying any preferential treatments or monopoly right? Is 
there any plan to privatise NBN Co.?  
Answer 
NBN Co was established because of a reluctance of the private sector providers to invest in next 
generation broadband infrastructure over an extended period. Private sector interest in investing 
was further tested through a competitive procurement and funding process in 2008-09.  
The National Broadband Network (NBN) is intended both to provide access to next generation 
broadband and to promote more effective retail level competition by providing an open access 
platform for retail providers. 
NBN Co is a Government-owned business that operates on a commercial basis. It is subject to 
existing competition legislation and telecommunications regulation and is also subject to additional 
regulatory requirements to ensure it operates on  a wholesale-only basis and does not discriminate 
between its wholesale customers. NBN CO does not have any monopoly rights or preferential treatment. 
The legislation governing NBN Co provides for privatisation of the company once the NBN has been 
completed and is operational. The Government has committed to reviewing the appropriate WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 113 - 
 
  structural and regulatory settings for the industry, including disaggregation of NBN Co, prior to any 
privatisation. 
Tourism (Page 129, Para. 4.146) To enhance growth and competitiveness within the tourism sector, the Australian Government 
launched a national strategy called Tourism 2020 in December 2011. This initiative focused on six 
strategic areas, namely to: (1) grow demand from Asia; (2) build competitive digital capability; (3) encourage investment and implement a regulato ry reform agenda; (4) ensure the tourism 
transport environment supports growth; (5) increase  the supply of labour, skills and indigenous 
participation; and (6) build industry resilience, productivity and quality. 
Questions 7 & 8  
We are interested to know more about the scope and details of the Tourism 2020, its latest 
progress, and implementation schedule. Can fore ign companies or foreign invested companies 
participate in the initiative? If so, would they receive the same treatment as local companies?  
Answer 
The forward work program under Tourism 2020 for 2015-2020 is currently being finalised. 
Governments and industry have worked together to identify key reform areas that will be incorporated into the Tourism 2020 Implementation Plan (2015-2020)  that will assist the 
industry in meeting the higher end of the Tour ism 2020 target. These key reform areas include; 
increasing cross portfolio collaboration, improving visa arrangements, improving aviation capacity and customer experience and integration of na tional and state tourism plans into regional 
development and local government planning. Detailed information about Tourism 2020, progress 
and implementation is available on the Austrade website at: 
http://www.austrade.gov.au/Tourism/Policies/National-long-term-strategy/Tourism-2020 .  
As outlined in the report, the overarching objective of Tourism 2020 is to enhance growth and 
competitiveness of the industry, this includes those companies involved in the tourism industry in 
Australia who may be foreign companies or foreign invested companies. 
If the question is referring to the procurement of goods and services by the Australian Government 
to implement the strategy, these are subject to the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs) 
which are non-discriminatory. Section 5.3 of Division 1 of the CPRs states: "The Australian Government's procurement framework is non-discriminatory. All potential supplier s to government 
must , subject to these CPRs, be treated equitably ba sed on their commercial, legal, technical and 
financial abilities and not be discriminated against due to their size, degree of foreign affiliation or 
ownership, location, or the origin of their goods  and services." 
Australian policy statement  WT/TPR/G/312  
Competition policy review (Page 6, Para. 2.16) 
We noted that the Australian Government has commissioned an independent "root and branch" 
review of Australia's competition laws and policy and a draft report for public consultation was 
released on 22 September 2014. 
Question 9 
Can Australia share with us findings and results of  the revision which may affect foreign companies 
already established in Australia or potential foreign investors? 
Answer 
The Competition Policy Review Final Report was released on 31 March 2015 and the Review has 
concluded. The Review recommended a range of amendments to Australia's competition laws. In 
particular, it recommended that the current definiti on of 'market' in section 4E of the Australian 
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 should be retained but the current definition of 'competition' WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 114 - 
 
  in section 4 should be amended to ensure that competition in Australian markets includes 
competition from goods imported or capable of being imported, or from services rendered or capable of being rendered, by persons not resident or not carrying on business in Australia. 
Small business policy agenda  (Page 7, Paras. 2.17) 
The report has mentioned three key priorities of  the Australian Government regarding its small 
business policy agenda which include reducing re d tape burdens and improving regulators engage 
with small business, improving the operating en vironment facing small business, and building 
small business capability. 
Question 10 
As Hong Kong China also has a large number of small and medium sized businesses, we are very 
interested to learn about the measures taken by the Australian Government to achieve this policy 
agenda.  
Answer 
The Government has a broad deregulation agenda in train and we are committed to cutting $1 
billion of red and green tape each year. On 22 October 2014, the Government announced a net 
saving to date of more than $2.1 billion.  
The Government is committed to improving regulator performance and enhancing the way 
regulators engage with small business. On 29 October 2014, the Government released a Regulator 
Performance Framework that establishes a common set of performance measures that will allow for the comprehensive assessment of regulator performance and their engagement with stakeholders. 
The Government is creating an Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman. The 
Ombudsman will be a: Commonwealth-wide advocate for small businesses and family enterprises; contributor to the development of small business friendly Commonwealth laws and regulations; a 
concierge for dispute resolution and provide its own limited mediation service. 
The Government's Entrepreneur's Infrastructure Package provides businesses with streamlined 
access to expert operators, information and refe rral services to help business owners better 
manage their business. Other Government assistance includes employment, digital and export 
programmes, which are open to many small businesses and provide information and assistance for specific business needs.  
The global economy provides Australian small and medium sized businesses (SMEs) with an 
opportunity to access new markets and the Government is committed to helping SMEs reach their 
export potential. Australia's Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC) was refocused to increase its capacity to finance SMEs seeking to capitalise on global trade opportunities. 
Deregulation (Page 7, Para. 2.20) 
We note that the Australian Government embark ed on a wide-ranging deregulation agenda in 
September 2013 which focused on reducing the flow of new regulations, reviewing the stock of 
existing regulations and encouraging regulators  to minimise the burdens they impose when 
administering regulation. We also note that at least two parliamentary sitting days are assigned each year to repeal counterproductive , unnecessary or redundant legislation. 
Questions 11, 12 & 13 
Can Australia share with us the number and types of legislation that were repealed in the 
parliamentary sittings in 2014? Has the Australian Government conducted any review and assessment on the actual benefits resulting from the deregulation? What are the findings? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 115 - 
 
  Answer 
In the first year of the Australian Government's red tape agenda, ending on 31 December 2014, 
the Government introduced legislation to repeal over 10,000 legislative instruments and 1,800 Acts of Parliament. Some of the decisions taken in 2014 are still being progressed or remain the 
subject of Parliamentary approval processes.  
Bills introduced to repeal legislation as part of the bi-annual repeal days in 2014 are available at: 
http://www.cuttingredtape.gov.au/repeal-day/2014-autumn-repeal-day  and 
http://www.cuttingredtape.gov.au/repeal-day/2014-spring-repeal-day . 
The Australian Government has not yet conducted a formal review or assessment of the benefits 
resulting from the current deregulation agenda.  
Decisions to implement major regulatory reforms are informed by regulatory impact analysis, 
which provides the decision maker with a sense of benefits and impacts on relevant entities prior 
to the decision being taken. As estimates of benefits are based on annualised savings over a 10-year horizon, it would be premature to assess at this stage how the benefits may have flowed 
relative to prior expectations across the entire red tape reduction objective. 
Furthermore, Australian Government agencies mu st undertake a post-implementation review (PIR) 
within five years for all regulatory changes that have major impacts on the economy. PIRs must 
also be prepared within two years when regulati on has been introduced, removed or significantly 
changed without a regulation impact statement. More information on PIRs is available at: http://ris.dpmc.gov.au/category/post-implementation-reviews/ . 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 
14, para 3.25 
Question: 
The report mentions that the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 
raises the quality of granted patents and reduces delays in resolution of patent and trade mark 
applications.  
Could Australia elaborate on how the quality of granted patents is raised and how the prosecution 
and examination of trade mark and patent applications (covering patent divisional applications) are 
simplified or expedited under the above legislation and, as far as possible, provide some examples for illustration. 
Answer 
The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 ('RTB Act') amends the 
Patents Act to address four key areas of patentability. The RTB Act:  
1. amended the Patents Act to remove restri ctions on the information and background 
knowledge taken into account when assessing whether an application is sufficiently inventive to 
justify a patent;  
2. bolstered the requirement that a patented invention be useful: that is, that the invention 
works in the way that the patent says it does and that the specification explains how the invention 
works; 
3. raised the standards set for disclosure of an invention. The amendments address 
circumstances where the information disclosed in a patent specification, although sufficient to 
make one thing within the scope of each claim, is not sufficient to make the invention across the 
full scope of each claim. The changes ensure that granted patents are no broader than the invention which has been disclosed; and  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 116 - 
 
  4. amended the Patents Act to increase certai nty in the validity of granted patents. The 
changes expand the grounds that the Commissioner can consider, and apply a consistent standard of proof across all grounds, so that the Commissioner is not obliged to grant patents which would not pass scrutiny in a court challenge. 
In relation to trade marks, the RTB Act includ ed amendments to tighten up requirements for 
commencing opposition proceedings for trademarks and for seeking extensions of time in trademark and patent opposition proceedings. These changes reduce delays in the finalisation of 
opposition proceedings and ensure that the grounds for trademark oppositions are clearly 
identified early in the opposition proceedings. 
In relation to divisional applications, the RTB Act amended the Patent Act to permit the regulations 
to prescribe an earlier deadline for filing a divisional application and to require that a divisional 
application include prescribed particulars. 
The amendment provides for regulations to be made restricting the period within which a divisional 
application can be made. The period will be up to  the end of the time within which a notice of 
opposition to grant of the parent application can be filed (three months after advertisement of 
acceptance of the parent application).  
This means an applicant will be unable to file a divisional application once the period for 
commencing opposition proceedings on the parent  application has expired. The amendment is 
intended to strike a balance between preserving patent applicants' interests in being able to 'divide out' multiple inventions and the public interest in preventing undue delays in determination of applications.  
The amendment also provides for regulations to be made requiring that certain details are 
provided with the divisional application. These will include particulars claiming divisional status for the application and details of the parent application.  
Page 14 paragraph 3.29 
Question: 
The report mentions that the WIPO-Australia Funds in Trust programme seeks to promote trade 
and economic growth through improved applicat ion and use of intellectual property rules by 
developing countries in the Indo-Pacific region. Activities under the Funds in Trust include intellectual property capacity building and traini ng to increase access to technology transfer. 
Hong Kong China is interested to know more details about the training programmes and capacity 
building activities and whether they are intended to  be open to all developing economies in Asia. 
Answer 
The Australian Government has provided $A2 million to WIPO for 2012-15. This funding assists 
developing and least developed countries to build their intellectual property regimes and 
capabilities in facilitating innovation, creativity, investment and technology transfer. There are four themes under Australia's Funds in Trust, as refl ected in a Memorandum of Understanding signed 
between Australia and WIPO in June 2012. These themes are: development of the intellectual 
property system; technology transfer (knowle dge transfer and commercialisation); addressing 
neglected tropical diseases; and copyright and related rights to assist the blind, visually impaired and other persons with print disabilities. Further details on the WIPO-Australia Funds in Trust 
program are available from the Australian Report to the WTO Council for Trade Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property on Technical Cooperat ion Activities of 13 October 2014 (IP/C/W/601), 
available on the WTO website. The WIPO Australia Funds in Trust programme was established to 
support developing and least developed countries in -line with Australian Government aid priorities, 
which focus on Official Development Assistance eligible countries in the Indo-Pacific Region.  Separately, Australia also delivers capacity-building programs through our free trade agreements 
and engages bilaterally with a range of countries to share best practices on effective intellectual 
property protection and enforcement.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 117 - 
 
  Page 83, paragraph 3.148  
Question: 
The report mentions that the ACIP has investigat ed the effectiveness of the innovation patent 
system in stimulating innovation by Australian SMEs. The ACIP report was released and it has been 
under consideration by the Austra lian Government since July 2014. 
(1) It is noted that the ACIP report contains various recommendation to enhance the innovation 
patent system should the Australian Government ultimately choose to retain the system. Hong 
Kong, China is interested to know when the Aust ralian Government may be expected to announce 
its policy decision about the future positioning of the innovation patent system, in particular whether the system would be retained, and if so, how the system would be refined.  
(2) It is noted that the deadline for filing a divisional innovation patent under section 79C of the 
Patents Act 1990 is no later than one month after the advertisement of certification of the parent 
innovation patent, and that a claim of a divisional innovation patent application will only be entitled to obtain priority from the parent if examinatio n of the divisional patent is requested within 2 
months of the date of grant of a patent on the divisional application, and the parent contains a 
clear enough and complete enough disclosure of the claimed invention (regulation 3.13E(1) of the 
Patents Regulations 1991). In this connection, could Australia briefly explain, as far as the grant of 
a divisional innovation patent ("subsequent patent grant") (where the earlier parent is an 
innovation patent) is concerned, whether the subsequent patent grant would be treated to take effect from the actual filing date of the divisional  application or the actual date of grant of the 
subsequent patent grant in the following scenarios:  
(a) pending request for substantive examination of the subsequent patent grant;  
(b) where the proprietor of the subsequent patent grant fails to request for substantive 
examination within the prescribed period.  
According to section 79C of the Patent Act 1990 (and determined under regulation 6.3(8)) the date 
of a patent for a divisional innovation patent application is the date of the parent innovation patent. However, a divisional patent will norm ally be considered to have effect against 
infringements from the date of its grant (and publication). 
Contrary to this, a recent legal decision (Britax Childcare Pty Ltd v Infa-Secure Pty Ltd [No 3] 
[2012] FCA 1019 ) suggests that the effect arises at the date of the parent patent, potentially 
before the divisional innovation patent application was filed.  
Answer: 
If rights exist before the date of grant of the divi sional innovation patent they potentially would be 
limited by the innocent infringement provisions of section 123 of the Patents Act (Innocent 
Infringement). If the requirements of Regulation 3.13E (1) (Priority date for divisional application 
after grant of innovation patent) are not met i.e. examination of the divisional application is requested within 2 months of the date of the grant of the divisional application - it is a matter only 
of the priority date of the innovation patent and consequently its validity. If the patent loses 
priority from the parent patent it will most likely be invalid against subject matter published in the parent. 
Page 86, paragraph 3.157 
Question: The report mentions that, following the completion of a thorough review of Copyright and the 
Digital Economy, the Australian Law Reform Commission made a number of recommendations, 
including the introduction of a new broad and flexib le fair use exception, that as at December 2014 
were under consideration. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 118 - 
 
  Hong Kong China is interested to know if the Australian Government would accept the 
Commission's recommendations and the reasons. Hong Kong China is also interested to know when the Australian Government will announce its policy decision on the way forward regarding these recommendations. 
Answer 
The Australian Government is continuing to consider the recommendations of the Australian Law 
Reform Commission. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 119 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Page – 54, Paragraph – 3.48 
Question: 
Could Australia provide details of its surveillanc e procedures in respect of mandatory standards 
and whether these, along with mandatory standard and ban, have been notified to the relevant WTO Committee? 
Answer: 
The ACCC's Product Safety Branch develops a risk -based targeted annual surveillance plan which 
is then ratified by Commission ers. Whilst not published, activities under that plan may be 
announced in advance of the activity if it is considered beneficial to promoting broad industry 
compliance. 
The ACCC is aware of the terms of the Ag reement on Technical Barriers to Trade. 
Page 56 -57, Paragraph – 3.56 
Question: Australia is requested to provide justification for maintaining a higher level of MRL for pesticides 
(including herbicides and fungicides) compared to  that of CODEX standards/international standards 
for the following agricultural products. Could Australia also indicate whether any risk assessment 
has been carried out, and the scientific justific ation, before applications of higher MRLs? 
• Cattle Meat 
• Chickpea 
• Coconut 
• Coffee bean, green • Corn, grain 
• Cucumber 
• Grape • Milk 
• Cashew Nut 
• Onion bulb • Peanut 
• Pepper, non-bell 
• Rice 
• Soybean • Tea leaves 
• Wheat, grain 
• Mustard Seed, Indian (Brown) • Sesame Seed 
• Sugarcane 
 
Answer 
Australian MRLs for agricultural and veterinary (agvet) chemicals residues in food are listed in Standard 1.4.2 in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code).  
Australia undertakes rigorous risk assessments including dietary exposure assessment for all MRLs 
listed in Standard 1.4.2. The MRLs are set using methodology consistent with OECD and Codex 
(JMPR) guidance for specific chemical/food commodity combinations and using food consumption and food composition from Australia's national nu trition surveys. Furthermore, MRLs are set in 
accordance with good agricultural practice which takes into account national use patterns 
necessary to control pests and/or diseases. MRLs are included in the Code only if the level of 
chemical residue in the food does not pose any public health and safety risks to consumers.  
The dietary intake assessments for pesticides in Australia are undertaken using methodologies 
consistent with those recommended by the World Health Organisation. The estimated exposures 
are compared to the relevant health based guidance value (HBGV) for the specific agvet chemical e.g. acceptable daily intake (ADI). The HBGVs for agvet chemicals permitted in Australia are 
generally established by the Australian Department of Health based on toxicological evaluations 
they have undertaken. The Australia HBGVs can be found at the Australian Government WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 120 - 
 
  Department of Health website at 
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/pu blishing.nfs/Content/ocs-adi-list.htm  and 
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/pu blishing.nsf/Content/ocs-arfd-list.htm . 
It should be noted that the Codex dietary risk assessment processes use internationally 
established HBGVs established by JMPR , model diets and food composition data. In addition, 
differences in the international use of foods compared to that in Australia may also result in variations to the final MRL value set by Codex compared to that by Australia.  
Differences between agvet chemical MRL values established by Australia compared to those 
established through Codex are due mainly to differences in the data sets used since the methodologies for conducting dietary risk assessments are equivalent. 
Page – 112, Paragraph – 4.68 
Question: Australia is requested to clarify what does it mean by input tariff penalty on services? It is also 
requested to provide government outlays and ta x concessions available for various services 
sectors by Australian government. 
Answer 
The input tariff penalty on services refers to the effect tariffs have on the services industry in 
Australia. The effect of tariffs on imported goods raises the cost of 'inputs' for Australian 
businesses where those goods are used as inputs. In 2012/13 the net effect of tariffs on the services industry in Australia was minus $4.7billion. 
Total budgetary assistance for the services se ctor was $3.3billion in 2012/13. A breakdown of 
sectors receiving assistance can be found in the Productivity Commissions Trade and Assistance 
Review (Y2012/13). 
Page – 113, Paragraph – 4.70 
Question: Australia is requested to inform the kind of subs idies available to its various services sectors and 
whether there exist any discrimination between fore ign and domestic service providers in obtaining 
such subsidies. 
Answer 
Australia notes the lengthy discussions in the WPGR on subsidies has been complicated by the 
difficulties defining subsidies in a services context. We are not aware of any subsidies that have a 
discriminatory effect on foreign services or service suppliers. 
Page 114, Paragraph 4.73 
Question: 
Australia is requested to provide the details of the screening process applicable for foreign 
investment in various sectors? 
Answer 
Types of proposals that are screened include:  Acquisitions of 15 per cent or more in Australian businesses valued above $252 million (or the 
higher threshold of $1,094 million for countries where Australia has given preferential treatment through free trade agreements). WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 121 - 
 
   All direct investments, establishment of new businesses and land acquisitions by foreign 
government investors. 
 Acquisitions of rural land where the cumulative value of rural land that the foreign person 
already holds exceeds, or immediately following the proposed acquisition is likely to exceed, 
$15 million (apply to all non-government investors except those countries where Australia 
 has given preferential treatment through free trade agreements). 
Separate legislation includes other requirements and/or imposes limits on foreign investment in 
the following instances:  
 Foreign ownership in the banking sector must be consistent with the Banking Act 1959, the 
Financial Sector (Shareholdings) Act 1998 and banking policy;  
 aggregate foreign ownership in an Australian international airline (including Qantas) is limited 
to 49 per cent; 
 the Airports Act 1996 limits foreign ownership of some airports to 49 per cent, with a 5 per 
cent airline ownership limit and cross ownership limits between Sydney airport (together with 
Sydney West) and either Melbourne, Brisbane, or Perth airports;  
 the Shipping Registration Act 1981 requires a ship to  be majority Australian-owned if it is to be 
registered in Australia, unless it is designated as chartered by an Australian operator; and  
 aggregate foreign ownership of Telstra is limited to 35 per cent and individual foreign investors 
are only allowed to own up to 5 per cent. 
Page 114, Paragraph 4.73 
Question 
Australia is requested to indicate what are the relevant considerations apart from the prudential 
requirements and impact on the economy and competition?  
Answer   
Foreign investment proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure they are not 
contrary to Australia's national interest.  
The Government typically considers the following factors when assessing foreign investment 
proposals in any sector: 
- national security; 
- competition; - impact on other Government policies (including taxation); 
- impact on the economy and the community; and 
- the character of the investor. 
Further information is provided on pages 7-9 of Australia's Foreign Investment Policy. 
Page 115, Paragraph 4.75 
Question What is Asia Region Funds Passport and how does it work? Please provide the details. 
Answer 
The Asia Region Funds Passport (Passport) is a trade liberalisation initiative of the Asia Pacific 
Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. It will fa cilitate the cross border issuing of collective WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 122 - 
 
  investment schemes across participating APEC economies in the Asia region. In practical terms, 
this means that a Passport scheme registered in its home economy can be offered in other participating economies without needing to meet different sets of operational and licensing requirements. This international 'portability' of  Passport funds will avoid the need for fund 
managers to manufacture and manage funds in each economy. Further details can be found at: 
http://fundspassport.apec.org.  
Page 115, Paragraph 4.78 
Question 
Australia is requested to provide the details of the legislative and prudential requirements for 
setting up foreign-owned subsidiaries of foreign banks? 
Answer 
Foreign banks may apply to establish locally incorporated subsidiaries or branches to carry on 
banking business in Australia (foreign banks author ised by APRA to carry on banking business in 
Australia through branches are referred to as  'foreign ADIs' under the Act). There are no 
restrictions on the number or size of operations of foreign banks in the Australian market. A 
foreign bank may simultaneously hold an authority to operate as a foreign ADI and be the parent of a locally incorporated subsidiary authorised as an ADI.  
Except as explicitly stated in APRA's Prudential Standards and Division 1B of Part II of the Act, 
foreign bank-owned subsidiary ADIs are subject to the same legislative and prudential requirements as locally owned ADIs. Although the prime responsibility for oversight of the 
Australian operations of a foreign ADI rests with local management and its head office as well as 
with the foreign ADI's home supervisor(s), the foreign ADI is nonetheless required to submit its 
local operations to APRA's prudential supervision. 
Page 118, Paragraph 4.90 
Question: Australia is requested to clarify about the exceptio n available and what is meant by eligible foreign 
life insurance companies? What is the criterion to decide such eligibility? 
Answer 
Eligibility of foreign life insurance companies is derived from where they are registered. The list of 
eligible countries is in Reg 2B.01 of the Life  Insurance Regulations 1995. At present, the list 
includes the USA, New Zealand, Japan and Korea. Unless the life company is incorporated and 
authorised to carry on life insurance business in one of the listed countries (thereby meeting the 
definition of an eligible foreign life insurance company), it must operate in Australia as a subsidiary not a branch. 
Page – 120, Paragraph – 4.102 
Question  
Australia is requested to inform the details of the Telecommunication Industry Levy, such as its 
rate, how is it levied etc.? 
Answer 
The Telecommunications Industry Levy Scheme (TILS) along with dedicated budget funding 
contributes to the costs of contracts/grants for delivery of the universal service obligation, the 
National Relay Service, the emergency call service, untimed local calls in remote areas, and safety 
net migration programs associated with the rollout of the National Broadband Network. From 2014 15 and onwards, the Government budget contribution is AUD$100 million per annum.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 123 - 
 
  The total amount raised each year under the TILS is  calculated by taking into account the costs of 
contracts/grants for public interest telecommunications services and the administrative costs of managing those contracts, less dedicated budget funding. 
Telecommunications carriers with eligible revenue of AUD$25 million or more are 'participating 
persons' and are required to contribute to the TILS. Contributions are proportional, calculated with 
regard to each participating persons eligible revenue against the total eligible revenue of all participating persons. 
Page 121, Paragraph 4.106 
Question 
Could Australia please inform about the various local-content requirements applicable for television 
broadcasting? 
Answer 
Commercial free-to-air television 
Broadcasting Services Act 1992  requires: 
• Primary channel – 55 per cent Australian programming from 6am-midnight. 
• Multichannels – 1460 hrs per annum (average 4 hrs/day) • One hour of first release Australian drama premiered on a multichannel counts as two hours 
 for the purposes of the multichannel quota.  
Broadcasting Services (Australian Content) Standard 2005  requires:  
• Sub-quotas for Australian drama, documentary and children's programming. Australian drama 
• 250 points per annum of first release Australian drama programs between 5pm and 
 11.30pm. Points accrue according to a complex calculation of a range of factors such as  hours and costs. 860 points total required over a three year period. 
Australian documentary 
• 20 hours of first-release Australian documentary programs per year. Children's Content 
• 32 hours of first-release Australian children's drama per year averaged over 3 years; with a 
 25 hour minimum per year. 
• 8 hours repeat children's drama per annum. Children's Television Standards 2009  requires: 
• 390 hours (130 hours of pre-school (P) programs  and 260 hours of children's (C) programs) 
 per annum. 
Television Broadcasting Standard 23  requires: 
• 80 per cent of total advertising time broadc ast per year between 6am-midnight must be 
 Australian produced advertisements. 
Broadcasting Services (Additional Television Licence Condition) Notice 8 November 2007 (imposed 
by the ACMA in accordance with sections 43 and 43A of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992): WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 124 - 
 
  • Commercial broadcasters in the licence areas of Regional Queensland, Northern New South 
 Wales, Southern New South Wales, Regional Victoria and Tasmania must provide material of  local significance. Material of local significance relates to news and current affairs content  that is of particular relevance to that local area. 
• The actual amount of material of local significance is determined by a complex points system 
 set by the ACMA which equates to: 
 - approximately 45 minutes of local news (or 90 minutes of other material of local 
  significance) per week; and 
 - approximately 360 minutes of local news (or 720 minutes of other material or local 
  significance) per 6 week period. 
• Material of local significance must be shown between 6.30am-midnight on Monday to Friday, 
 and 8am-midnight on weekends. 
• The Notice is an additional licence condition imposed under section 43 of the Broadcasting 
 Services Act 1992 – see below for penalties. 
Subscription television 
Broadcasting Services Act 1992  requires: 
10 per cent of total drama program expenditure for a subscription television drama service must 
be Australian drama. 
National broadcasters The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) are 
largely regulated by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983 and the Special 
Broadcasting Service Act 1991 respectively. The national broadcasters are not subject to specific 
Australian content quota obligations. However, each broadcaster has specific roles and programming requirements outlined in their releva nt Act, Charter, and codes of practice. These 
include catering for and promoting the cultural identity and diversity of the Australian population 
through the provision of free, quality content and accurate and independent news and information. 
Page 121, Paragraph 4.107 
Question Australia is requested to provide the details of  the flexibilities provided by new legislative 
provisions? 
Answer 
The Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Convergence Review and Other Measures) Act 2013  
amended the Broadcasting Services Act 1992.  The flexibility introduced by this Act included:  
• flexibility for commercial free-to-air broadcasters in meeting sub-quotas for first release 
Australian drama, documentary and children's programming by allowing programs broadcast on 
multichannels to be counted as well as those programs broadcast on the primary channel.  
• flexibility for commercial free-to-air broadcasters by allowing each hour of first release 
Australian drama programming broadcast on a multichannel (between 6 a.m. and midnight) to 
count for two hours of Australian content for the purposes of meeting the relevant transmission quota. This means that the broadcaster can use first release Australian drama to satisfy the multichannel content quota by providing less than the required 1460 hours of content. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 125 - 
 
  Page – 124, Paragraph – 4.123 
Question:   
Could Australia elaborate the conditions to obtain temporary licence for engaging in coastal 
trading?  
Answer 
The conditions for obtaining temporary licences to engage in coastal trading in Australia are clearly 
set out in the Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Act 2012 (see 
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2014C00575 ). For further information see: 
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/maritime /business/coastal_trading/index.aspx  or contact the 
Shipping Business Unit for specific advice or information 
shippingbusinessunit@infrastructure.gov.au or +61 2 6274 7474. 
Page – 125, Paragraph – 4.124 
Question 
"Tax reforms are set out in the Tax Laws Amendm ent (Shipping Reform) Act 2012. They include: 
(a) corporate income tax exemptions for Australian ship operators who meet certain conditions." 
Could Australia provide the details of the conditions to be satisfied in order to obtain corporate 
income tax exemptions? 
Answer 
To qualify for the income tax exemption a company must meet the requirements set out in the Tax 
Law Amendment (Shipping Reform) Act 2012 and have been issued with a certificate under the Shipping Reform (Tax Incentives) Act 2012. To obtain a certificate a company must be a 
constitutional corporation (paragraph 51(xx) of the Constitution), meet certain tonnage 
requirements (minimum vessel size in gross tonnes) and also meet management and training requirements. Detailed requirements are specif ied in the Shipping Reform (Tax Incentives) 
Act 2012 which can be accessed online see http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012A00053 . 
Such certificates are issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development but 
the tax exemption is granted by the Australian Tax Office. If a shipping operator is registered in 
Australia and meets the requirements in the Shippi ng Reform (Tax Incentives) Act 2012 they will 
qualify for the exemption .  
Page 129, Paragraph 4.147 
Question 
Could Australia inform whether there exists any discrimination between foreign and domestic 
service providers in obtaining industry-specific support to the tourism sector? 
Answer 
As of 1 July 2014, federal tourism grant funding is provided directly to State and Territory 
Governments (primarily through the Tourism Demand  Driver Infrastructure Programme). Each of 
these jurisdictions make direct decisions re garding co-funding partners and proponents 
undertaking projects. Australian government grant programs generally require that businesses be 
registered for GST and fit within prescribed entiti es e.g. private company, non-profit organisation. 
If a service provider meets the individual program eligibility guidelines, they are able to apply for 
grant funding regardless of whether they are a foreign or domestic service provider. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 126 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF INDONESIA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
3.2.2 Tariffs 
3.2.2.2 Applied MFN tariff 
3.2.2.2.2 Tariff dispersion and escalation  
Page 42 Para. 3.17 
"Despite a low overall average tariff rate and large share of duty-free items, tariff peaks in some 
sectors remain a potential distortion and thus a source of inefficiency. In particular, while agriculture continues to face relatively low ta riff rates (1.4%, under the WTO definition of 
agriculture, Table 3.1), average rates for non-agriculture items, notably textiles and clothing 
(8.4%) and PMVs (8.6%) (Table A3.1) remain significantly higher despite recent unilateral 
reductions, thus reflecting sensitivities in these sectors.17 Domestic "tariff peaks" continue to affect 3.9% of tariff li nes (3.7% excluding AVEs)." 
Question 1 & 2 
 Why the average tariff rates for non-agriculture items are still high? 
 Would Australia reduce the tariff rates for textiles and clothing in the future? 
Answers 
Australia's tariff rates are already very low with  m o r e  t h a n  9 9 %  o f  t a r i f f  l i n e s  h a v i n g  a  M o s t  
Favoured Nation rate between 0% and 5%. In addition, over 47% of tariff lines are duty free. In 2015 Australia reduced tariffs on textiles, clothing and footwear to 5%.  
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
3.2.2 Tariffs 3.2.2.6 Tariff concessions and other schemes 
Page 45 Para. 3.25 
"During the review period, Schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995, which lists the range of 
goods and user categories subject to concessional  rates of import duty, was updated by: repealing 
redundant and rarely used concessions; rewording the concessions in plain English; and 
consolidating items of similar coverage under specific headings, for ease of use. The number of concessions was reduced from 100 items to 57 and the number of prescribed by-laws from 150 to 74. The new Schedule 4 came into effect on 1 March 2013 with minimal disruption to industry. 
There are 14 government agencies with policy responsibility for various items. Complexities create 
burdens on business with costs being passed on to consumers; they may also result in inappropriate use of concessions." 
Questions 3 & 4 
 Why did Australia reduce the number of concessions from the previous law? 
 What actions Australia will do in the future to eliminate the complexities caused by the 
authority given to various agencies which responsible in imposing the concessions tariffs? 
Answers 
The reform of Schedule 4 was a result of a review conducted in 2010 by the Better Regulation 
Ministerial Partnership between the then Ministers for Finance and Deregulation; Innovation, 
Industry, Science and Research; and Home Affairs, to simplify the existing tariff concession 
regime. The amendments to Schedule 4 reduce re gulatory red tape and unnecessary complexity. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 127 - 
 
  They have achieved this by consolidating conces sions of similar coverage and removing redundant 
or rarely used concessions. The Australian Customs and Border Protection Service administers Schedule 4 concessions; the reform of Schedule 4 has simplified and streamlined this task. 
In relation to action by the Australian Government to avoid increasing complexity through future 
changes to tariff concessions, the Australian Gove rnment is firmly committed to reducing red tape. 
Any future proposal to introduce or remove re gulation, including tariff concessions, must be 
considered in the context of the Australian Govern ment Guide to Regulation, which aims to reduce 
regulation through adoption of the following principles: 
 Regulation should not be the default option for policy makers: the policy option offering the 
greatest net benefit should always be the recommended option. 
 Regulation should be imposed only when it ca n be shown to offer an overall net benefit. 
 The cost burden of new regulation must be fully offset by reductions in existing regulatory 
burden. 
 Every substantive regulatory policy change mu st be the subject of a Regulation Impact 
Statement. 
 Policy makers should consult in a genuine and timely way with affected businesses, 
community organisations and individuals. 
 Policy makers must consult with each other to avoid creating cumulative or overlapping 
regulatory burdens. 
 The information upon which policy makers base their decisions must be published at the 
earliest opportunity. 
 Regulators must implement regulation wi th common sense, empathy and respect. 
 All regulation must be periodically reviewed to test its continuing relevance. 
 Policy makers must work closely with their portfolio Deregulation Units throughout the policy 
making process. 
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
3.2.7 Standards and other technical requirements 
3.2.2.6 Sanitary and phytosanitary regulations 
3.2.7.2.5 Transparency and technical assistance 
Page 60 Para. 3.67 "Australia has continued to assist developing countries – particularly APEC members through 
capacity building activities under the APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum (FSCF) – to adjust to, 
and comply with, sanitary and phytosanitary measures in their export markets and to improve their capacity to develop and implement their ow n SPS measures based on science.94 As Co-Chair 
of the APEC FSCF, FSANZ has provided guidance and leadership, and has implemented a wide 
range of activities, on a cost-recovery basis, in  areas such as: developing food laws; standards 
and enforcement systems; risk assessment and management; risk communication; food safety 
incidents management; and assessment of food safe ty capacity building needs. Recent capacity 
building activities included workshops on: educating SMEs on food safety standards; improving food inspection capacity based on risk analysis ; and, food allergen management. In addition, 
under the current FSCF action plan, the FSCF is to promote alignment with relevant international 
standards and consistency with WTO obligations, focusing initially on two areas: export certificates 
and pesticide MRLs. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 128 - 
 
  Question 5 
Does Australia have the intention to assist Indonesia through capacity building activities under the 
APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum (FSCF)? 
Answer 
Australia will continue to assist Indonesia as an APEC FSCF member economy through capacity 
building activities through Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ). Specifically, in accordance to the FSCF action plan, Australia as Co-Chair is leading the work on pesticide MRLs, 
which directly promotes alignment with relevant international standards and consistency with WTO 
obligations. 
3.4 Measures Affecting Production and Trade 
3.4.2 Production assistance 
Page 73 Para 3.111 
"Since its previous Review, Australia has continued to provide wide-ranging assistance to 
production, not just in the form of tariff conce ssions and other tax incentives (sections 3.2.2.6, 
3.3.4, and 3.4.1.3), but also in the form of gran ts and concessional loans, which are not generally 
included in its assistance estimates, and regulatory restrictions on competition in certain activities (section 3.4.3.1). Concessional loans are available under the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, 
the Export Finance and Insurance Commission, the Farm Finance Concessional Loan Scheme, the 
Drought Concessional Loan Scheme and the Infrastructure Growth Package programmes (sections 1.2.1, 3.3.5, 4.2.2.2 and 4.3.2 and 4.5.7). Between 2011 and mid-2014 the Department of Industry provided $A 25 million in concessional lo ans. Assistance generally benefits the industry 
receiving it and, if well targeted and designed, can deliver wider community benefits, but can 
come at a cost to other industries, taxpayers, co nsumers, and competitors. There is no legislative 
requirement for conducting programme evaluations in order to assess their cost-effectiveness in 
achieving their stated objectives. Nevertheless, the Government committed to giving broader 
consideration to the effectiveness of existing tax incentives for innovation and industry-funded research in the forthcoming White Paper on Australia's Tax Reform (section 1.4.1)." 
Questions 6, 7 & 8 
 Could Australia more elaborate about "Concessional loans" program? 
 Has the program had a positive impact on production level in Australia?  
 Which sectors have most take advantage for these concessinal loans? 
Answers 
The Australian Government provides a range of loans on terms more favourable than otherwise 
obtainable in the commercial market as a matter of public policy to increase economic activity in 
these areas. In most cases, the Government provides these loans because there is a limited or no 
commercial market. For example, in Australia, the Higher Education Loan Program provides loans that are indexed to CPI to students for their tuition fees. Table 3 on page 8-31 of the 2014-15 
Budget provides a summary of the major loan s provided by the Australian Government. 
3.4 Measures Affecting Production and Trade 
3.4.3 Competition and consumer policy 3.4.3.1 Competition policy 
3.4.3.1.5 Cartel conduct 
Page 78 Para 3.128 "For individuals, cartel conduct is punishable by imprisonment of up to ten years and/or fines of up 
to $A 220,000 per contravention or, under the parallel regime of civil prohibition, fines of up to $A 
500,000 per contravention. Export cartels are exempt from the law. Corporations found guilty of such conduct may be fined up to $A 10 million, three times the value of the illegal benefit or, 
where the benefit cannot be calculated, 10% of the corporate group's annual turnover (whichever WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 129 - 
 
  is greater). In addition to the ACCC, which is re sponsible for investigating allegations of cartel 
conduct and arranging civil proceedings, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), the general centralized prosecutions agency, has responsibility for prosecutions of all indictable federal offences in Australia. In 2012/13, six cartel litigations involving air cargo companies and a 
cable supplier were concluded securing over $A 41 million in fines; litigation was under way in four 
alleged cartel conduct cases (air cargo, cable, fo rklift gas, wire harnesses), two alleged misuse of 
market power (flyash, dynamic currency conversion services), and two alleged anti-competitive 
agreements cases. As at May 2014 there were 12 in-depth investigations and 8 litigations 
ongoing." 
Questions 9 & 10 
 What is the consideration of the Government for the exemption of export cartels? 
 Could Australia give us information on what sectors which conducting export cartels? 
Answers 
Section 51(2)(g) exempts from a number of Part IV prohibitions contracts relating solely to the 
export of goods or supply of services outside Australia provided particulars are submitted to the 
Commission within 14 days of the date on which the agreement is entered into. The register is not open to the public. The ACCC has received approxim ately 23 notifications of export cartels in the 
past five years. 
The following are examples of arrangements that may constitute an export cartel and which would 
be able to be notified to the ACCC under the current exemption.  
 A group of Australian producers that market th eir goods overseas coordinate an agreement 
whereby all member producers meet regularly before and during export negotiations to 
compare information on market conditions in the target market overseas and assess supply volumes from Australia and other countries. At each meeting, the producers agree 
to set a minimum price for their products for export from Australia to the target market 
agree and that each member will endeavour to sell their products at or above this price.  
 A small producer wishes to start selling its product into overseas markets for the first time 
and contracts with a larger producer that has been exporting for some time and has an 
established presence in a number of overseas markets. The large producer markets and sells the small producer's goods overseas effectively on consignment, within a band of acceptable prices agreed with the small producer. 
Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
3.14 Concluding the Doha Round – Bali and Post-Bali Page 17 Para. 3.48 
"Australia remains committed to concluding the Doha Round. Our approach to developing the post-
Bali work programme is that we should focus on elements that are practical and doable, with a view to concluding the Doha Round as soon as possible." 
Question 11 
We would like to know Australia's view on how to drive initiate the Post Bali Programme for the 
conclusion of Doha Development Agenda (DDA) negotiation? 
Answer 
Australia believes it is fundamentally important to finalise the post-Bali work program in order to 
conclude the Doha Round. Australia considers it a necessary condition for concluding the Round that we focus on elements that are practical an d doable and is working with other WTO Members 
to drive these negotiations forward. Agriculture will set the benchmark for ambition in the Round. 
Through our leadership of the Cairns Group we are helping to shape discussions on agriculture. 
Australia is ready to contribute in areas such as non-agricultural market access and services that WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 130 - 
 
  will be needed to balance the package for all Members. We are active in discussions across all 
negotiating groups. Australia has also been supportive of efforts to implement other elements of the Bali package, notably the LDC services waiver, as proper implementation of the Bali decisions will improve the prospects for achieving a meaningful work programme. 
Australia will also host an informal gathering of Trade Ministers in the margins of the Paris OECD 
MCM in early June, which will provide an opportunity  for Ministers to address political blockages to 
conclusion of the post-Bali work program ahead of the July 2015 deadline. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 131 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 2.4 Trade Agreements and Arrangements 
2.4.1 WTO 
Question 1: Page 28, Paragraph 2.14 
The Secretariat notes that "it has also commenced its domestic approval process to ratify the WTO 
Trade Facilitation Agreement". In light of this statement, how is Australia's ratification 
progressing? When does Australia anticipate being able to notify the WTO of its acceptance of the 
TFA? 
Answer 
Australia commenced its domestic approval process for the WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation 
(ATF) in 2014. The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCOT) is required to consider any 
treaty action, and recommended that binding trea ty action take place regarding the ATF in its 
report dated 26 March 2015. Australia will need to seek Executive Council approval to accept the 
ATF. We are expecting Australia will be in a posi tion to formally accept the ATF before the middle 
of 2015. 
Question 2: Page 28, Paragraph 2.14 
Government of Japan welcomes Australia's announcement on 14 November 2014 that it is working 
towards acceding to the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). Could Australia explain the current development for its preparation to initiate the accession process to the Government Procurement Agreement? 
Answer 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. 
Question 3: Page 28, Paragraph 2.14 
Please provide us with the name of the FTAs which Australia has provided the highest level of 
coverage and the lowest level of threshold in Government Procurement Chapter among its FTAs. 
Will Australia submit the same or more ambitious level of the coverage in its initial offer for its GPA 
Accession? 
Answer 
Australia has committed to strong government procurement disciplines and market access 
outcomes in its free trade agreements.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 132 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312  
Page 51 (Para 3.38), Page 52 (Para 3.40) 
Question 
Australia reformed its anti-dumping regime und er the Streamlining the Anti-Dumping System 
Policy which is intended to strengthen the anti-dumping system. Could Australia explain the sixth tranche of legislative reforms in detail? Please elab orate on the changes, particularly with regard to 
the application of the lesser-duty rule. 
Answer 
Legislation for implementing Tranche 6 of the anti-dumping reforms was contained in Customs 
Amendment (Anti-Dumping Measures) Act 2013 and the C ustoms Tariff (Anti-Dumping) 
Amendment Act 2013 which was notified in document G/ADP/N/1/AUS/2/Suppl.12, 21 August 
2013. The legislation commenced 1 January 2014. 
Tranche 6 gave effect to reforms to the anti-dum ping system specified in the then Government's 
response to the report of the non-Government members of the Prime Minister's Manufacturing 
Taskforce Report (announced on 4 December 2012 as  part of the broader Industry and Innovation 
Policy statement).  
Specifically, the reforms in Tranche 6 included the removal of the mandatory consideration of the 
lesser duty rule by the Minister in certain circum stances. Those circumstances relate to 'complex 
cases', specifically: 
 in dumping and/or subsidy cases, where the Australian industry producing like goods 
consists of at least two small and medium enterprises (SMEs);  
 in dumping cases, where there is a finding of a particular market situation in the country of 
export;  
 in subsidy cases, where there is a failure to notify subsidies by the country of export.  
However, if the circumstances above exist, the Minister is not obliged to, but still may, have 
consideration of applying a lesser amount of duty. 
Tranche 6 also introduced two additional reforms:  
1)  Tranche 6 clarified the application of retrospective duties. This improved the alignment of 
Australian legislation with the circumstances in which duties can be imposed retroactively 
under Article 10.6 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; clarified that the Minister is the 
decision maker for certain findings; and improved the transparency of the process. 
2) Tranche 6 introduced a new type of anti-circumv ention inquiry to address 'sales at a loss', 
specifically the avoidance of the intended e ffect of the duty. The new anti-circumvention 
inquiry included a shorter timeframe than other anti-circumvention inquiries. Amendments 
were also made to introduce a termination provision that applies to all types of 
anti-circumvention inquiries.  
Page 10 (Para 17), 109-110 (Para 4.6) 
Question: 
Australia continues to assist the automotive industry through mechanisms such as preferential 
government procurement policies, the luxury car ta x (LCT), high compound tariff rate for second 
hand vehicles and other restriction. Please elaborate, if relevant, on any possible plans to reduce 
the support for the automotive industry.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 133 - 
 
  Answer  
The Australian Government's Tax White Paper process will be a comprehensive review to create a 
better tax system with taxes that are lower, simpler and fairer.  
The first step in this process was the release of a discussion paper titled 'Re:think' (available at 
www.bettertax.gov.au ) on 30 March 2015. Submissions on the discussion paper can be made until 
1 June 2015.  
After these initial discussions, the Australian Government will release an options paper in the 
second half of 2015. This will undergo further community consultation on possible reforms to 
improve the tax system. The Australian Governme nt will then put forward final policies for 
consideration by the Australian people before the next election.  
The Government has committed to considering the luxury car tax in the tax discussion and review 
process outlined above. 
Page 10 (Para 17), 109-110 (Para 4.6) 
Question 
The Secretariat Report states that Australia's industry-specific support for the textiles, clothing, 
footwear and leather industries was drastically cu t and the elimination of the other two remaining 
programs is under consideration. Please provide further information on the support programs 
which were already reduced or are currently under consideration. 
Answer  
As of 1 January 2015, all of Australia's textiles, clothing and footwear (TCF) tariffs have been 
reduced to 5 per cent. In the Federal Budget released on 13 May 2014, the Australian Government 
announced its intention to cease one year earlier than originally intended the two remaining 
significant TCF industry support programs. These programs are the Clothing and Household Textile 
Building Innovative Capability Scheme  and the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Small Business 
Program . Funding for these programs for the 2015/16 financial year was to be $22.5 million and 
$2.5 million respectively. A bill to close these legislated programs is still before the Parliament.  
Report by the Government WT/TPR/G/312  
Page 10 (Para 2.46) 
Question 
Korea welcomes Australia's announcement that it is working towards acceding to the Government 
Procurement Agreement (GPA). Could Australia provide an update on its preparations for launching 
its GPA accession? 
Answer  
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014 and has been en gaging in consultations with stakeholders. No 
decision to accede has yet been taken. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 134 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 2.4.1 WTO 2.14.  Australia is an original Member of the WT O, and grants at least most-favoured-nation (MFN) 
treatment to all its trading partners. It is not a member of the WTO plurilateral Agreements on 
Government Procurement or Trade in Civil Aircraft . However, Australia announced on 14 November 
2014 that it is working towards acceding to the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) 
(section 3.2.8). It has also commenced its domestic approval process to ratify the WTO Trade 
Facilitation Agreement. 
Question 1 
We appreciate if Australia could share with Malaysia status and outcome of domestic consultation 
referred by Minister Andrew Robb in his media release (footnote 13). 
Answer 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. Therefore an 
assessment of the outcome of domestic consultations is not currently available 
3.2.7.1 STANDARDS, TESTING, AND CERTIFICATION 
3.45.  The institutional framework for standards and conformity assessment remains unchanged. It 
consists of four main bodies: Standards Australia, a not-for-profit company encompassing 75 of Australia's leading industry, government and consumer organisations is responsible for the formulation of standards; the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA), and the Joint 
Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand (JAS-ANZ) (section 3.2.7.1.3), the two main 
accreditation bodies57; and the National Measurement Institute (NMI), the government body responsible for physical, chemical, and biological measurement and metrology. The current five-
year long Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between Commonwealth Government (Department 
of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (D IISR)) with Standards Australia and NATA, largely 
the continuation of the previous MOUs, were si gned on 17 and 21 May 2013 respectively. The MOU 
with Standards Australia still requires the development of new or amended standards and setting 
of priorities to be transparent and well-founded, an d ensuring the primary decision criterion is of 
net benefit to the community as a whole. The authorities also indicated that the MOU stipulates that no Australian standard may contravene WTO requirements, national standards should not be 
used as non-tariff barriers, and no new Australian  standard can be developed where an acceptable 
international standard already exists. The Accreditation Board for Standards Development Organisations (ABSDO) accredits other standards development organizations to make Australian 
standards; six organizations other than Standards Australia are now accredited to establish 
Australian standards 
Question 2 
We appreciate if Australia could enlighten us on specific procedures within the MOU for cases 
where deviation from existing international standards is needed. 
Answer 
The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is a high level document that describes the 
responsibilities of the Commonwealth and Standards Australia in collaborating to strengthen 
Australia's national standards system.  The MoU sets out provisions which require Standards Australia to ensure its practices comply with the WTO TBT Agreement and the Code of Good 
Practice. The MoU also requires Standards Australia to utilise accepted international standards to 
the maximum extent possible and only depart wher e there are compelling reasons. The MoU does WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 135 - 
 
  not contain specific procedures for dealing with deviations from international standards. However, 
Standards Australia has a number of Standardisation Guides in place which outline the policies and processes for the development of Australian Standards. There are Standardisation Guides for 'Preparing Standards' and also for the 'Adoption of International Standards'. These guides can be 
found here: 
http://www.standards.org.au/StandardsDevelopmen t/Developing_Standards /Pages/Standardisatio
n-Guides.aspx .  
It is important to note that where standards are made mandatory it is the regulator who decides 
which standards to use depending on their requirements. The Australian Government is committed to regulatory reform as evidenced in its Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda which promotes the adoption of the principle that if a system, service or product has been approved 
under a trusted international standard or risk assessment, then Australian regulators should not 
impose any additional requirements. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 136 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF MEXICO 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Question 1 
Panorama general. Punto 1.2. (P.15) 
¿Qué medidas se contemplan para mitigar los efectos del envejecimiento de la población? 
1.1 Overview. 1.2. (P.15) What measures are contemplated to mitigate the effects of an aging population? 
As set out in the recent 2015 Intergenerational Report, demographic change, including population 
ageing, is expected to contribute to slower real economic and incomes growth over the next 40 years, compared with the past 40 years, as well as contribute to long term fiscal pressures.  
Answer 
Productivity growth will be critical to improv ing living standards over the next 40 years. The 
Government will continue to focus on reforms that can improve the competitiveness of businesses and markets, and provide an environment that en courages entrepreneurship and innovation. Gains 
from higher labour force participation, particularly older Australians and women, will also make a 
contribution.  
Population ageing also puts pressure on Government budgets. The Government's budget repair 
strategy is intended to reduce fiscal pressures over the longer term by addressing unsustainable 
rates of growth in expenditure and government debt, and enable governments to continue to deliver the services the community needs. Fiscal repair will also afford scope for productivity enhancing investments, and improve the resilien ce of the budget to future economic shocks. 
Question 2 
1.3.1 Política monetaria y ca mbiaria. Punto 1.9. (P.19) 
¿Qué medidas se tienen previstas para reducir los efectos negativos del empeoramiento de la 
relación de intercambio y la apreciación del dólar australiano? 
1.3.1 Monetary and exchange policy. Point 1.9. (P.19) What measures are planned to reduce the negati ve effects of declining terms of trade and the 
appreciation of the Australian dollar? 
Answer 
Australia has a highly credible and transparent monetary policy framework that provides for the 
maintenance of medium-term price stability whilst having regard to the implications of monetary 
policy for activity and employment. 
Also, the Australian dollar has depreciated against most major currencies over the past year. Question 3 
1.7 Tendencias y estructura de la inve rsión extranjera. Punto1 .21. (P.27)  
¿Se planea implementar medidas para diversificar y promover la IED a sectores diferentes al 
minero para requilibrar el crecimiento y reducir la dependencia a dicho sector? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 137 - 
 
  1.7 Trends and structure of foreign investment. Point 1.21. (P.27) 
Are you planning to implement measures to diversify and promote FDI in sectors other than 
mining to rebalance growth and reduce dependence on this sector? 
The tapering of the global commodities super-cycle, which is largely a result of lower aggregate 
demand from China, means that all major mineral exporting economies will need to look to other 
sources of FDI in the longer-term. Australia is already a diversified economy, but in recognition of the changing global economic landscape, Australia designated five national priority areas for 
foreign direct investment in February 2014: ag ribusiness and food; resources and energy; major 
infrastructure, tourism infrastructure; and adva nced services, manufacturing and technologies. 
Five senior investment specialists with extensive business experience were appointed to identify new opportunities in each sector. Our investment commissioners overseas are focussed on 
attracting investment into these priority sectors, as well as other parts of the economy to ensure 
balanced and diversified economic growth in the future. 
2.4.2 Regional and preferential agreements (P.30) 
¿Cuál es el contenido ambiental de la Carta Paralela en dicho Acuerdo? ¿Cómo pretende 
implementarse en la agenda comercial?  
2.4.2 Regional and preferential agreements (P.30) 
What is the environmental content of the side-letter? How do you intend to implement it in a 
commercial agenda? 
Answer 
Below are the web links to the side letters on environment for MAFTA. The letters refer these 
matters for future review. 
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/mafta /Pages/side-letter-env ironment-australia-
malaysia.aspx . 
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/mafta /Pages/side-letter-e nvironment-malaysia-
australia.aspx . 
Question 4 
2.4.2 Regional and preferential agreements (P.30) 
¿Cuál es el contenido laboral de la Carta Paralela en dicho Acuerdo? ¿Cómo pretende 
implementarse? ¿Cómo pretende implementarse en la agenda comercial? 
2.4.2 Regional and preferential agreements (P.30) 
What is the labour content of the side-letter? How do you intend to implement it? How do you 
intend to implement it in a commercial agenda? 
Answer 
Below are the web links to the side letters on labour for MAFTA. The letters refer these matters for 
future review. 
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/maf ta/Pages/side-letter -labour-australia-
malaysia.aspx . 
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/maf ta/Pages/side-letter -labour-malaysia-
australia.aspx . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 138 - 
 
  Question 5 
3.38 (P.51) 
En relación con las recientes reformas legislativ as en materia de la regla del derecho inferior, 
¿podría Australia ampliar la información en cuanto a las razones por las cuales considera que en 
las circunstancias señaladas en el documento "ANTI-DUMPING NOTICE NO. 2013/108" se puede 
no realizar el análisis de la regla de l derecho inferior (lesser duty rule)? 
Además de las anteriores, ¿existe algún otro supuesto o circunstancia bajo la cual la autoridad 
investigadora pudiera considerar la posibilidad de no realizar el análisis antes mencionado? 
En relación con las reformas legislativas realizadas por Australia entorno a sus procedimientos 
antielusión, ¿podrían ampliar la información al respecto de la manera en que la autoridad investigadora da a conocer a las partes interesadas los aspectos relevantes para sus 
determinaciones, tomando en cuenta que elimina la etapa de revelación de hechos esenciales? 
3.38 (P.51)  
In connection with the recent legislative reforms in the lesser duty rule, could Australia provide 
further information as to the reasons why it considers the circumstances described in the 
document "ANTI-DUMPING NOTICE NO. 2013/108 "cannot perform the analysis of the lesser duty rule (lesser duty rule)? 
In addition to the above, is there any other circumstance or circumstances under which the 
investigating authority would not consider the analysis above? 
Regarding the legislative reforms undertaken by  Australia around its anti-circumvention 
procedures, could further information about the way the investigating authority discloses to 
stakeholders aspects relevant to its determinations, considering eliminating the stage where 
essential facts are revealed? 
Answer 
The lesser duty rule is not required to be considered in three specific circumstances:  
1. in dumping cases, where there is a finding of a particular market situation for the goods in 
the country of export and normal value cannot be ascertained under the relevant provision 
of Australia's legislation; 
2. in subsidy cases, where the country of export has not complied with World Trade 
Organization (WTO) obligations under Article 25 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures to notify subsidies for the relevant period; and 
3. in dumping and/or subsidy cases, where the Australian industry producing like goods 
consists of at least two small-medium enterprises – whether or not that industry consists of other enterprises. 
The purpose of this amendment was to give discretio n to consider the desirability of fixing a lesser 
duty in certain circumstances which could be characterised as complex. The Parliamentary Secretary is not prevented from considering and a pplying the lesser duty rule where one (or more) 
of these circumstances exist and where it is considered that it would be appropriate to still apply 
the lesser duty rule.  
The three circumstances can introduce complexity into an anti-dumping or countervailing duty 
investigation. In such complex cases, delays can occur in the course of the investigation which has 
an impact on the ability of the injured industry to recover as injury can continue to be sustained 
until the imposition of measures.  
There are no other situations under which the Parliamentary Secretary would not consider possible 
application of the lesser duty rule. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 139 - 
 
  Excluding anti-circumvention inquiries conducted into the avoidance of the intended effect of duty, 
a statement of essential facts is placed on the public record within 110 days from the initiation of an inquiry or investigation. Interested parties have 20 days to provide comments in relation to the statement of essential facts. In anti-circumvention inquiries relating to the avoidance of the 
intended effect of duty, there is no requiremen t to publish a statement of essential facts. The 
Commissioner to the Anti-Dumping Commission must report within 100 days, recommending whether the original notice should be altered. In this type of inquiry, the investigating authority 
determines remedial action is necessary to prevent the circumvention behaviour that may be 
occurring and to achieve a swift resolution to the matter. This is especially the case as it is a 
requirement that this type of circumvention behaviour has already occurred over a reasonable period prior to any action being taken. 
Question 6 
3.42 (P.53)  
Considerando que Australia manifiesta que no cuenta con legislación interna específica para la 
imposición de medidas en materia de salvaguardias y asumiendo que para tales efectos aplica lo 
dispuesto en el Acuerdo sobre Salvaguardias de la OMC y el GATT de 1994, ¿podría Australia ampliar la información en cuanto a la manera en que toma en cuenta la jurisprudencia existente 
en el marco del Órgano de Solución de Diferenc ias de la OMC en este tipo de procedimientos? 
3.42 (P.53) Whereas Australia states it does not have specific domestic legislation to impose safeguard 
measures and assuming for this purpose applies the provisions of the Agreement on Safeguards of 
the WTO and the GATT 1994, could Australia provide further information regarding the way it 
takes into account existing case law under the Dispute Settlement Body of the WTO in these procedures? 
Answer 
The Australian Government, when it receives a safeguard application from Australian domestic 
industry, takes into account the WTO Agreement on Safeguards, GATT 1994 and WTO case law 
when considering the initiation of a safeguard investigation. In addition, the terms of reference 
provided to the Productivity Commission, Australia's competent authority for conducting safeguard investigations, specifically ask the Commission to report on whether the conditions are such that safeguard measures would be justified under the WTO Agreement.  
Question 7 
3.2.7.1.5 Transparency. Punto 3.53 (P.56) 
De acuerdo a lo mencionado, respecto a que "generalmente" se publican las regulaciones técnicas 
en la "Commonwealth of Australia Gazette" ¿Cuándo no se publican en la Commonwealth of 
Australia Gazzette, donde se publican las noticias de las regulaciones técnicas? ¿Por qué no se publican todas las regulaciones técnicas en dicha gaceta?  
3.2.7.1.5 Transparency. Item 3.53 (P.56) 
According to the above, "generally" technical re gulations are published in the "Commonwealth of 
Australia Gazette". When not published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette, where is news of technical regulations published? Why are not all technical regulations published in the gazette? 
Answer 
Technical regulations may be mandated by gove rnment (Commonwealth, State and Territory or 
local council) or called up in a contract.  Each jurisdiction is responsible for publishing notifications. 
For example: WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 140 - 
 
   Information on a range of consumer products an d safety related issues can be obtained from 
the Australian Competition and Consumer Commi ssion (ACCC) or from the Office of Fair 
Trading or Consumer Affairs in each state and territory.  
 Mandatory requirements for building products are the responsibility of the building authority 
in each state.  Information about mandatory requirements can be obtained from the 
Building Authority for that jurisdiction. 
Question 8 
3.54 (P.56) ¿Cuál fue la razón por la que de 31 notificaciones ante la OMC por Australia, siete hayan tenido un 
plazo menor al de 60 días para emitir comentarios? 
3.54 (P.56) 
Why did seven of 31 notifications to the WTO by Au stralia have a period shorter than 60 days for 
comment? 
Answer 
We are not aware of the specific reasons why shorter periods of comment may have been included 
for certain notifications. This would need to be answered on a case by case basis specific to each notification.  
Question 9 
3.2.7.2 Reglamentación sanitaria y fitosanitaria. Punto 3.55. (P.63) 
Las normas técnicas y muchos otros reglamentos son sometidos sistemáticamente a un análisis de 
la relación entre costos y beneficios, ¿Se contempla realizar lo mismo con las medidas sanitarias y 
fitosanitarias? 
3.2.7.2 SPS regulations. Item 3.55. (P.63) Technical standards and many other regulations are routinely subjected to cost benefit analysis, 
does Australia envisage doing the same with SPS? 
Answer 
Australia maintains a strict sanitary and phytosanitary regime, which is proportionate to Australia's 
appropriate level of protection. Our approach to quarantine is designed to preserve Australia's 
favourable pest and disease status and our unique native flora and fauna. The Australian Government maintains its commitment to a robust, science based, framework to protect Australia's unique environment and biosecurity status. Australia bases its national standards as 
closely as possible on those of the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), the International 
Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and the Codex Alimentarius. However, in some cases, relevant standards do not exist or the international standard s do not deliver the level of protection required 
for Australia to maintain its appropriate level of protection. 
The SPS Agreement clearly states the economic factors that can be taken into account during risk 
assessment. The use of cost-benefit analysis does not comply, in our view, with the SPS 
Agreement and Australia therefore has no plans to  conduct a cost-benefit of its SPS measures.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 141 - 
 
  Question 10 
3.89 (P.66) 
El párrafo 3.89 establece que en Australia todavía hay un número relativamente grande de 
entidades públicas involucradas en la producción y comercio de bienes y servicios. ¿Publica 
Australia periódicamente una lista de las entidades públicas que participan en este tipo de 
actividades? 
3.89 (P.66) 
Paragraph 3.89 states that in Australia there is still a relatively large number of public entities 
involved in the production and trade of goods an d services. Does Australia publish periodically a 
list of public entities involved in such activities? 
Answer 
The Commonwealth does not publish a list of all State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) in Australia. A list 
of all Commonwealth Government Trading Enterprises (GTEs) can be accessed on the Department of Finance's website: www.finance.gov.au/property/gbe/ .   
A list of all the Commonwealth' s SOEs can be accessed at www.australia.gov.au . A list of State and 
Territory SOEs can be sourced from State and Territory governments.  
Question 11 
3.117 (P.75) El párrafo 3.117 establece que el informe final resultante de la revisión de la ley y política de 
competencia de Australia seria publicado en marzo de 2015. ¿Ya se publicó dicho informe? 
3.117 (P.75) 
Paragraph 3.117 provides the final report following the review of the law and competition policy in 
Australia would be published in March 2015. Has that report been published? 
Answer 
The Competition Policy Review Final Report was released on 31 March 2015 and the Review has 
concluded. 
Question 12 
3.118 (P.75) El párrafo 3.118 menciona dos autoridades independientes sobre competencia: la Comisión 
Australiana de Competencia y Consumidor (ACCC) y el Consejo Nacional de la Competencia. 
¿Puede explicar con más detalle la relación entre ambas autoridades? ¿Ambas autoridades operan 
bajo el mismo marco legal? 
3.118 (P.75) Paragraph 3.118 mentions two independent competition authorities: the Australian Competition 
and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and the National Competition Council. Can you explain in more 
detail the relationship between the two authoritie s? Do both authorities operate under the same 
legal framework? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 142 - 
 
  Answer  
The role of the ACCC is to enforce the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 and a range of 
additional legislation promoting competition and fair trading, and regulating national infrastructure in certain highly concentrated and monopoly industries with 'bottleneck' characteristics that affect 
competition in upstream and downstream markets.  The ACCC has a range of regulatory functions 
in relation to national infrastructure industries as well as a prices oversight role in some markets where competition is limited.  
The National Access Regime is part of the regula tory framework to facilitate access to services 
provided by means of significant infrastructure facilities. The National Competition Council (NCC) has an advisory role in providing recommendations to the relevant Minister in relation to access to infrastructure services under the National Access Regime. 
Question 13 
3.119 (P. 76) 
El párrafo 3.119 menciona que en marzo 2014 se introdujo al senado una enmienda a la ley de 
Competencia y Consumidor, con el objetivo de remediar el mal uso del poder de mercado, ¿En qué 
estado se encuentra este proyecto de ley actualmente? 
3.119 (P. 76) 
Paragraph 3.119 states that in March 2014 the Senate introduced an amendment to the 
Competition and Consumer Act, in order to remedy the misuse of market power, what state is this draft law in now? 
Answer 
On 20 March 2014, the Senate referred the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Misuse of 
Market Power) Bill 2014 to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 24 June 2014.  The Bill was a private members bill introduced by Senator Nick Xenophon. 
On 17 June 2014, the committee was granted an extension to report by 28 August 2014. On 15 
July 2014, the committee was granted a further extension to report by 4 December 2014. On 4 December 2014, the Senate granted a further extension for the committee to report by 26 
February 2015. 
The Senate Economics Legislation Committee released its Report in February 2015. The Committee 
recommended that the Senate not pass the bill. 
Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
Question 14 
2.5.2 Examen de la política de competencia (P.7) 
¿Qué acciones se planean implementar para fomentar los procesos competitivos en interés de los 
consumidores? 
2.5.2 Review of Competition Policy (P.7) What actions are planned for implementation to promote competitive processes in the interest of 
consumers? 
Answer 
The Government is carefully considering the Harper Competition Policy Review Final Report, 
including undertaking public consultation on the recommendations before announcing next steps. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 143 - 
 
  This input will inform the Government's response to the report later in the year. The Government 
supports the broad direction of the Final Report, promoting more dynamic, competitive and well-functioning markets. 
Question 15 
3.4 Disposiciones de Australia en mate ria de bioseguridad. Punto 3.9 (P.14) 
¿Qué recomendaciones de partes interesadas e interlocutores comerciales se han tomado en 
cuenta para la elaboración de reglamentos y políticas sobre riesgo asociado a las importaciones 
con arreglo al proyecto de Ley de Bioseguridad de 2014? 
3.4 Provisions Biosecurity Australia. Point 3.9 (P.14) What recommendations of stakeholders and business partners are taken into account in the 
development of regulations and policies on risks associated with imports under draft Biosecurity 
Act 2014? 
Answer 
The Australian Government has consulted with both domestic and international stakeholders 
during the development of the Biosecurity Bill 2014 (Biosecurity Bill). Consistent with Australia's 
obligations as a signatory to the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement), relevant SPS notifications have been provided to WTO members 
during the development of the legislation. All submissions received in relation to the Biosecurity 
Bill have been taken into consideration during its development. 
Regulations and policies to support the operation of the Biosecurity Bill are currently being drafted. 
Based on feedback from stakeholders, the Aust ralian Government has undertaken an examination 
of Australia's import risk analysis process. This examination considered all concerns and comments 
from industry bodies and international trading partners on Australia's import risk assessment framework. A final report on this examination is yet to be published. A discussion paper on the 
examination of the import risk analysis process is currently publically available on the Australian 
Government's Department of Agriculture website http://www.agriculture.gov.au/biosecurity/risk-
analysis/ira/iraexamination/ . 
The Australian Government will consider the outc omes of the examination in the development of 
regulations and policies for conducting biosecurity import risk analyses under the Biosecurity Bill. There will be further opportunities for engagement as the Biosecurity Bill 2014 regulations and underlying administrative policies are developed. 
Question 16 
3.4 Disposiciones de Australia en mate ria de bioseguridad. Punto 3.7 (P.14) 
¿El proyecto de Ley de Bioseguridad a que refiere considera aspectos de etiquetado para 
Organismos Genéticamente Modificados? 
3.4 Provisions Biosecurity Australia. Point 3.7 (P.14) Does the draft Biosafety Law consider Genetically Modified Organisms with respect to labelling? 
Answer 
The Biosecurity Bill 2014 does not address details around labelling of GMOs. 
GM foods, whether grown in Australia or overseas, are not approved for sale unless they have 
been assessed as safe for human consumption by Food Standards Australia and New Zealand 
(FSANZ). Any approved foods must be labelled in accordance with the Australia New Zealand Food 
Standards code to enable consumers to make informed choices. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 144 - 
 
  Further information regarding the labelling of GM foods is available on the FSANZ website at: 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/ gmfood/labelling/p ages/default.aspx . 
Question 17 
3.11 Comercio y medio ambiente. Punto 3.40. (P.18) 
¿Cómo considera e incorpora Australia la labor y las directrices de otros foros, tales como APEC, en 
el proceso de la OMC relativo a la liberalización del comercio internacional de bienes y servicios ambientales? 
3.11 Trade and environment. Item 3.40. (P.18) 
How does Australia consider and incorporate the work and guidelines from other forums such as 
APEC and the WTO process on liberalization of international trade in environmental goods and services? 
Answer 
The WTO Environmental Goods Agreement negotiation builds on the list identified for applied tariff 
reduction in APEC and has also considered earlier WTO processes that considered liberalisation of 
environmental goods. 
Question 18 
3.11 Comercio y medio ambiente. Punto 3.40. (P.18) 
¿Cuáles fueron los principales desafíos para la incorporación de los capítulos ambientales en los 
tres acuerdos de libre comercio a que refieren? 
3.11 Trade and environment. Item 3.40. (P.18) What were the main challenges of incorporating environmental chapters in the three FTAs referred 
to? 
Answer 
Generally the challenge of including environmental chapters in FTAs stem from the mutual concern 
of parties in relation to environmental issues, where these parties may take different legal and 
policy approaches. The inclusion of environmen tal chapters in the three FTAs referred to, 
demonstrates that many of the challenges were overcome between the parties. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 145 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF NEW ZEALAND 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 SECTION 3: TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE Biosecurity 
Section 3.2.7.2.2, page  57, paragraph 3.58 
Section 3.2.7.2.2, paragraph 3.58 states that "During the review period, Australia pursued reforms 
towards developing a modern and responsive system that facilitates trade while managing 
biosecurity risks offshore, at the border and onshore in line with the recommendations of a 2008 
independent review." 
Questions 1 & 2 
 What is the intent and substance of the new biosecurity legislation? 
 How will these reforms facilitate trade while managing biosecurity risks? 
Answers 
On 7 July 2014, the Australian Government announced its plan to progress the Biosecurity Bill 
2014 (the Bill) to the Australian Parliament to replace the Quarantine Act 1908. The legislation 
package was debated and passed the House of Representatives on 9 February 2015. It was introduced into the Upper House (Senate) of the Australian Parliament on 10 February 2015 and is 
being considered. 
The Bill is largely based on the legislation previously introduced into Parliament in 2012. The 
biosecurity legislation will provide a modern regulatory framework for the Australian Government to manage the risk of pests and diseases entering Australian territory and causing harm to animal, 
plant and human health, the environment and the economy.  
Key features of the Biosecurity Bill 2014 include: 
• A strong legislative framework that clearly sets out the powers that can be exercised by 
officials as well as the requirements of those being regulated. 
• New powers to manage risks onshore and in Australia's marine environment. • The ability to impose a minimum regulatory impact whilst still achieving the best 
biosecurity. 
• Flexible tools to target non-compliant activities, whilst reducing the burden on those who 
are compliant. 
The legislation has been designed to be consistent with Australia's rights and obligations under the 
WTO and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Health Regulations. It will also 
enable Australia to manage ballast water consistent with the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments. 
The Biosecurity Bill includes a definition of Australia's Appropriate Level of Protection (ALOP). This 
provides additional certainty to importers and tr ading partners that the ALOP is applied when 
undertaking risk assessments to determine if, an d under what conditions, goods may be brought 
into Australia. 
To enable a smooth transition, the Biosecurity Bill 2014 and its supporting Bills, are currently 
drafted to start twelve months after they receive passage through Parliament. Information on the WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 146 - 
 
  Biosecurity Bill has been provided in previous SPS notifications and Australia will update WTO 
Members through future SPS notifications when the status of the legislation changes. 
We do not expect any significant or adverse changes for trading partners with the introduction of 
the new legislation.  
Further information on the Biosecurity legislation will be released at: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au /biosecuritylegislation  as the Australian Parliamentary process 
advances. 
Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
SECTION 3: TRADE AND INVESTMENT POLICY Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement (ANZCERTA) 
Section 3.18.2, page 19-20, paragraph 3.66 
Section 3.18.2, paragraph 3.66 states, "The Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations 
Trade Agreement (ANZCERTA) entered into force on 1 January 1983 and covers substantially all trans-Tasman trade in goods and services." And;  
"The Trade in Services Protocol brought services into ANZCERTA from January 1989, providing for 
free trade in services in all but a very small numbe r of areas listed as inscriptions in an Annex to 
the Protocol. The Protocol is reviewed from time to time to ensure the scope for liberalising trade 
by removing remaining inscriptions is regularly tested." 
Questions 3 & 4 
 What impact has ANZCERTA had on trade between Australia and New Zealand since entering 
into force? 
 What additional Protocols have been put in place since the last review? 
Answers 
Since ANCERTA came into force in 1983, two-way trade in goods between the two countries has 
expanded at an average annual growth rate of 6.9 per cent (1983-2013). More recently, two-way 
trade in goods and services grew 21 per cent between 2003 and 2013.  Two-way investment grew at an average annual rate of 14.4 per cent be tween 1983 and 2013. Between 2003 and 2013 total 
two-way trans-Tasman investment grew 83.2 per cent (to $111.3 billion).  
The Protocol on Investment to ANZCERTA, which entered into force in March 2013, is the only 
additional Protocol to have been put in place since the last review in 2011.  
SECTION 2: ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 
Small business policy agenda 
Section 2.5.3, page 7, paragraph 2.17 Section 2.53, paragraph 2.17 states "The Australian Government has a long-term policy agenda to 
drive economic growth, reduce red tape burden s for business, and improve productivity and 
competitiveness." 
Questions 5 & 6 
 Could the Australian Government please provide further details on its efforts to reduce red-
tape burdens for business? 
 How will these measures assist Australian and foreign businesses? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 147 - 
 
  Answers 
A major focus of the Government's deregulation policy is to reduce the cost to business in 
complying with Commonwealth regulation. This includes several key reforms to alleviate compliance costs for small business, who often feel a disproportionate impact of regulation. 
To reduce the stock of existing regulations, the Government has a red tape reduction target of $1 
billion per year for businesses, individuals and co mmunity organisations. Since the 2013 election, 
the Government has announced more than $2.45 billio n in red tape savings. To stem the flow of 
new regulation, all regulatory proposals must be accompanied by a Regulation Impact Statement. 
Any change in the burden imposed by a new regulation must be costed and any increase must be offset. 
Because the way regulators administer regulation ca n also have a major effect on productivity, the 
Government has developed a Regulator Performance Framework that will apply from 1 July 2015. 
This will allow for the comprehensive assessment of regulator performance and their engagement with stakeholders.  
Reducing the regulatory burden assists Australian  and foreign business by freeing up time that 
would otherwise be spent meeting red tape requirements, by reducing barriers to entry in the marketplace and by alleviating barriers to growth. With lower compliance costs, business will have 
more time and resources to focus on developing and expanding their business, leading to greater 
wealth and employment.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 148 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312  
Page 53, paragraph 3.2.7.1 (3.45) 
Question 
Could Australian Government provide details of the content of the MOU, specifically on trade? This 
is to seek assurance that the new standard will not be trade restrictive to developing countries like Nigeria . 
Answer  
The MOU between the Australian Government and Standards Australia can be found on the 
Department of Industry and Science website at: http://www.industry.gov.au/industry/IndustryInitiat ives/TradePolicies/TechnicalBarrierstoTrade/Pa
ges/Library%20Card/StandardsAustraliaMOUsigned17May2013.aspx .  
Page 59, paragraph 3.2.7.24 (3.64) 
Question: 
Since March, 2010, Australia has implemented a new policy for beef imports allowing all countries, 
including those which have experienced cases of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), to 
apply to export beef to Australia. Canada, the United States, Japan and Netherlands have all 
applied to the Department of Agriculture. The Impo rt Risks Analysis (IRAs) for beef from the first 
t h r e e  w e r e  p u t  o n  h o l d  a s  a  r e s u l t  o f  " s top the clock" provision of the Quarantine 
Regulations 2000. 
Could Australian Government provide in details th e provision of the Quarantine Regulations 2000? 
Is there technical assistance provided to meet the standards? 
Answer 
Detailed information on Australia's Quarantine Regulations 2000 can be found on Australia's 
Commonwealth Legislation website ComLaw: 
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2010C00203/Download . 
Australia has provided SPS-related technical assistance. We report on this assistance bi-annually. 
Our last report was provided in G/SPS/GEN/717/ADD.4.  
Page 60, paragraph 3.2.7.2.5 (3.67) 
Question Australia has continued to assist developing countries- particularly APEC members through 
capacity building activities under the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Food Safety 
Cooperation Forum, to adjust to and comply with, SPS measures in their exports markets and to improve their capacity to develop and implem ent their own SPS measures based on science. 
Could the Australian Government extend to Nigeria the capacity building granted to Association of 
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)?  
Answer  
As mentioned above, Australia provides assistance  to APEC members under the APEC Food Safety 
Cooperation Forum. Nigeria is not a member of AP EC. Australia's SPS-related technical assistance WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 149 - 
 
  to the APEC Food Safety Cooperation Forum is incl uded in our bi-annual technical assistance report 
to the WTO SPS Committee Secretariat (see G/SPS/GEN/717/ADD.4).  
Australia's technical assistance and capacity building programs focus primarily on the Indo-Pacific 
region. Funding for SPS-related technical assistance is used to engage state agencies and research 
organisations with specific expertise in the Asia-Pacific region. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 150 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF NORWAY 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Question 1 
With reference to para 4.123 in the Secretariat's report (WT/TPR/S/312) we understand that the 
functioning of the Coastal Trading Act 2012 is bein g evaluated. There seems to be questions as to 
whether the intentions of the Act have been met.  The Norwegian shipping industry has expressed 
concerns about time-consuming and complicated procedures for obtaining waivers. We would 
therefore be interested in hearing more about th e evaluation process and what you estimate would 
come out of it. 
Answer 
The Australian Government is working to help build a more competitive and efficient shipping 
industry and is committed to reforming the coastal shipping sector. The Australian Government is 
currently considering a range of policy options relating to coastal shipping and will make a public announcement regarding any changes to existing policy in due course. 
Question 2 
We are interested in information about local content requirements (including use of local crew) 
applicable to suppliers of maritime offshore services related to oil and gas exploration and 
production on the Australian continental shelf, in specialised vessels such as supply vessels, 
anchor handling vessels and drilling rigs. Could Australia please provide the relevant information on this topic? 
Answer 
As far as the Department of Industry and Science is aware, there are no specific mandated local 
content requirements which apply to maritime offshore services related to oil and gas exploration and production on the Australian continental shel f. There is, however, the requirement that all 
major projects in Australia with capital expend iture of $500 million or more must develop and 
implement an Australian Industry Participation (AIP) plan. AIP plans set out how companies will 
provide full, fair and reasonable opportunity for Australian industry to participate in a project. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 151 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312  
p.91 4.11 
Question 
In 4.11 paragraph of the Secretariat report has in dicated that during the review period Australia 
initiated policy initiatives such as 'Sustainable Agriculture stream' 
Could Australia provide details of product specific initiatives under this scheme? 
Answer 
The previous programme, Caring for our Country 2013-18 , had a Sustainable Agriculture stream 
that promoted sustainable food production, innovation, land management and a skilled community. Information on the projects covered by this programme can be found at: 
http://www.nrm.gov.au/news-and-resour ces/resources/previous-programmes . Caring for our 
Country  ceased in December 2014 (Regional Delivery) and March 2015 (Community Landcare 
Grants). Caring for our Country  has been replaced by the National Landcare Programme . 
The National Landcare Programme  2014-18 has two funding streams, national and regional. It 
invests funds over four years in projects that address both environmental and sustainable agricultural issues. The National Landcare Programme's sustainable agriculture component 
promotes sustainable food production, innovation, land and weed and pest animal management, 
and a skilled community. Information on projects supported by this programme can be found at: 
http://www.nrm.gov.au/national/contin uing-investment/innovation-grants  
http://www.nrm.gov.au/regional   
http://www.nrm.gov.au/national/25t h-anniversary-landcare-grants   
p.97 4.29 
Question: 
In 4.29 paragraph of the secretariat report indica tes that competitive grants were provided during 
the review period to improve the long-term sustainability of fisheries displaced by the marine reserves.  
Could Australia share its experience about the usefulness of these grants in ensuring long term 
sustainability? 
Answer 
The Australian Government has commissioned an independent review into the Commonwealth 
Marine Reserves established in November 2012. The Review is due to be completed in mid-2015; 
while the Review is continuing, the Fisheries Adjustment Assistance Package (FAAP) has been placed on hold. Prior to the commencement of the Review in September 2014, no assistance had 
been provided under the FAAP. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 152 - 
 
  P.66 3.3.3 State Trading 3.89 
Question 
In paragraph 3.3.3 of the secretariat report indicates that according to Australia's STE (State 
Trading Enterprise) notifications under the review pe riod Australia's export of rice have witnessed 
sharp increase, rice sector remains outside the domain of competition commission.  
Could Australia share its plan for phasing out public sector role in rice exports? Answer  
All rice grown in New South Wales (NSW) that is not sold domestically to an authorised buyer is 
divested from producers and becomes the property  of the NSW Rice Marketing Board (the Board). 
The Board seeks to ensure the best possible return s from rice sold outside Australia, based on the 
quality differentials or attributes of Australian rice. The Board has appointed Ricegrowers Limited 
(trading as SunRice) as its sole exporter.  
The Board does not negotiate contracts for the sale of rice. All rice trading is conducted on behalf 
of the Board by Authorised Buyers. Authorised Buyers are able to freely buy and sell rice grown in 
NSW on the domestic market in Australia. All sales contracts are entered into on a commercial 
basis. SunRice has no obligation to set a benchmark price and has not done so. Export prices are determined by the market for Australian rice at levels influenced by the quality of the rice and 
prevailing world prices. 
Australia has progressively reduced the number of State Trading Enterprises (STEs) with export 
monopoly powers from seven in 2004 to one in 2015. The revised draft WTO modalities for agriculture (TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4) would require WTO Members to remove the export monopoly 
powers of STEs. Australia is committed to the removal of STE export monopoly powers as part of a 
final Doha Round outcome. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 153 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF PARAGUAY 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312  
2.40 
Question 
In Section 2.40 is mentioned that Australia ha s contributed to the Trust Fund for WTO needs 
assessment on Trade Facilitation. In this regard, it is queried whether the Government of Australia will allocate funds for the implementation of th e provisions of the Agreement, designated as 
Category C by country Developing and Least Developed? 
Answer 
Australia recognises the challenges that developing and least developed countries face in 
undertaking trade facilitation. We have assisted where we can. For example, Australia contributed 
AUD 400,000 to the WTO Trust Fund for Trade Facilitation Needs Assessment in 2013. More 
recently, Australia has committed AUD 6,000,000 (over three years) to the World Bank's Trade Facilitation Support Program (TFSP) and pled ged AUD 1,000,000 to the WTO Trade Facilitation 
Agreement Facility to help developing countries implement the WTO Agreement on Trade 
Facilitation.  
4.125 and 4.126 
Question: About points 4.125 and 4.126 concerning the introduction of changes in regulations for the 
shipping industry; has it been possible to measure its impact on trade? 
Answer 
• There are currently no vessels on the Australian International Shipping Register, so it is not 
possible to measure its impact on trade.  
• The Navigation Act 2012 (the Act) replaced the former Navigation Act 1912 with a 
contemporary legislative framework for maritime safety regulations. The Act is underpinned by 
internationally agreed standards and is not expe cted to have a measurable impact on trade. 
4.104 
Question In Section 4.104 is mentioned that the rules were revised in telecommunications related to spectra 
for an efficient allocation thereof; and though the experiences of liberalization could we conclude that this would promote trade in services in this subsector of services and others, also indicated in 
paragraph 4.101? 
Answer 
The review of Australian's spectrum management framework commenced in May 2014, with the 
purpose of maximising the public benefit derived from spectrum. The recommendations of the 
review are currently being considered by the Aust ralian Government and are not available at this 
time. However a public consultation paper, Spec trum Review – Potential Reform Directions, was 
released in November 2014 that outlined a number of proposals under consideration. This includes 
proposals that would encourage innovation  and more efficient use of spectrum. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 154 - 
 
  Please visit http://www.communications.gov.au/spectrumreview  to view the consultation paper 
and obtain more information on the review. 
3.18 
Question 
In paragraph 3.18 mentions that the service sect or accounts for 70% of GDP, and also Australia 
introduced several reforms in this sector, especially unilateral reform measures affecting specific sectors such as the financial sector, the transport sector and logistics or sector of higher 
education. In this regard, could Australia give further details of the reforms? 
Answer 
Australia continues work to remove red tape burden and support small businesses to make 
Australia more competitive and to drive more jobs and higher living standards. 
The Government has initiated several reviews to identify areas of reform, including: 
- The Tax White Paper 
- The Competition Policy review 
- The Financial Systems Inquiry 
Discussions papers (on the Tax White Paper) and Review Reports (for the Harper Competition 
Review and the Murray Financial System Inquiry) can be accessed on public websites. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 155 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF PERU 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 3.2. Medidas que afectan dire ctamente a las importaciones 
3.2.2. Aranceles 
3.2.2.2. Arancel NMF aplicado 
3.2.2.2.1. Estructura 
Par. 3.16 Un pequeño número de líneas arancelarias (0,3%) sigue sujeto a tipos no ad valorem, 
que tienden a ocultar tipos arancelarios relativamente altos e incluyen un tipo específico de 1,22 
dólares australianos por kg aplicado a cinco líneas arancelarias (quesos y requesón); un tipo alternativo del 5% o de 0,45 dólares australianos por kg, si este importe es menor, aplicado a cuatro líneas arancelarias (jugos de frutas); y un tipo compuesto del 5% (10% en 2006), más 
12.000 dólares australianos por unidad, aplicado a oc ho líneas arancelarias (vehículos usados o de 
segunda mano), que, según las autoridades, apenas se ha aplicado desde 2011. El promedio de los equivalentes ad valorem (EAV) en el período objeto de examen siguió oscilando entre el 10,2% 
y el 27,1% para los tipos específicos, hasta el 5% para los tipos mixtos, y entre el 89,5% y el 
215,4% para los tipos compuestos (incluido el componente ad valorem de 5 puntos porcentuales). Estos EAV son los tipos arancelarios aplicados más altos en vigor. 
3.TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
3.2.Measures directly affecting imports 
3.2.2. Duty 3.2.2.2. MFN applied duty 
3.2.2.2.1. Structure 
Par. 3.16 A small number of tariff lines (0.3%) re main subject to non-ad valorem tariffs, which 
tend to conceal relatively high tariff rates and include a specific type of A $ 1.22 per kg applied to 
five tariff lines (cheese and cottage cheese); an  alternative rate of 5% or A $ 0.45 per kg, 
whichever is lower, applied to four tariff lines (fruit juices); and 5% (10% in 2006), plus $ 12,000 Australians per unit applied to eight tariff lines (used cars or second hand) compound type, which, 
according to authorities, have hardly been im plemented since 2011. The average the ad valorem 
equivalents (AVEs) in the period under review continued to oscillate between 10.2% and 27.1% for specific types, up to 5% for mixed types, and between 89.5% and the 215.4% for composite types (including the ad valorem 5 percentage points). These EAV tariff rates are the highest duties 
in place. 
3.2.2.3. Arancel consolidado Par. 3.19 La Lista de concesiones arancelarias de Australia ha seguido basándose en el Sistema 
Armonizado de Designación y Codificación de Mercancías de 2002. Con arreglo a su versión de 
2012 facilitada por las autoridades australianas, en 2014 el 96,6% (96,5% según la versión del SA 2007) de las líneas arancelarias estaban consolidadas. Las consolidaciones abarcan el 100% de las 
líneas arancelarias correspondientes a productos agropecuarios y el 96,2% de las correspondientes 
a productos no agrícolas (según las definiciones de la OMC). Los tipos consolidados oscilan entre 0 y 29% (patatas elaboradas) en el caso de los productos agrícolas, y entre 0 y 55% (vestido) en el caso de los productos no agrícolas. Los tipos consolidados de Australia exceden actualmente de los 
tipos NMF aplicados en casi siete puntos porcentuales; las diferencias máximas de hasta 55 puntos 
porcentuales afectan al vestido. Las diferencias entre los tipos consolidados y los aplicados pueden dar margen a Australia para aumentar los aranceles aplicados, especialmente en los sectores 
sensibles, aunque durante el período objeto  de examen no recurrió a esa flexibilidad. 
Question 1 
Pregunta.- Podría Australia indicar si las líneas arancelarias sujetas a tipos no ad valorem que se 
mencionan en el párrafo 3.16 están consolidadas en la Lista de concesiones arancelarias de 
Australia en la OMC que se describe en el párrafo 3.19 y, de ser así, qué niveles alcanzan dichas consolidaciones.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 156 - 
 
  3.2.2.3. Bound tariff 
Par. 3.19 The list of tariff concessions in Austra lia has continued to be based on the Harmonized 
Commodity Description and Coding 2002. Under its 2012 version provided by the Australian authorities, in 2014 96.6% (96.5% according to the HS version 2007) of tariff lines were 
consolidated. The bindings cover 100% of tariff lines for agricultural products and 96.2% of those 
for non-agricultural products (as defined by the WTO). Bound rates range between 0 and 29% (prepared potatoes) in the case of agricultural products, and 0 to 55% (dress) for non-agricultural 
products. Australia's bound rates currently exceed applied MFN rates by almost seven percentage 
points; the maximum differences of up to 55 percentage points affecting textiles. The differences between bound and applied rates may provide scope to Australia to raise tariffs, especially in 
sensitive sectors, although during the period und er review did not resort to such flexibility. 
Could Australia indicate whether tariff lines subject to non-ad valorem rates, mentioned in 
paragraph 3.16, are consolidated in the List of Tariff Concessions Australia notifies the WTO, as described in paragraph 3.19 and, if so, what levels reach these bindings? 
Answer 
Australia's non-ad valorem duties are at the bind ing in relation to the $1.22/kg applied to cheese 
products which are subject to a TRQ. Australia's bound commitment on these products is 
$1.22/kg. The 5%, or, if lower, $0.45/kg TSS (total soluble sugar) duty is applied below Australia's 
bound commitments for fruit juice goods – Australia's binding on these goods is 10 per cent and the structure of the applied non-ad valorem duty on fruit juice has a ceiling of 5 per cent. Australia's commitments on used or second hand vehicles are unbound. 
HS 2007 Description WTO bound % MFN % 
0406.10.00 -Fresh (unripened or uncured) cheese, 
including whey cheese, and curd $1.22/kg $1.220/kg 
0406.20.00 -Grated or powdered cheese, of all kinds $1.22/kg $1.220/kg 
0406.30.00 -Processed cheese, not grated or powdered $1.22/kg $1.220/kg 
0406.40.90 ---Other $1.22/kg $1.220/kg 
0406.90.90 ---Other $1.22/kg $1.220/kg 
2009.21.00 --Of a Brix value not exceeding 20 10.0% 5%, or, if lower, 
$0.45/kg TSS 
2009.29.00 --Other 10.0% 5%, or, if lower, 
$0.45/kg TSS 
2009.31.90 ---Other 10.0% 5%, or, if lower, 
$0.45/kg TSS 
2009.39.90 ---Other 10.0% 5%, or, if lower, 
$0.45/kg TSS 
8703.21.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each 
8703.22.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each 
8703.23.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each 
8703.24.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each 
8703.31.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each 
8703.32.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each 
8703.33.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each 
8703.90.11 ----Used or secondhand vehicles U 5%, and $12,000 
each WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 157 - 
 
  3.2 Medidas que afectan directamente a las importaciones 
3.2.6 Medidas comerciales especiales 3.2.6.1 Medidas antidumping y compensatorias 
Question 2  
Pregunta.- Podría indicar los procedimientos seguidos bajo la nueva legislación sobre materia 
antidumping. 
Podría brindar detalles sobre la labor del Asesor sobre medidas comerciales correctivas 
internacionales para las pymes. 
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Imports 3.2.6 Contingency measures 
3.2.6.1 antidumping and countervailing measures 
Question.- the proceedings under the new legislation on antidumping. It could provide details on the work of the Advisory on International Trade Remedies for SMEs. 
Answer 
The International Trade Remedies Advisor (ITRA) assists Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) 
which wish to access the anti-dumping system. The primary work of the ITRA includes: 
 Assisting domestic industry SMEs to bring anti-dumping or countervailing investigation 
applications; and 
 Assisting domestic importer SMEs to bring duty assessment applications. 
Further information on the ITRA service can be found at: http://www.business.gov.au/grants-and-
assistance/import-export/International-Trade-R emedies-Advisory-Service/Pages/default.aspx . 
3.3.4 Ayuda a las exportaciones 
3.3.4.1 Programa de subvenciones para el desarrollo de mercados de exportación 
(Programa EMDG) 
Par. 3.90. El Programa EMDG, el principal programa de asistencia financiera de Australia, está 
dirigido principalmente a las pequeñas empresas, aunque también a las medianas, en todos los 
sectores de la economía 
Question 3 
Pregunta.- ¿Cómo se define en Australia pequeñas y medianas empresas para efectos del 
Programa EMDG? 
3.3.4 Support to exports 
3.3.4.1 Grants Program for the development of export markets (EMDG program) Par. 3.90. The EMDG program, the main program of financial assistance from Australia, is aimed 
primarily at small businesses, but also the medium, in all sectors of the economy 
How are SMEs defined in Australia for the purposes of the EMDG Program? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 158 - 
 
  Answer 
The Export Market Development Grants Act 1997 does not define SMEs. However, to be eligible for 
the scheme, applicants must not have turnover of  more than $AU50,000,000 for the grant year in 
which they apply. 
3.4.3 Política de competencia y consumo 
3.4.3.1 Política de competencia  3.4.3.1.3 Exenciones de la CCA 
Par. 3.124. Muchas de estas exenciones de la Ley de Competencia y Consumo habían sido 
examinadas previamente por la Comisión de Productividad en el marco de sus investigaciones. También son objeto de examen en el marco del actual proceso de revisión de la política de competencia de Australia. Las excepciones se establecen por decisión del Gobierno de turno, y no 
de la ACCC. Sin embargo, en términos generales, se han aplicado por motivos de política pública 
que, en el momento de la aplicación de la excepción, se han considerado más importantes que mantener el statu quo de las disposiciones pertinentes en materia de competencia 
Question 4 
Pregunta.- ¿Las excepciones están sujetas a algún tipo de evaluación posterior, sea con el cambio 
de Gobierno o por algún tipo de modificación en las políticas públicas australianas? 
TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
3.4.3 Competition and Consumer Policy 
3.4.3.1 Competition policy 3.4.3.1.3 Exemptions from CCA 
Par. 3.124. Many of these exemptions from th e Competition and Consumer Act had previously 
been examined by the Productivity Commission in the course of their inquiries. They are also 
under review as part of the ongoing review of co mpetition policy in Australia. The exceptions are 
established by decision of the government of the day, and not the ACCC. However, generally 
speaking, have applied for public policy at the time of application of the exception, are considered more important than maintaining the status quo of the relevant provisions on competition 
Exceptions are subject to some form of further a ssessment, either with the change of government 
or some type of change in Australian public policy? 
Answer 
The Harper Review has recommended a range of changes to the Competition and Consumer Act 
2010. The Government is currently considering the 56 recommendations in the Final Report and 
undertaking public consultation on the recommendat ions before announcing next steps. This input 
will inform the Government's response to the report later in the year. 
3.4.3.1 Política de competencia  
3.4.3.1.1 Marco general 3.4.3.1.4 Fusiones y adquisiciones 
Pár. 3.127 (…) La ACCC llevó a cabo exámenes, púb licos o confidenciales, de 55 fusiones (141 en 
2010-2011). En 2013-2014, la ACCC autorizó sin condiciones el 65% (77% en 2012-2013) de las fusiones sometidas a examen público o confidencial y el 94% de todas las fusiones (incluidas las que fueron objeto de valoración previa). 
Question 5  
Pregunta.- Podría indicar los motivos por los cuales se denegaron las autorizaciones para fusiones 
y a qué sectores económicos pertenecían. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 159 - 
 
  3.4.3 Competition and Consumer Policy 
3.4.3.1 Competition policy 3.4.3.1.1 General framework 3.4.3.1.4 Mergers and acquisitions 
Para. 3.127 (...) The ACCC conducted examinatio ns, public or confidential, 55 M (141 in 2010-
2011). In 2013-2014, the ACCC cleared unconditionally 65% (77% in 2012-2013) mergers under public or confidential examination and 94% of al l mergers (including those which were the subject 
of previous assessment). 
The reasons why authorizations for mergers and which economic sectors belonged were denied. 
Answer 
In the financial year13/14, there were 4 mergers which the ACCC decided to oppose outright. The 
sectors involved are listed below along with a link to the ACCC decisions outlining the reasons. 
Health  
 Sonic Healthcare Limited - proposed acquisition of assets of Delta Imaging Group 
http://registers.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1130860/fromItemId/751043 . 
 Healthscope Limited - proposed acquis ition of Brunswick Private Hospital 
http://registers.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1179110/fromItemId/751043 . 
Energy 
 AGL Energy Limited - proposed acquisition of Macquarie Generation assets in NSW 
http://registers.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1147200/fromItemId/751043 . 
Fuel 
 Peregrine Corporation - proposed acquisition of Caltex Fullarton in Adelaide, South Australia 
http://registers.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/1178130/fromItemId/751043 . 
Ten mergers were cleared subject to remedies. Thes e involved the following sectors: health; retail 
shopping centres; financial services; ports; rural electronics products; steel products; and fuel. 
3.4.3.3 Política de protección de los consumidores Par. 3.133: En 2013 y 2014 se dio prioridad a la protección de los consumidores en los siguientes 
ámbitos: telecomunicaciones y energía; consumo en línea; consumo en sectores muy 
concentrados; lucha contra el fraude; complejidad y deslealtad en los contratos; reclamaciones en materia de credibilidad, en particular las que afectan negativamente al proceso competitivo y a las pequeñas empresas; declaraciones que inducen a error sobre la tarificación de las emisiones de 
carbono; garantías para los consumidores; cuestiones que afectan a las comunidades indígenas; y 
cuestiones relativas a la inocuidad de los productos que pueden causar daños graves a los consumidores 
Question 6 
Pregunta.- ¿A qué criterio obedece la priorización realizada a la protección de los consumidores en 
los sectores mencionados? 
Policy 3.4.3.3 consumer protection 
Par. 3133: In 2013 and 2014 gave priority to the protection of consumers in the following areas: 
telecommunications and energy; Online consumption; consumption in highly concentrated sectors; combating fraud; complexity and unfairness in contracts; claims concerning the credibility, 
particularly adversely affect the competitive process and small businesses; Misleading statements 
on the pricing of carbon emissions; guarantees for consumers; issues affecting indigenous WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 160 - 
 
  communities; and issues relating to the safety of products that can cause serious harm to 
consumers 
What obeys the prioritization criteria on the protection of consumers in these areas? Answer 
The Australian Consumer Law (ACL), which is set out in the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 is 
the principal consumer law in Australia. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is an independent statutory body with re sponsibility for administering and enforcing the 
law. It publishes its compliance and enforcement policy outlining its enforcement priorities, which 
are reflected in paragraph 3.1.4.3.3 of the WTO Secretariat's report. 
In 2013-14 the ACCC was involved in 53 proceeding s related to consumer protection enforcement. 
The ACCC has recently focused on comparator webs ites and the incremental disclosure of fees and 
charges by traders, referred to as drip pricing. 
A wide ranging review of the ACL will be cond ucted in 2016 to assess the effectiveness of the 
national consumer policy framework, including the ACL. 
3.4.5 Empresas comerciales del Estado  
Question 7 
Pregunta.- ¿Las empresas comerciales de Australia publican sus Estados Financieros? ¿Alguna de 
ellas cotiza en bolsa? De tener una respuesta afirmativa, ¿esta información se encuentra 
disponible de manera virtual? 
3.4.5 State Trading Enterprises Australia Commercial companies publish their financial statements? Do any of them traded? To 
have an affirmative answer, this information is available virtually? 
Answer 
There are no Commonwealth GTEs listed on the Australian Securities Exchange. However, all 
Commonwealth GTEs publish financial information as part of their annual report which is publicly 
available on individual GTE websites. 
3.4.5 Empresas comerciales del Estado 
Par. 3.136 Las empresas comerciales del Estado siguen dedicándose, a menudo en régimen de 
monopolio, a la producción de bienes y servicios, y deben estar en condiciones de cubrir todos sus 
costos o una parte sustancial de ellos (…). 
Question 8 
Pregunta.- Al respecto, en el caso que solo cubran una parte sustancial de sus costos, debe 
entenderse que el gobierno cubre la parte restan te. Podría indicar en qué sectores usualmente 
ocurre ello. Asimismo, a cuánto ascendió el monto destinado a cubrir dichos costos en los años 
2013 y 2014. 
3.4.5 State Trading Enterprises Par. 3.136 The STEs continue to engage, often as a monopoly, to the production of goods and 
services and should be able to cover all their costs or a substantial part of them (...). 
Regard, in the case that only cover a substantial portion of its costs to be understood that the 
government covers the remainder. May specify se ctors usually this occurs. Also, much was the 
amount allocated to cover these costs in 2013 and 2014. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 161 - 
 
  Answer 
The Commonwealth GTEs are to comply with the Commonwealth's Competitive Neutrality Policy on 
all commercial activities. This is aimed at ensuring these GTEs do not gain an unfair advantage over the private sector. Where a GTE undertakes non-commercial activities (i.e. to fulfil 
community service obligations or to deliver Government policy objectives) the Government may 
provide funding to assist with covering the cost of  these activities and this funding is outlined in 
the GTE's annual report.  
There are no specific sectors allocated by Government for providing additional funding to recover 
the cost of these activities. This consideration is undertaken by Government on a case by case basis depending on the activity and the revenues generated by the GTE. 
Question 9 
Par. 3.136 (…) Sin embargo, la mayor parte de es tas empresas son entidades oficiales y pueden 
tener objetivos de política que están en conflicto con sus funciones comerciales (…). 
Pregunta.- Podría dar ejemplos sobre cuáles son los objetivos de política que están en conflicto con 
las actividades realizadas por las empresas comerciales del Estado. 
Par. 3.136 (...) However, most of these companies are government entities and may have policy 
objectives are in conflict with their business functions (...). 
Could give examples of what policy objectives are in conflict with the activities of the STEs are.  
Answer 
Australia Post has community service obligations meaning that it is required under legislation to 
meet a minimum level of service for the whole co mmunity that is in excess of what the market 
would otherwise provide. 
Question 10 
Par. 3.136 (…) El Gobierno puede imponer controles de precios a las empresas comerciales del 
Estado que suministren bienes y servicios en un mercado monopolístico, o bien establecer otros 
objetivos, por ejemplo obligaciones de servicios a la comunidad. 
Pregunta.- Aparte de lo señalado para Australia Post, podría señalar a qué otros sectores se ha 
aplicado previamente esta medida. 
Par. 3.136 (...) The Government may impose price controls to commercial enterprises that provide 
goods and services in a monopolistic market, or set other goals such obligations of community 
service. 
Apart from Australia Post, in what other sectors does the government impose price controls?  
Answer 
States and Territories have been progressively removing price controls in energy, such as 
electricity and gas.   
At the Commonwealth level, under Part VIIA of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, price 
notifications (which restrict price increases in certain ways) apply to aspects of Australia Post, 
Airservices Australia, and Sydney Airport. 
http://registers.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/328716 .  
The National Broadband Network (NBN Co) also has wholesale price caps that will apply to its 
services.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 162 - 
 
  http://www.communications.gov.au/__data/asse ts/pdf_file/0020/243902/Telecommunications_Re
gulatory_and_Structural_Reform_Paper_-_11_December_....pdf . 
Previously, Australia had price controls on Telstra for fixed line voice services; however, these 
have recently been revoked: https://www.accc.gov.au/regulated-
infrastructure/communications/accc-role-in-communications/telstra-retail-price-control-
arrangements . 
Question 11 
Par. 3.138 (…) El presupuesto para 2014-2015 prevé la racionalización del sector público para 
centrarse en esferas en las que es necesaria la intervención del Gobierno del Commonwealth. 
Pregunta.- ¿En qué sectores se ha identificado que es necesaria la intervención del Gobierno de 
Commonwealth? 
Par. 3.138 (...) The 2014-2015 budget provides for rationalization of the public sector to focus on 
areas where government intervention is necessary Commonwealth. 
What sectors have been identified that the Co mmonwealth government intervention necessary? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is committed to reduce the size of the Australian Public Service and 
consolidate government programmes and bodies to cut waste and reduce duplication, and assess 
whether government functions should be open to competition and outsourced to ensure that 
government services are undertaken by the organisation most able to do so most efficiently and as well targeted as possible.  
As part of this agenda, the Government made decisions to abolish 138 government bodies; merge 
25 bodies (resulting in a net reduction of 19 bodies); consolidate the functions of 16 government 
bodies into departments; and transfer responsibi lity for two bodies outside the Government. The 
next tranche of the smaller government reforms will be announced in the 2015-16 Budget. 
4.4 Manufacturas 
4.4.2. Textiles, vestido y calzado 
Par. 4.66. Durante el período examinado han seguido en vigor diversos tipos de asistencia para 
fomentar, entre otras cosas, la innovación y el desarrollo de un sector de productos textiles y 
prendas de vestir sostenible y competitivo en el plano internacional. Se ha mantenido el conjunto de medidas de innovación en el sector de los textiles, el vestido y el calzado de 2009, que comprendía el Programa de creación de capacidad estratégica en el sector de los textiles, el 
vestido y el calzado, de 33,2 millones de dóla res australianos (donaciones, de 2010-2011 a 2014 
2015), el Programa de creación de capacidad innovadora en el sector de las prendas de vestir y los textiles para uso doméstico, de 112,5 millones de dólares australianos (donaciones, de 2010-2011 
a 2014 2015), y el Programa para pequeñas empresas del sector de los textiles, el vestido y el 
calzado (donaciones, hasta el 30 de junio de 2016). En el presupuesto de mayo de 2014 el Gobierno anunció su intención de que el Programa de creación de capacidad innovadora en el 
sector de las prendas de vestir y los textiles para uso doméstico y el Programa para pequeñas 
empresas del sector de los textiles, el vestido y el calzado dejaran de funcionar a partir del 30 de junio de 2014 (un año antes de la fecha prevista inicialmente). En diciembre de 2014 la legislación que debía hacer efectiva esa decisión había sido aprobada en la Cámara Baja, pero no había sido 
debatida aún en el Senado. En junio de 2013 finalizó la Parte 2 (el Plan de donaciones para 
iniciativas de reestructuración) del Programa de ajuste estructural del sector de los textiles, el vestido y el calzado, dotado con 50 millones de dólares australianos (1º de julio de 2005 - 30 de 
junio de 2015). Las empresas, los sindicatos, los investigadores y el Gobierno se reúnen en el 
Consejo de Innovación del Sector de los Textiles, el Vestido y el Calzado para celebrar consultas sobre la innovación y ofrecer asesoramiento estratégico. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 163 - 
 
  Question 12 
Pregunta.- ¿Podría dar más detalle de qué instituciones específicamente representan a las 
empresas, sindicatos, investigadores y Gobierno que conforman el Consejo de Innovación del Sector de los Textiles, el Vestido y el Calzado. Asimismo, ¿podría Australia elaborar con más 
detalle cuáles son las funciones específicas del Consejo? 
TRADE POLICY BY SECTOR 4.4 Articles 
4.4.2. Textiles, clothing and footwear 
Par. 4.66. During the reporting period have rema ined in place various types of assistance to 
promote, inter alia, innovation and the developm ent of a sector of textiles and apparel dress 
sustainable and competitive internationally. It has kept the package of innovation in the textiles, 
clothing and footwear in 2009, which included the creation program strategic capacity in the 
textiles, clothing and footwear, 33.2 million Au stralian dollars (grants, 2010-2011 2014 2015), the 
Program for creation of innovative capacity in the field of clothing and household textiles, 112.5 
million Australian dollars (donation, 2010-2011 to 2014 2015), and the Program for small 
businesses in textiles, clothing and footwear (donations, until June 30, 2016). In the May 2014 
Budget the Government announced its intention that the program innovative capacity building in 
the field of clothing and household textiles and the Programme for small businesses in textiles, 
clothing and footwear stop functioning from June  30, 2014 (one year before the date originally 
scheduled). In December 2014 legislation that would give effect to this decision was passed in the House, but had not yet been debated in the Senate. In June 2013 he finished Part 2 (the Plan 
grants for restructuring initiatives) program of structural adjustment in textiles, clothing and 
footwear, worth 50 million Australian dollars (1 July 2005-30 June 2015). Businesses, unions, researchers and government meet in the Innovation Council Sector Textiles, Clothing and 
Footwear for consultations on innovation and provide strategic advice. 
Could you provide more detail specifically what institutions representing business, labor, and 
government researchers that make up the Inno vation Council Sector Textiles, Clothing and 
Footwear. Also, could Australia further elaborate what the specific functions of the Council are? 
Answer 
The Textile, Clothing and Footwear (TCF) Industries Innovation Council (the Council) was 
announced as part of the TCF innovation package in the Federal Budget on 12 May 2009. The 
Council was commissioned to provide advice to the Minister on the introduction of a voluntary 
ethical mark, voluntary national sizing standards for clothing and footwear and a national anthropometric (human measurement) database. The Council also provided strategic advice to the 
Minister on innovation priorities, championed innovation in the TCF industries and built connections 
with other relevant organisations. Given the diverse nature of the TCF industries, the Council included representatives from the textiles and textile products, footwear, leather manufacturing, 
clothing and retail sectors, as well as from education and research bodies, the industry union and 
the Government. The council met a total of thirteen times, from September 2009 until its final meeting in August 2012. 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 
4.2  
Question: 
Currently, exports and / or the production of certain commodities (certain dairy products, cereals, 
horticulture, livestock products and wine / grapes ) remains subject to charges intended primarily 
to finance research and development. Could Australia explain how this has benefited the agricultural sector since its implementation?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 164 - 
 
  Answer 
The 15 rural research and development corporations  (RDCs) are the vehicle used by industry and 
government to jointly fund Research and Development (R&D) for agricultural industries to improve productivity, sustainability and product quality. The corporations receive funds from the levies 
imposed, at the request of the relevant industry, on the production or export of commodities. The 
RDCs invest the levy funds, along with matching government contributions, to commission R&D on behalf of industry. The RDCs are managed by in dependent boards and overseen by the Australian 
Government. This combination allows national strategic goals and specific industry needs to be 
met, while ensuring that producers benefiti ng from the R&D contribute to its cost.  
Investments in rural R&D and extension have had a significant effect on agricultural productivity. 
Research by the Australian Bureau of Agricultur al and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) 
has found that past investments in broadacre R&D and extension have generated internal rates of 
return that could be as high as 28 per cent an d 47 per cent a year, respectively. ABARES also 
estimates that farmers generate a $12 return within 10 years for each dollar the government 
invests in agricultural R&D. 
4.2 
Question: 
Regarding rice exports, subject to monopoly Could Australia outline why this is retained and what 
is the benefit to the sector? 
Answer 
All rice grown in New South Wales (NSW) that is not sold domestically to an authorised buyer is 
divested from producers and becomes the property  of the NSW Rice Marketing Board (the Board). 
The Board seeks to ensure the best possible return s from rice sold outside Australia, based on the 
quality differentials or attributes of Australian rice. The Board has appointed Ricegrowers Limited 
(trading as SunRice) as its sole exporter.  
The Board does not negotiate contracts for the sale of rice. All rice trading is conducted on behalf 
of the Board by Authorised Buyers. Authorised Buyers are able to freely buy and sell rice grown in 
NSW on the domestic market in Australia. All sales contracts are entered into on a commercial 
basis. SunRice has no obligation to set a benchmark price and has not done so. Export prices are determined by the market for Australian rice at levels influenced by the quality of the rice and 
prevailing world prices. 
Australia has progressively reduced the number of State Trading Enterprises (STEs) with export 
monopoly powers from seven in 2004 to one in 2015. The revised draft WTO modalities for agriculture (TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4) would require WTO Members to remove the export monopoly 
powers of STEs. Australia is committed to the removal of STE export monopoly powers as part of a 
final Doha Round outcome. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 165 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Question 1 
Under Trade Policies and Practices by Measure in paragraph 3.58, the Secretariat report indicated 
that On 7 July 2014 the Minister for Agriculture announced plans to progress with a Biosecurity Bill 
2014, introduced to Parliament on 27 November 2014 and is expected to be passed in the course of 2015. 
Could Australia please provide updates regarding this Bill? How is the Bill different from its 
predecessor, the Quarantine Act of 1908? 
Answer 
On 7 July 2014, the Australian Government announced its plan to progress the Biosecurity Bill 
2014 (the Bill) to the Australian Parliament to replace the Quarantine Act 1908. The legislation 
package was debated and passed the House of Representatives on 9 February 2015. It was introduced into Australian Parliament's Upper House (Senate) on 10 February 2015 and is 
currently being considered. 
The Bill is largely based on the legislation previously introduced into Parliament in 2012 and has 
been designed to be consistent with Australia's rights and obligations under the WTO and the 
World Health Organization (WHO) International Health Regulations.  
The Bill will provide a modern regulatory framework for the Australian Government to manage the 
risk of pests and diseases entering Australian territory and causing harm to animal, plant and human health, the environment and the economy.  
The Bill can be broadly broken up into three topics—operational chapters to support day to day 
biosecurity business, stand-alone chapters that support specialised biosecurity situations and general administrative chapters to support ot her functions and powers in the legislation. 
The Biosecurity Bill differs from the Quarantine Act in that it: 
 includes a definition of Appropriate Level of Protection (ALOP). This provides additional 
certainty to importers and trading partners that  the ALOP is applied when undertaking risk 
assessments to determine if, and under what  conditions, goods may be brought into 
Australia. 
 regulates the use of ballast water and management of sediment by Australian and foreign 
vessels in Australian seas. It creates a single, Australia-wide ballast water and sediment 
management regime. 
To enable a smooth transition, the Biosecurity Bill 2014 and its supporting Bills, are currently 
drafted to start twelve months after they receive passage through Parliament. Information on the 
Biosecurity Bill has been provided in previous SPS notifications and Australia will update WTO 
Members through future SPS notifications when the status of the legislation changes. 
We do not expect any significant or adverse changes for trading partners with the introduction of 
the new legislation.  
Further information on the Biosecurity legislation will be released at: 
http://www.agriculture.gov.au /biosecuritylegislation  as the Australian Parliamentary process 
advances. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 166 - 
 
  Question 2 
Under Trade Policies and Practices by Measure in paragraph 3.56, the Secretariat report indicated 
since its previous Review, Australia has maintained many quarantine controls and food standards that are stricter than relevant standards promulgated by international bodies (e.g. CODEX 
Alimentarius Commission). A generally strict quaran tine and inspection regime remains in place, 
while biosecurity reform has proceeded. 
How does Australia resolve the reform in one area but the status quo on the other? 
Answer 
The Biosecurity Bill 2014 has been developed to replace the Quarantine Act 1908 and aims to 
manage biosecurity risks more flexibly than the current legislation, whilst still ensuring a robust set of powers and mechanisms to protect Australia's unique biosecurity status and environment. 
The scientific methodology used by Australia to establish quarantine controls and food standards is 
consistent with international best practice. Australia consistently notifies the WTO on its quarantine controls and food standards through SPS and TBT notifications. Quarantine controls and food 
standards differ between regions and countries as pests, diseases and environmental factors vary. 
This means that Australian food standards may differ from Codex Alimentarius standards due to its unique biosecurity status and environment. When th is difference occurs Australia identifies any 
variance in its notifications. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 167 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION  
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 2.3 p.26 
Question: 
What is the impact on the economy with the removal of foreign ownership restrictions in the civil 
aviation sector in the past few years? Does the Government have any plans to review the foreign 
ownership restrictions in other sectors? 
Answer 
The provisions of the Qantas Sale Amendment Act 2014 removed provisions limiting total 
ownership by foreign airlines to 35 per cent and ownership by a foreign individual to 25 per cent. The changes ensure the same investment and operational rules apply to all Australian based 
airlines and will ensure that it is easier for Qantas to attract foreign investment. The Australian 
Government understands that foreign investment  has declined in Qantas over recent months .  
2.2 General Framework 2.5 p.26 
Question: Could you please provide more information about the role of the states and territories in 
standardization and conformity assessment proced ures? And the way in which these standards are 
applied and in which area? 
Answer 
Technical regulations may be mandated by gove rnment (Commonwealth, State and Territory or 
local council) or called up in a contract.  Each jurisdiction is responsible for publishing notifications. 
For example: 
 Information on a range of consumer products and safety related issues can be obtained from 
the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) or from the Office of Fair 
Trading or Consumer Affairs in each state and territory.  
 Mandatory requirements for building products are the responsibility of the building authority in 
each state.  Information about mandatory requirements can be obtained from the Building 
Authority for that jurisdiction. 
Question: Could Australia explain in detail how the bounties (subsidies) to mining activities are operated and 
the impacts on Australian mining sector as a whole? 
Answer 
While the Commonwealth constitutionally has the power to provide bounties, Australia does not 
currently pay subsidies in the form of bounties to mining activities. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 168 - 
 
  3.2.7.2 Sanitary and Ph ytosanitary Regulations 
3.2.7.2.1 Food standards-setting  
3.56 p. 56 
Question: 
Could Australia please provide detailed information regarding the application of the SPS-measures 
that do not comply with the international meas ures in the SPS sphere. What is the procedure 
(documents, authorities) for the justification of standards that differ from international ones?  
Answer 
FAO/WHO and the working principles for risk analysis as set out in the Codex Procedural Manual. 
The risk analysis is based on the use of the be st available evidence and the risk assessment and 
risk management processes are functionally separa ted and documented fully and systematically in 
a transparent manner. The primary objective of standard-setting is the protection of consumers. In 
all cases, FSANZ pays regard to effects on international trade and Codex standards and harmonises where justified. Where this is not possible, for example for the reasons set out below, 
an explanation of the rationale for the food standard is given in the WTO notification. The reasons 
for a decision on a food standard are presented clearly and transparently in FSANZ reports for each amendment to the Australia New Zealand Food Standard Code  (the Code). 
Some of the reasons why a standard in the Code may be more restrictive than a Codex standard 
are given below. These are factors relating to the protection of the health and safety of Australian 
consumers: 
 Setting maximum permitted levels for substances added to foods requires consideration of 
national consumption levels to determine a safe level. 
 Standards are set based on current and best sci entific evidence and therefore may be more 
up-to-date than the evidence used to set an earlier Codex standard. 
 Some substances added for a technological need should only be used up to the level 
required for that need, and this may differ in different countries due to food processing requirements and availability of alternatives. 
 Standards for allergens are based on geographically important food components giving rise 
to significant allergenic potential – these vary regionally. 
 Other specifications e.g. for vitamins and mineral permissions are based on the national diet 
and may require the setting of upper levels to ensure there is no excessive exposure. 
Australia has established a system whereby interested parties may apply on an annual basis for 
recognition of international MRL levels for import purposes, thus facilitating the harmonisation of international MRL standards where appropriate. 
It should also be noted that many standards in Australia are less restrictive than for Codex e.g. 
commodity standards, contaminant standards.  
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is established as an independent statutory agency 
by the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act 1991. The Act sets out the objectives of setting 
standards and the factors to be taken into account when setting the standards. Information about FSANZ and the framework within which it conducts its standard setting activities can be found at http://www.foodstandards.gov.au /about/Pages/default.aspx . Further information on the specific 
regulatory activities undertaken by FSANZ can be found at 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/abo ut/whatwedo/Pages/default.aspx . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 169 - 
 
  3.2.7.2 Sanitary and phytosanitary regulations 
3.2.7.2.1 Food standards-setting  
3.57 p. 57 
Question:   
Could you please clarify whether there is any scientific justification behind the specific 
requirements for food derived from GM organisms (plants, animals and microorganisms), particularly, the procedure of GM food labelling. In addition, we would like to get information on 
the procedures applied to assess and approve the imported foods using biotechnology by FSANZ. 
Answer 
GM foods are regulated under Standard 1.5.2 – Food produced using Gene Technology of the 
Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. This Standard can be accessed from the FSANZ 
website at the following link: http://www.foodstandards.gov. au/code/Pages/ default.aspx .  
The Standard requires that all GM foods (including ingredients, food additives and processing aids 
from GM sources) must be assessed for safety and approved by FSANZ before they can be sold in 
Australia and New Zealand. GM foods that ha ve passed the safety assessment and approval 
process are listed in the Schedule to Standard 1.5.2. 
The methods and approach used by FSANZ for GM food safety assessment are consistent with the 
documents dealing with 'principles and guidelines' that are relevant to the assessment of the 
safety of GM food which have been agreed thro ugh the Codex Alimentarius procedures. Australia's 
protocol for conducting safety assessments of GM foods is based on the scientific principles and approaches outlined in these Codex documents which are underpinned by scientific expertise 
provided by the World Health Organization, th e Food and Agriculture Organization and the 
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. For a GM food application to be assessed by FSANZ it must comply with the data requirements set out in the FSANZ Application 
Handbook, available on the FSANZ website at 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/code/chan ges/pages/applicationshandbook.aspx .  
Further information about the procedure applied fo r assessing and approving GM foods is available 
on the FSANZ website - 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consume r/gmfood/safety/Pa ges/default.aspx  and the safety 
assessments and approval reports for all applications can be viewed through the individual 
application links provided at 
http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/ gmfood/applications/Pages/default.aspx . 
The purpose of labelling GM foods is to provide consumer information, to ensure that it is 
meaningful to consumers, while remaining practical for enforcement purposes. GM foods are not 
labelled for safety reasons, and only those GM foods assessed by FSANZ as safe are approved for 
sale. 
3.4 Measures Affecting Production and Trade 
3.4.1 Taxation 
3.4.1.1 Indirect taxation  
3.104, р. 71 
Question: 
Wine Equalisation Tax (WET Act) deals with tax on sales, importations and certain other dealings 
with wine, which take place on or after 1 July 2000. WET applies to wines with an alcohol content of over 1.15 percent. The tax covers grape wine, fruit or vegetable wine, cider, perry, mead and 
sake and applies to both bulk and packaged wine. The rate of 29% is applied on the customs value 
of imported wine. Domestic wine producers are eligible for a rebate of the tax. This rebate is provided for some New Zealand wine exports to Australia as well. In our view, the discriminatory 
system of WET Act has a negative effect on trad e and appears not to comply neither with MFN and WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 170 - 
 
  National Treatment principles. Please explain ho w this measure complies with MFN and National 
Treatment principles. Could the Australia comment on the factors that led it to maintain this Act? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is currently undertaki ng a comprehensive review of the Australian 
taxation system via a Tax White Paper process (as the first step in this process the Government 
has released a discussion paper 'Re:think' availabl e at www.bettertax.gov.au). Alcohol taxation will 
be considered in the context of Tax White Paper process. 
Report by the Australian Government WT/TPR/G/312 
1 INTRODUCTION 
1.1, p. 4 
Question:  
Following the announcement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Australia on 19 March and 21 
May 2014 Australia has adopted various regulations under the Autonomous Sanctions Bill 2011 and pursuant to the Autonomous Sanctions Regula tions 2011 that are not in conformity with 
Australia's obligations under the GATT 1994 and the GATS, in particular, though not exclusively: 
Autonomous Sanctions Amendment (Ukraine) Regulation 2014; Autonomous Sanctions (Designated Persons and Entities and Declared Persons – Ukraine) List 2014 (the Ukraine List); 
Autonomous Sanctions Amendment (Russia, Crimea and Sevastopol) Regulation 2014; 
Autonomous Sanctions (Russia, Crimea and Sevastopol) Specification 2014. 
In accordance with mentioned acts of Australia a number of trade restrictive measures in respect 
of the Russian Federation in relation to the situ ation in Ukraine, the property and interests in 
property of certain natural and legal persons of the Russian Federation are blocked; the access to 
the capital markets for affected persons, including certain Russian financial institutions, is restricted; admission of certain natural persons to the territory of Australia is prohibited.  
Such measures effectively restrict supply of serv ices by such persons within the territory of 
Australia, in particular through mode 1, 3 and 4, including in the sectors where specific commitments of Australia do not provide for such types of restrictions. Such measures also result 
in restriction of transfers of payments by such se rvices suppliers contrary to provisions of GATS 
Articles XI and XII. Moreover, these restrictions  are applied only in respect of the services 
suppliers of the Russian Federation. 
- Please explain the nature of these measures and rational behind them. 
- Please explain the criteria used for the inclusion of certain Russian natural and legal persons 
on the List of persons to which these measures are applied.  
- Please explain how these measures comply with Australia's specific commitments and GATS 
Articles II and XI. 
- Please indicate the timeframe for bringing these measures in consistency with provisions of 
the GATS. 
Answer 
- The nature of these measures and their ration ale are explained in the measures themselves 
and their accompanying Explanatory Statements, copies of which are available at: www.ComLaw.gov.au .   
Australia has implemented these measures in concert with others in the international community 
in response to the Russian threat to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 171 - 
 
  - The criteria for inclusion of certain natural and legal persons, are explained in the measures 
themselves and their accompanying Explanatory Statements, copies of which are available at: www.ComLaw.gov.au . Each person provided in the list is a person that the Minister is satisfied is 
responsible for, or complicit in, the threat to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. 
- Australia's measures comply with its WTO obligations. 
Question The said measures include certain restrictions affecting also trade in goods between the Russian 
Federation and Australia, in particular, though not exclusively, the restrictions on import of certain 
goods from the Russian Federation to Australia. 
- Please explain the nature of these measures and rational behind them. 
- Please explain how these measures comply with GATT Articles I and XI. 
- Please indicate the provision of the WTO Agreement that justifies this measure. 
- Please indicate the timeframe for bringing these measures in consistency with provisions of 
the GATT. 
Answer 
- The nature of the measures and their rationale are explained in the measures themselves 
and their accompanying Explanatory Statements, copies of which are available at: 
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ . 
- Australia's measures comply with its WTO obligations. 
Question In respect of all measures mentioned above: 
- Does Australia apply measures that are similar to any of the measures described above in 
respect of any other WTO Member? If yes, please explain the reasons for applying such measures to other WTO Members and indicate legal acts according to which such measures 
are applied? 
- Were all of the mentioned measures of Australia referred to above notified to the WTO? If 
no, please explain, why? 
Answer 
- Australia imposes autonomous sanctions in relation to the Democratic People's Republic of 
Korea (DPRK), Former Yugoslavia, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Syria, Zimbabwe, Russian Federation 
and Ukraine (including Crimea and Sevastopol).  The nature of the measures and their rationale 
are explained in the measures themselves and th eir accompanying Explanatory Statements, copies 
of which are available at: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ . 
- Australia's measures comply with its WTO obligations. 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 
Paras 3.97 - 3.98 Question 
Our first concern deals with the support measures listed in paras. 3.97 and 3.98 of the 
Secretariat’s report. In our view, these measures, with the exception of direct loans to buyers, WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 172 - 
 
  may be considered as inconsistent with Australia’s obligations under Art. 3.1(a) of the SCM 
Agreement. If this is not the case, we would appreciate relevant explanations. 
Answer 
We can confirm, as stated by the Secretariat in that report, that EFIC’s operations are in line with 
the OECD’s guidelines.  The measures supported by  Australia’s official export credit agency are 
consistent with the WTO Subsidies Agreement, including the relevant paragraphs of Annex I to that Agreement relating to export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes. 
Question 
Second, we are concerned with the so-called “Australian content”, mentioned in para. 3.98 of the 
Secretariat’s report. We consider that maintenance of such requirement appears to be inconsistent with Australia’s obligations under art. III of the GATT, as well as under the TRIMS Agreement. We 
kindly ask Australia to explain, what does the “Australian content” consist of, and how it 
corresponds with the mentioned WTO agreements. 
Answer 
The amount of export finance EFIC will consider for a contract reflects the value of the Australian 
content in that contract plus any foreign content that EFIC also deems eligible for finance.  The following is used as a guide only as EFIC has the discretion to vary the policy according to the 
circumstances. 
Australian content represents the export from Australia of goods or services that are produced or 
manufactured wholly or substantially in Australia. 
EFIC will consider support for foreign goods and services if; 
• they are essential to the contract;  
• they cannot be sourced competitively within Australia; and  • it is impractical to finance the foreign goods and services elsewhere.  
The foreign goods and services must usually be incorporated into the contract in Australia. 
In cases where an Australian export has significant foreign content, it is usual for the Export Credit 
Agency of the country from where the foreign content is sourced to provide finance or insurance 
for that portion of the transaction.   
We can confirm, as stated by the Secretariat in that report, that EFIC’s operations are in line with 
the OECD’s guidelines.  As stated above, the measures supported by Australia’s official export credit agency are consistent with the WTO Subsidies Agreement, including the relevant paragraphs 
of Annex I to that Agreement relating to export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance 
programmes, as well as GATT 1994 and the TRIMS Agreement. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 173 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF SINGAPORE 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Page 33, Para 2.33 Question 1 
We would appreciate if Australia could expl ain the mechanics of the Australian Industry 
Participation (AIP). In particular, how does the AIP work with the Australian Jobs Act 2013 to provide "full, fair and reasonable opportunities for Australian industry to supply goods and 
services"?  
Answer 
The Act requires Australian Industry Participation plans for major projects with a capital 
expenditure greater than or equal to $A 500 million. The AIP plan must demonstrate that 
Australian entities have full, fair and reasonable opportunity to bid for the supply of key goods or 
services for the project. 
The AIP plan requires companies to detail specific activities they intend to undertake to provide 
Australian industry with full, fair and reasonable opportunity. Specific requirements are set out in 
the legislation, which covers activities to identify opportunities for Australian suppliers, communicate opportunities to potential suppliers and work with suppliers to encourage capability 
development and integration into global supply chains.  
AIP plans do not mandate the use of Australian industry, but rather aim to provide Australian 
industry with the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities and bid for work if they are able to meet the procurement specifications. 
Page 33, Para 2.34 
Question 2 
We note that the concept of "national interest " is not defined under Foreign Acquisitions and 
Takeovers Act 1975 and the 2013 Foreign Investment Policy, and is "interpreted on a case-by-case 
basis", taking into account a range of factors. We would appreciate if Australia could shed light on the criteria for a screening process based on "national interest" and how the principle of non-
discrimination is adhered to in this screening process.  
Answer 
Australia reviews foreign investment proposals on a case-by-case basis to ensure they are not 
contrary to the national interest. This is in contrast to the more prescriptive rules-based approach 
in some other countries. 
The national interest, and hence what would be contrary to it, is not defined in the Foreign 
Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975. Instead, the Act confers upon the Treasurer the power to 
decide in each case whether a particular investment would be contrary to the national interest.  
All residential real estate applications are considered in light of the overarching principle that 
foreign investment in residential real estate should increase Australia's housing stock.  
For business acquisitions, assessing the national interest allows the Government to balance 
potential sensitivities against the benefits of foreign investment. 
The Government typically considers the following factors when assessing foreign investment 
proposals in any sector: WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 174 - 
 
   national security; 
 competition; 
 impact on other Government policies (including taxation); 
 impact on the economy and the community; and 
 the character of the investor. 
Page 39 (Para 3.10) Question 3 
We note that Australia has established the "National Border Targeting Centre" to coordinate a 
national approach for identifying high-risk passe ngers and cargo. Which agencies constitute the 
National Border Targeting Centre; and what areas do these agencies cover? It is also mentioned that "during the review period, the proportion of goods released by the time a vessel arrives into 
port increased due to timely reporting". Could Australia share how far in advance relevant import 
information is required to be submitted prior to arrival of the goods? 
Answer 
Through the National Border Targeting Centre (NBTC), the Australian Customs and Border 
Protection Service (ACBPS) will work closely with border management, intelligence, law enforcement and regulatory agencies with responsibi lities at the border. The NBTC will draw on the 
collective expertise and capabilities of nine Commonwealth agencies to provide an enhanced and 
collaborative approach to identifying and treating high-risk international travellers and cargo that may cause harm to the Australian community. 
The nine Commonwealth agencies are:  
 Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS) 
 Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) 
 Australian Federal Police (AFP) 
 Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) 
 Australian Crime Commission (ACC) 
 Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's (Australian Passport Office) 
 Department of Agriculture 
 Office of Transport Security (OTS), and 
 Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC). 
Internationally, one of the opportunities for Australia's NBTC is the connection with our Border 5 
(B5) partners and the ability to work collaboratively in real-time with existing B5 International 
Targeting Centres in the USA, Canada, the UK an d New Zealand. Working with the B5 targeting 
centres and the international networks of our partner law enforcement agencies improves our 
knowledge of criminal syndicates with international links and disrupt criminal activity ahead of the 
Australian border. 
Currently a Canada Border Service Agency officer is embedded in the NBTC with New Zealand 
currently inducting an officer to be placed full-time in the NBTC by June. 
Import declarations can be made any time before the ship or aircraft carrying the goods first 
arrives at a port or airport in Australia and no later than close of business the working day after the goods arrive. Sections 68 and 72 of the Cust oms Act 1901 and Regulation 43 of the Customs 
Regulations 1926 refer. Electronic reporting within the prescribed time frames is a statutory 
requirement and there are penalties associated with non-compliance. 
The earlier that industry submits information about imported goods, the earlier that border 
agencies can complete profiling and risk asse ssment. Early risk assessment assists border 
agencies to identify high risk cargo for intervention, while facilitating legitimate trade. ACBPS continues to educate industry and increase awareness of the benefits of early reporting. Late and 
inaccurate reporting can have a flow on effect to others in the cargo reporting chain, causing 
delays in the clearance of goods.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 175 - 
 
  See ACN 2011/58 Movement of goods under Customs control that has not been fully reported for 
more information: http://www.customs.gov.au/webda ta/resources/files/ACN2011_58-
revised5Dec2011.pdf . 
Page 47, Para 3.29 
Question 4 
We would appreciate Australia's clarification on the following: 
a) What is the intent of the Enhanced Project By-Law Scheme (EPBS)?  
b) How often would a company be required to seek and obtain the relevant approval for its AIP 
plan implementation report to access duty concessions under the EPBS?  
c) Could Australia share (with examples to illustrate) on the challenges in assessing and 
verifying whether AIP plans are met/implemented by companies under the EPBS?  
d) In the event that companies (which currently qualify for certain Australian concession 
schemes such as the EPBS for example) subseq uently deviates from their AIP plan and/or 
fails to implement their AIP plan (in part or in full), how would Australia's concession 
schemes apply to such companies?  
Answers 
The objectives of the EPBS are to: 
 Encourage and enhance investment in the establishment of world class operations; 
 Encourage the involvement of Australian industry in supplying goods and services; 
 Lower input costs for industry where there are sound reasons for doing so; and 
 Facilitate Australian industry participation in domestic and international supply chains. 
A complete Implementation Report must be lodged before any eligible goods covered by that 
report are entered for home consumption. 
An additional requirement for projects greater than  or equal to $A 2 billion must provide updates 
at least every six months on actions to implement the AIP plan. Implementation Reports are 
assessed on whether the evidence provided demonstrates that the actions detailed in the approved AIP plan were satisfactorily implemented.  
For example, a company may propose to list opport unities on a public website. The evidence might 
be details of the opportunities that were listed, and a screenshot of the website. 
If any changes need to be made to the AIP plan, the applicant can seek approval for a variation to 
the AIP plan. Where an Implementation Report fails to disclose satisfactory progress on the 
implementation of the AIP plan, or is inconsistent with the AIP plan (and changes from the original 
plan have not been approved), no duty co ncessions will be granted under the EPBS. 
Page 48, Para 3.33 
Question 5 
Could Australia share how long the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service would 
require, on average, to assess and issue a co nclusive outcome on a company's application 
(assuming a duly completed application with all the necessary supporting documents by the 
company) for:  
i) A prospective transfer pricing valuation advice; and  
ii) A transfer pricing valuation advice?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 176 - 
 
  Answer 
Australian Customs and Border Protection Service aims to respond within 30 calendar days of 
receipt of complete information. 
Page 52, Para 3.39 
Question 6 
We note that imports from New Zealand covere d by the ANZCERTA are excluded from anti-
dumping actions and are dealt with under competition laws. We would appreciate if Australia could 
elaborate on how anti-dumping investigations and measures are dealt with under competition 
laws. 
Answer 
Section 46A of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 was introduced following the ANZCERTA 
and is intended to act as a safeguard against dumping-type conduct. Section 46A prohibits a firm 
taking advantage of substantial market power in a trans-Tasman market (a market in Australia, New Zealand or both) with the purpose of harming a competitor in an Australian market (other 
than a market for services, reflecting the dumping origins of the section). Competition laws, 
including section 46A, are administered by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). See the ACCC website for more information: https://www.accc.gov.au/business/anti-
competitive-behaviour . 
Page 61, Para 3.71 
Question 7 
 We note that in Para 3.71, Australia has "announced that it is working towards possibly 
acceding to the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA)". Is there a target date for 
Australia's accession to the WTO GPA?  
 We also note that in Para 3.79, "In addition to their Buy Local Policy, certain states maintain a 
10% preference or 20% preference in the form of  a nominal increase on the tendered price, for 
procurement of domestic or New Zealand, United States and Chilean goods and related services, to uphold industry development, social  or economic objectives. Similar arrangements 
are proposed under the Australia-Japan Econom ic Partnership Agreement and the Australia-
Korea Free Trade Agreement." Given that Australia is considering acceding to WTO GPA, would Australia be considering incorporating their FTA commitments into their GPA commitments, including state-level procurement?  
Answer 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. 
Page 74, Para 3.113 
Question 8 
Noting that "the share of industry-specific suppo rt (such as for the automotive, biotechnology, and 
textile and clothing, and footwear industries) fell from 24% to 21% and the share of export 
promotion dropped from 7% to 6%", could Australia share how these reductions were accomplished? We would also be grateful for more information on support programmes specific to the biotechnology sector? 
Answer 
The following table shows the programs and fund ing included in the two categories 'industry 
specific support' and 'export 'promotion'. Lines 94 and 106 show how these result in the 
percentages referred to in the question. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 177 - 
 
  Table 1 Industry-specific and general expo rt budgetary assistance measures by 
program, 2007-08 and 2012-13 
$ million (nominal) 
    2007-08  2012-13  
Industry specific measures   
 12-month prepayment rule 5.0 – 
 ABC and SBS Digital Interference Scheme 0.0 – 
 ACL Bearings 2.0 – 
 Advanced Electricity Storage 2.8 – 
 Assistance to the Vegetable Industry 1.1 – 
 Australian Animal Heal th Laboratory 7.2 7.5 
 Australian Film Commission 53.0 – 
 Australian Film Finance Corporation 70.5 – 
 Australian HomeGrown Campaign 0.9 – 
 Australian Paper's Maryville Pu lp and Paper - Assistance – 4.2 
 Australian Seafood Industry Council 0.1 – 
 Australian Space Science Program – 12.7 
 Australian Wine In dustry - Support – 1.1 
 Automotive competitiveness and investment scheme - Stage 2 506.9 – 
 Automotive New Markets Initiative – 2.9 
 Automotive Supply Chain Development Program – 4.4 
 Automotive Transformation Scheme – 334.4 
 Bass Straight Passenger Vehicle Equalisation 30.1 34.5 
 Biofuels infrastructure grants 7.2 – 
 Biotechnology Innovation Fund 0.0 – 
 Brandy preferential excise rate 4.0 4.0 
 Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships Program – 13.8 
 Citrus Canker Eradication Programme 0.6 – 
 Clean Technology Investment - Food and Foundries Program – 21.7 
 Clothing and Household Textile Build ing Innovative Capability Program – 22.3 
 Coal Mining Abatement Support Package – 1.0 
 Community Broadcasting Program – 14.9 
 CSL - Commonwealth assistance – 8.0 
 Energy Brix Australia Corporation – 9.1 
 Equine Influenza Emergency Assistance Package 256.8 – 
 Ethanol Distribution Program 6.2 – 
 Ethanol production subsidy 56.7 108.9 
 Exemption of refundable film tax offset payments 2.0 55.0 
 Exotic Disease Preparedness Program 0.9 0.6 
 Film Australia 13.3 – 
 Film industry division - 10B & 10BA -13.0 -14.0 
 Film industry offsets 69.0 226.0 
 Fisheries Structural Adjustment Package  25.3 – 
 Fishing Structural Adjustment Package - Management Levy Subsidy 5.0 – 
 Food Processing in Regional Australia 2.3 – 
 Great Barrier Reef Structural Adjustment 67.8 – 
 Green Car Innovation Fund – 47.4 
 Greenhouse Gas Abatement Program 7.3 – 
 High Costs Claims Scheme 3.2 33.4 
 Howe leather - loan repayment  -3.4 – 
 ICT Incubators Program 1.7 – 
 Indigenous Broadcasting Program 14.0 15.4 
 Integrated Forest Products Grant 4.0 – 
 Investment incentive for holden 2.0 – 
 Investment Incentives to Hismelt - grant 20.0 – 
 Low-Emission Technology Development Fund  3.1 – 
 LPG Vehicle Scheme 163.2 5.2 
 National Energy Efficiency Init iative - Smart Grid, Smart City – 9.1 
 National food indu stry strategy 0.5 – 
 National Livestock Identification System 4.7 – 
 National Low Emissions Coal Initiative – 22.4 
 National Urban Water and Desalination Plan – 64.2 
 Offshore banking unit tax concession 320.0 185.0 
 Payment scheme for Airservices Australia's en route charges 5.8 1.0 
 Pharmaceuticals Partnerships Program  35.1 – 
 Premium Fresh Tasmania - assistance – 0.5 
 Premium Support Scheme 23.5 9.3 
 Product Stewardship for Oil Program 36.0 33.4 
 Rebate for broadcasting licence fees – 155.0 WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 178 - 
 
      2007-08  2012-13  
 Regional Equalisation Plan 23.7 1.0 
 Remote Renewable Power Generation Program  29.9 – 
 Screen Australia – 98.1 
 Small scale mammalian cell production facility – 4.0 
 Solar cities initiative 9.1 – 
 Sugar Industry Reform Program - 2004 35.6 – 
 Tasmanian Community Forest Agreement 26.0 – 
 Tasmanian Forest Industry Adjustment Package – 0.3 
 Tasmanian Forests Agreement - Implementation Package – 20.3 
 Tasmanian wheat freight subsidy 0.9 – 
 Tax Deduction for horticultural plantations 5.0 6.0 
 Tax deductions for gr ape vines -1.0 -6.0 
 TCF Product Diversification Scheme 5.0 – 
 TCF Small Business Program 2.3 2.4 
 TCF Strategic Capability Program – 7.2 
 TCF Strategic Investment Program Scheme - Post 2005 97.4 – 
 TCF Structural Adjustment Scheme 2.3 1.3 
 Tobacco Grower Adjustment Assistance - 2006 14.4 – 
 United Medical Protection support 0.1 – 
 Venture capital limited partnerships 10.5 11.5 
 Vodafone Hutchison Australia - Tasmania Call Centre Expansion – 4.0 
 Wheat Export Authority Supplementation  2.0 – 
 Wine Australia Corporation – 5.4 
Total industry specific measures 2,087.6 1,609.8 
per cent 24.7 20.7 
Export measures   
 Austrade 98.0 96.0 
 Australian Made Campaign  - export strategy 0.9 – 
 Duty Drawback 107.2 69.1 
 EFIC national interest business 9.2 2.7 
 Export Market Development Grants Scheme 150.3 120.4 
 International Food and Agricultural Service 36.7 – 
 Tourism Australia 135.8 129.7 
 TRADEX 80.0 43.8 
Total export measures 618.0 461.7 
per cent 7.3 5.9 
Total Budgetary Assistance 8,435.4 7,771.0 
– Nil   
While the Federal Government does not run any specific support programmes for the 
biotechnology sector, several Australian states do, including Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia. The Queensland Biopharmaceutical Development Fund 
(http://www.biopharmaus.com.au/bdf/ ) is a pilot funding program which provides grants to 
biopharmaceutical product developers wanting to make use of BioPharmaceuticals Australia's 
(BPA) mammalian cell contract manufacturing facility. South Australia's BioSA 
(http://www.bioinnovationsa.com.au /) programmes delivers industry assistance via access to 
funding including grants, venture capital and other finance, infrastructure support through two 
business incubators and land for new technology facilities, and business development, marketing 
assistance and access to international networks. The NSW Government has developed the NSW 
Biobanking Framework, to support biobanking in  NSW. The framework includes improving the way 
biobanking services are delivered, improving da ta linkage between biobanks, and streamlining 
regulatory processes associated with the collection and storage of biospecimens and data. Further, 
the 2014 NSW state budget contained two new initiatives that will provide funding of $24 million 
(ex GST) over four years for the Sydney Genomics Collaborative program that will provide NSW researchers with access to state-of-the-art genomic technologies now available at the Garvan 
Institute of Medical Research, and $1 million (ex GST) in 2014/15 to support pathogen genomics 
research at the Centre for Infectious Diseases and Microbiology in partnership with the Marie Bashir Institute at the University of Sydney. NSW also has the Genomics Collaborative Grants 
Program, which supports researchers as they undertake ground-breaking research using whole 
genome sequencing. $7 million is being made available over four years, with up to $3 million being made available in 2014/15. The grants will allow NSW researchers to access the latest whole genome sequencing technology at the Garvan Institute and to engage bioinformatics services. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 179 - 
 
  Page 90 (Para 4.8) 
Question 9 
Singapore notes that reforms have been implemen ted to make the Australian shipping industry 
more internationally competitive, and that Austra lian cabotage policy is being reviewed by the new 
Government in light of concerns about resulting costs and inefficiencies. Could Australia share 
more details on these reforms and reviews; and wh ether these have resulted in liberalisation and 
non-discriminatory treatment for (i) international liner cargo shipping services and (ii) maritime 
cabotage? 
Answer 
The exemptions for liner shipping are granted under Part X of the CCA have been under review by 
the Australian Government. The final review report is available online on at the following address 
http://competitionpolicyreview.gov.au/ . 
The Australian Government is working to help build a more competitive and efficient shipping 
industry and is committed to reforming the coastal shipping sector. The Australian Government is 
currently considering a range of policy options relating to coastal shipping and will make a public 
announcement regarding any changes to existing policy in due course. 
Page 110 and 111, Para 4.61 
Question 10 
We note from the report that "the authoritie s consider that all programmes under the scheme A 
New Car Plan for a Greener Future are WTO compliant". Singapore would like to better understand the details and mechanism behind Australia's Automotive Transformation Scheme "ATS". 
Specifically, could Australia share:  
a) the criteria for motor vehicle companies, automotive component companies, automotive 
machine tool companies and automotive tool companies to be eligible for the ATS;  
b) the WTO-consistency concerns raised domestically in the past on production support 
provided by the ATS;  
c) how Australia ensures that ATS assistance in the form of "cash payments to eligible 
participants for production of motor vehicles" does not constitute/result in an export 
subsidy?  
Answer 
Details on the criteria for eligibility for the ATS can be found at: 
http://www.comlaw.gov.a u/Details/F2013C00256 . 
Australia also provided details of the eligibility criteria of the ATS in its WTO subsidy notification 
(see for example document G/SCM/N/253/AUS) and in replies to questions (see for example WTO 
documents G/SCM/Q2/AUS/52 of 25 March 2014 and G/SCM/Q2/AUS/45/Rev.1 of 16 April 2012). 
The ATS provides assistance based on a number of elements including for motor vehicle producers, 
on the basis of production. Australia is not aware of WTO consistency concerns raised domestically 
regarding the ATS. However, in designing the ATS, Australia has been mindful of its WTO 
obligations which allow Members to provide subsidies to their domestic producers. 
Cash payments to motor vehicle producers are not contingent, in law or in fact, upon export 
performance. Therefore these payments neither constitute nor result in an export subsidy.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 180 - 
 
  Page 124 (Para 4.123)  
Question 11 
We note that the Australian government is currently considering submissions from stakeholders 
and developing new options to eliminate unnecessary  burdens on the coastal shipping industry. We 
would like to seek an update from Australia on the measures that the government has developed, 
or is developing, to remove such burdens on the coastal shipping industry. Does Australia have plans to increase the validity period and coverage of temporary licences issued to foreign vessels 
engaged in coastal trading in Australia, so as to improve the operational efficiency of such vessels, 
which are currently operating with licences of th e existing 12-month validity period and a limited 
coverage? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is working to help build a more competitive and efficient shipping 
industry and is committed to reforming the coastal shipping sector. The Australian Government is currently considering a range of policy options relating to coastal shipping and will make a public 
announcement regarding any changes to existing policy in due course. 
Page 125, Para 4.214 Question 12 
We note that "Tax reforms are set out in the Tax Laws Amendment (Shipping Reform) Act 2012. 
They include: (a) corporate income tax exemptions for Australian ship operators who meet certain conditions". Could Australia elaborate on the "certain conditions" for ship operators to meet in order to be eligible for the corporate income tax exemptions? Would a non-Australian ship operator 
that meets these "certain conditions" qualify for the exemption? Could Australia also confirm that 
the corporate tax exemption is administered in a manner consistent with National Treatment obligations, and how this is done? 
Answer 
To qualify for the income tax exemption a company must meet the requirements set out in the Tax 
Law Amendment (Shipping Reform) Act 2012 and have been issued with a certificate under the 
Shipping Reform (Tax Incentives) Act 2012. To obtain a certificate a company must be a 
constitutional corporation (paragraph 51(xx) of the Constitution), meet certain tonnage requirements (minimum vessel size in gross tonnes) and also meet management and training requirements. Detailed requirements are specifie d in the Shipping Reform (Tax Incentives) Act 
2012 which can be accessed online see http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012A00053 . 
Such certificates are issued by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development but 
the tax exemption is granted by the Australian Tax Office. If a shipping operator is registered in 
Australia and meets the requirements in the Shippi ng Reform (Tax Incentives) Act 2012 they will 
qualify for the exemption.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 181 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF SWITZERLAND 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 3. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure 
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Imports  
3.2.2 Tariffs 
3.2.2.3 Bound tariffs 
Para. 3.20 of the Secretariat's report states that  "as of November 2014 Switzerland was one of the 
members maintaining (unspecified) reservations on Australia's HS2007 schedule. 
Question 1 
Contrary to what para. 3.20 indicates Switzerland has made a specific reservation in July 2014 on 
the HS2007 schedule of Australia and would appreciate to get an answer from Australia. 
Answer 
This issue is currently being addressed in the Committee on Market Access. 
Question 2 
Switzerland would like to know why Australia transposed in HS2007 code 8538.90 all the codes 
mentioned in the column HS02 in the attached docu ment by the Secretariat (sheet 3.29), whereas 
according to the WCO correlation table, subheading 853890 was not affected by HS 2007 change. 
Answer 
This issue is currently being addressed in the Committee on Market Access. 
3.2.2 Tariffs 
3.2.2.5 Tariff preferences 
According to Para. 3.23 and table 3.2, Australia maintains generous preferences for developing 
countries. It is with satisfaction that Switzerland notes that the Australian GSP grants LDCs with DFQF access on over 3'000 product lines.  
Question 3 
Could Australia explain the reasons and beneficiaries of 2 apparently differing schemes for (non-
LDC) developing countries, respectively labeled GS P DC and GSP DCS in table 3.2 on p. 45 of the 
Secretariat's report? 
Answer 
In 1993 and 1994 Australia moved from two developing country lists to three, creating the DCS 
category of countries. At the time, the remaining countries (which included LDCs) were eligible for 
further preferences. As a result of providing du ty-free quota-free access for LDCs in 2003 Australia 
moved to four categories of developing countries which created the category of DC countries. The list of countries and places eligible for DC and DCS rates of duty is provided below: 
DC-Eligible Countries and Places: 
• Afghanistan 
• Angola  
• Bangladesh  
• Benin  • Bhutan  • Botswana 
• Burkina Faso  
• Burundi  
• Cambodia • Cape Verde  • Central African 
 Republic 
• Chad 
• Comoros  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 182 - 
 
  • Congo, Democratic 
 Republic of  • Djibouti  • East Timor (Timor-
 Leste)  
• Equatorial Guinea  • Eritrea  
• Ethiopia 
• Gambia • Guinea  • Guinea-Bissau  
• Haiti 
• Lao People's  Democratic Republic  
• Lesotho  
• Liberia • Madagascar • Malawi 
• Maldives  • Mali  • Mauritania  
• Mozambique 
• Myanmar, Union of • Namibia  
• Nepal  
• Niger  • Palau • Rwanda  
• Sao Tome and 
 Principe  • Senegal 
• Sierra Leone  
• Somalia  • Sudan  • Tanzania, United 
 Republic of  • Togo  • Uganda  
• Yemen, Republic of 
• Zambia • American Samoa  
• French Polynesia  
• Guam  • Mariana Islands  • New Caledonia  
• Pitcairn Island  
• Tokelau Islands  • Wallis and Futuna 
 Islands  
 
DCS-eligible Countries and Places: 
• Albania 
• Algeria  
• Antigua and Barbuda  
• Argentina  • Bahamas  
• Barbados  
• Bahrain  • Belize  
• Bolivia  
• Bosnia and  Herzegovina  • Brazil  
• Brunei Darussalam  
• Bulgaria  • Cameroon  
• Chile  
• China, People's  Republic of 
• Colombia  
• Congo  • Costa Rica  • Cote d'Ivoire  
• Croatia  
• Cuba  • Cyprus  
• Czech Republic.  
• Dominica  • Dominican Republic 
• Ecuador  
• Egypt  • El Salvador  • Gabon  
• Ghana  
• Grenada  • Guatemala  
• Guyana  
• Honduras  • Hungary  
• India  
• Indonesia  • Iran  • Iraq  • Israel  
• Jamaica  
• Jordan  
• Kenya  • Korea, Democratic 
 People's Republic of 
• Korea, Republic of  • Kuwait  
• Lebanon  
• Libyan Arab  Jamahiriya • Malaysia  
• Malta  
• Mauritius  • Mexico  
• Mongolia  
• Morocco  • Nicaragua  
• Nigeria  
• Oman  • Pakistan  • Panama  
• Paraguay  
• Peru  • Philippines  
• Poland  
• Qatar  • Romania  
• St Christopher and 
 Nevis.  • St Lucia  • St Vincent and the 
 Grenadines 
• Saudi Arabia  • Serbia 
• Seychelles  
• Singapore  • Slovak Republic  
• Slovenia  
• Sri Lanka  • Suriname  • Swaziland  • Syrian Arab Republic  
• Thailand  
• Trinidad and Tobago  
• Tunisia  • Turkey  
• United Arab Emirates 
 (Abu Dhabi, Dubai,  Sharjah, Ajman, 
 Umm al Qaiwain, 
 Fujairah, Ras al Khaimah) • Uruguay  
• Venezuela  
• Vietnam, Socialist  Republic of  
• Zimbabwe 
• Anguilla  • Bermuda  
• British Indian Ocean 
 Territory • British Virgin Islands  • Cayman Islands  
• Falkland Islands  
• Former Yugoslav 
 Republic of 
 Macedonia 
• Gibraltar  • Hong Kong, China 
• Johnston Island  
• Macao  • Midway Islands  • Montserrat  
• Netherlands Antilles  
• South Georgia and  the South Sandwich 
 Islands 
• St Helena  • St Pierre and 
 Miquelon  
• Chinese Taipei  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 183 - 
 
  • Territories 
 administered by the  Palestinian Authority • Turks and Caicos 
 Islands  • Virgin Islands of the 
 United States • Wake Island  
3.2.6 Contingency measures 
3.2.6.1 Anti-dumping and countervailing duties 
In para. 3.40, the Secretariat's report notes that with 267 cases initiated between 1995 and 2013, 
Australia was one of the world's major users of anti-dumping measures (fourth in 2013). Between 2010 and 2013, Australia initiated 57 anti-dumping investigations. Despite the already wide use of 
this instrument in recent years, the Secretariat's report notes also in para. 3.38 that Australia 
further strengthened its anti-dumping policy as a result of the Streamlining of the Anti-Dumping 
System Policy, for instance through the removal in certain circumstances of the consideration of 
the lesser-duty rule or through the introduction of a new type of anti-circumvention inquiry.  
Questions 4, 5, 6 & 7 
 Could the Australian authorities please indicate the reasons for further strengthening the anti-
dumping instrument they already use very widely?  
 Also, do the Australian authorities consider that using the anti-dumping instrument on a large 
scale is an appropriate policy to facilitate the structural adjustment of the domestic economy at a time when efforts are made to improve the multifactor productivity of the economy?  
 Furthermore, could the Australian authorities indicate whether the needs of global value 
chains are specifically taken into account when  decisions are made to impose trade remedies 
on the imports they may require and could they  indicate how these interests are being taken 
into account?  
 Finally, how do the Australian authorities reconcile the objectives of a strong competition 
policy on the domestic market with a pervas ive use of antidumping duties which tends 
precisely to reduce competition in the domestic economy? 
Answers 
The 2011 antidumping policy, "Streamlining Australi a's anti-dumping system – An effective anti-
dumping and countervailing system for Australia" (S treamlining) responded to the 2009 report of 
the Productivity Commission (the Australian Go vernment's independent research and advisory 
body). The report, "Australia's Anti-dumping and Countervailing System" made 20 recommendations for improvements to Australia's anti-dumping system. The full report is found 
at: http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/antidumping/report/anti-dumping.pdf .  
Since the streamlining reforms there have been further reforms to Australia's anti-dumping 
system. These further reforms have arisen from further governmental inquiries intended on 
improving the efficiency and effectiveness of Au stralia's anti-dumping system. The most recent 
were announced on 15 December 2014 and are being implemented in 2015. All these reforms have been made in the context of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement. 
Australia's anti-dumping system is not used as a structural adjustment policy tool. Consistent with 
the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement, Australia's anti-dumping system provides for remedying 
behaviours of foreign producers and exporters in Australia's domestic market which injure Australia domestic industry. Australian anti-dumping investigations are based on applications from 
Australian industry and measures are not imposed unless it is found that dumping (or 
subsidisation) is causing material injury to the domestic industry.  
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry and Science has discretion as to whether 
or not to impose anti-dumping measures and may consider global value chain concerns in that 
decision. 
The Australian Government is supportive of free trade and strong competition in Australia's 
domestic market. However, the Australian Governme nt also believes that free trade must be fair 
trade. The practice of exporting goods to Australia at prices below their normal value and of selling WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 184 - 
 
  subsidised goods in Australia and which cause material injury to Australian producers are 
inconsistent with the notion of fair trade. Aust ralia's anti-dumping system, is not intended to 
decrease the level of competition in Australia's domestic market, rather it ensures that Australian and foreign organisations compete fairly and on a level playing field. 
3.2.7 Standards and other technical requirements 
3.2.7.1 Standards, test ing, and certification 
Para. 3.46 of the Secretariat's report indicates that approximately one third of the standards 
published by Australia are mandatory. Switzerlan d would appreciate clarifications regarding the 
amount of mandatory standards (35%) re ferenced in technical regulations.  
Questions 8 & 9 
 For which product sectors mandatory standards typically apply?  
 How could a product be placed on the Australian market, deviating from the mandatory 
standard but fulfilling the same essential requirements as set out in the technical regulation? 
Answers 
Mandatory standards primarily relate to electrical safety, consumer product safety standards and 
building and plumbing standards. 
In some cases, voluntary standards are used as a 'Deemed to Satisfy' solution of the law. The 
National Construction Code, as an example, references voluntary Australian Standards as a means 
of demonstrating compliance with the National Construction Code. The Standards are by virtue of this reference, in law, but must be complied with if they are used as a means of demonstrating compliance. This type of regulatory structure allows for choice in complying with an Australian 
Standard, or using another method to demonstrate compliance. 
3.2.7 Standards and other technical requirements 
3.2.7.2 Sanitary and phytosanitary regulations 
3.2.7.2.3 Import risk analysis (IRAs) 
In Para. 3.60 of the Secretariat's report it is stated that Australia's efforts to align its bovine 
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) import conditions with the relevant World Organization for 
Animal Health (OIE) standards are still ongoing.  
Questions 10, 11, 12 & 13 
 Could Australia give an update on this process?  
 What is the expected timeframe for completion of this process?  
Furthermore, the Secretariat's report notes that ev ery country exporting or seeking to export beef 
or beef products to Australia has to undergo a food safety risk assessment by FSANZ.  
 If an exporting country has the OIE risk status  'negligible', could Australia indicate whether 
FSANZ would still conduct a risk assessment or whether it does accept the OIE status and 
consequentially allow imports of bovine products from that country?  
 Could Australia indicate what are the conditions for a country with OIE risk status 'negligible' 
to be exempted from such additional requirements? 
Answers 
Australia's BSE food safety policy for the import of beef or beef products for human consumption 
has been implemented. It is consistent with Australia's rights and obligations under the Agreement 
on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the SPS Agreement) where Australia WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 185 - 
 
  has the right to set its own appropriate level of pr otection (ALOP) and to conduct risk assessments 
on products to determine whether measures need to be applied to achieve ALOP.  
Under the BSE food safety policy, all countries that wish to export beef for human consumption to 
Australia, including those with OIE assigned BSE risk status of 'negligible', must apply to FSANZ 
for a BSE food safety assessment. 
A minor editorial correction can be made to the last sentence of para 3.60, i.e. 'FSANZ has 
assessed eight countries and assessments of another four countries are in progress' where 'eight 
countries' should be changed to 'nine countries'.  
3.2.8  Government procurement According to paragraph 3.71, the Australian authorit ies are evaluating the possibility of a future 
accession to the revised GPA. Switzerland thanks  Australia for this intention and for the work 
already undertaken to achieve that goal. 
Questions 14 & 15 
 Could the Australian authorities provide some indication regarding the time frame and the 
steps intended to be undertaken for achieving this objective?  
 In addition, to the review procedures mentioned in the Secretariat's report, what are the 
hurdles to be passed by Australia for having an internal procurement legislation in line with 
the standards of the revised GPA?  
Answers 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. 
The Australian Government incorporates its international procurement obligations into the 
Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs), and similar changes may also be required at the sub-central (state and territory) level. 
3.3 Measures directly affecting exports 
3.3.3 State trading 
According to Para. 3.89 of the Secretariat's report the Rice Marketing Board for the State of New 
South Wales was the last remaining operating state trading entity during the review period.  
Questions 16 & 17 
 Could Australia indicate the reasons for maintaining an export monopoly for rice whereas no 
such monopoly exists for other commodities?  
 Does Australia envisage to abolish this monopoly in the near future? 
Answers 
The Rice Marketing Board for the State of New So uth Wales (RMB NSW) is the sole entity that 
continues to fall within the scope of the WTO definition of a State Trading Enterprise. The RMB 
NSW helps promote the competitiveness of Australian farmers by ensuring that rice grown in the State of New South Wales is marketed, particularly through the operation of an export "single 
desk". The RMB NSW's primary function is to obta in the best possible monetary return to rice 
growers consistent with the maintenance of orderly marketing and operates under the authority of and in accordance with the Marketing of Primar y Products Act 1983, the Public Finance and Audit 
Act 1983 and the Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 186 - 
 
  The Australian market is open to competition from imports and significant quantities of rice are 
imported. About 99 per cent of total rice grown in Australia occurs in the State of New South Wales. Effective from 1 July 2006, the domestic marketing arrangements for rice grown in New South Wales were deregulated and a system of multiple authorised buyer permits for sales within 
Australia was introduced. Entities wanting to participate in the domestic market for rice grown in 
New South Wales must apply to the RMB NSW to become an Authorised Buyer. Authorised Buyers are able to buy and sell rice grown in New South Wales on the domestic market in Australia. 
For information on the NSW Government review of  the RMB NSW, please refer to the following 
document: http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/373778/report-review-nsw-
rice-marketing-act-1983.pdf .  
Further information about the RMB NSW is also available in Australia's WTO STE notification. 
3.3.4 Export assistance 
3.3.4.1 Export market development grants (EMDG) scheme 
Para. 3.90 of the Secretariat's report states that the EMDG scheme is used to partially reimburse 
expenditure on specific export promotion activities to overseas markets.  
Questions 18 & 19 
 Could Australia indicate to what extent the food and agricultural sector benefits from such 
grants?  
Furthermore it is mentioned that the scheme is operational until the 2015/2016 grant year.  Is there any intention to continue the EMDG programme past this date? 
Answers 
The Export Market Development Scheme (EMDG) is currently operational until the 2015-16 grant 
year, which is the 2016-17 financial year in which grants for the 2015-16 grant year are paid. The continuation of the scheme is subject to the Government's consideration of and response to the 
EMDG Review 2015. The Review is currently underway and is scheduled to report to Government 
in June 2015. 
Number and value of EMDG grants paid (fro m applications received in FY 2013-14 for 
Grant Year 2012-13) 
Industry Number of 
grants paid Value of 
grants paid (aggregate) 
Agriculture 69 $AU2,442,458 
Agriculture, forestry and fishing support services 16 $AU631,694 
Aquaculture 5 $AU100,911 
Food & beverage manufacturing 141 $AU5,185,824 
Grand total  231 $AU8,360,887 
Source:  EMDG database (accessed 24/3/2015). 
3.4 Measures affecting production and trade 
3.4.2 Production assistance 
In para. 3.111, the Secretariat's report indicate s that there is no legislative requirement for 
conducting program evaluations in order to assess their cost-effectiveness in achieving their stated 
objectives. The Government only committed to give broader consideration to the effectiveness of 
existing tax incentives for innovation and industry-funded research.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 187 - 
 
  Questions 20 & 21 
 Could the Australian authorities please indicate why the effectiveness of their production 
assistance in most areas benefitting from such assistance does not seem to be a priority despite the fact that Australia is facing a downward trend in economic productivity growth?  
 Are there any plans to change re-evaluate this in future? 
Answers 
Australia's production assistance programs are tailored for purpose. As noted in the Secretariat's 
report, "assistance generally benefits the industry receiving it and, if well targeted and designed, 
can deliver wider community benefits." 
No plans have been announced to alter this approach. 3.4.3 Competition and consumer policy 
3.4.3.1 Competition policy 
3.4.3.1.1 General framework 
According to Para. 3.118, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has 
different functions combined in a single institution, namely the responsibility for consumer policy 
and the responsibility for the enforcement of compet ition policy. The fact that consumer protection 
policy, economic regulation and competition policy are largely interdependent instruments of 
economic policy, each aimed at serving a common purpose of enhancing the efficiency with which 
markets work, is widely accepted. It is also widely recognised that there can be tensions between those policies.  
Question 22 
What advantages does Australia see in such an organisation? Answer 
These questions were examined recently by the in dependent review of Australia's competition laws 
and policy, the Competition Policy Review. The final Report was released by the Review Panel on 
31 March 2015. It recommended that since enforcem ent of competition policy and enforcement of 
consumer protection matters are complementary, bo th should continue to be administered by one 
body.  
The Report noted that having a single body: 
 fosters a pro-market culture; 
 facilitates co-ordination and depth across the functions; 
 provides a source of consistent information to business and consumers about their rights; 
and 
 provides administrative savings and skills enhancement through pooling information, skills 
and expertise. 
A single body also ensures that the issues of small business are not overlooked, as could be the 
case if the competition and consumer functions were separated into different bodies. 
However, the Panel noted that tensions can also arise between the two functions, so it is important 
that the ACCC continues to maintain an approp riate balance between it s competition-related 
regulatory tasks and its role in protecting consumers. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 188 - 
 
  The Report also recommended that the ACCC's cu rrent access and pricing functions be separated 
into a dedicated regulator. 
The Government is considering its response to the Report. 3.4.3 Competition and consumer policy 
3.4.3.1.6 Enforcement 
Para. 3.130 provides indications regarding the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA). Questions 23, 24 & 25 
 Could Australia indicate the role of international cooperation in the investigations under the 
Competition and Consumer Act (CCA)?  
 For which types of harmful anti-competitive bu siness conduct is international cooperation the 
most useful?  
 Do laws and/or treaties allow the exchange of confidential information with the country 
partners? 
Answers 
The role of international cooperation under the CCA is significant and covers competition, 
consumer protection and product safety.  
International cooperation is particularly important in detecting and deterring cartels, as well as in 
securing evidence in enforcement action against cartels. International cooperation is often 
conducted by informal discussion. Formal mechanisms are also used and include: 
 s.155AAA of the CCA, which enables the ACCC to  disclose confidential information to 
counterpart agencies in other countries 
 Memoranda of Understanding and treaties which establish the framework for cooperation, 
and  
 the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987, which provides for incoming and 
outgoing requests in criminal matters. 
3.4.6 Intellectual property rights 
4.4.6.2 Industrial property 
3.4.6.2.1 Patents 
Australia's Department of Health (DOH's) seems to apply a preliminary injunction policy that 
enables the DOH to seek damages from originator pharmaceutical companies in case the DOH is negatively (price-wise) affected by a preliminary injunction issued during the course of a patent 
dispute. As we understand it, the Australian government would base its claim for damages on the 
Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) price reduct ion mechanism for generics, if a court finds the 
relevant patent invalid or not infringed. The DOH could apparently claim that the preliminary 
injunction delayed the PBS-listing of a generic version and therefore claim owed damages for the 
lost price reduction the government may have achieved in the absence of a preliminary injunction. 
Questions 26, 27 & 28 
 How does the Australian government make sure that the DOH's preliminary 
injunction/damages policy does not deter right holders from seeking to enforce their IP rights in good faith and therefore from taking effective action?  
 If the threat of possible damages (obviously, in  addition to the appropriate compensation for 
any potential injury caused to a defendant) is so high that applicants might refrain from 
enforcing their IP rights in good faith (for in stance by seeking provisional measures), out of 
fear of possibly ruining damage claims, how does the Australian government make sure that 
enforcement procedures (in particular 'provisional measures') permit effective action against 
infringement? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 189 - 
 
   How does the Australian government make sure that such a policy is reconcilable with TRIPS 
Art. 41 that stipulates that "Members shall ensure that enforcement procedures as specified in this Part are available under their law so at to permit effective action against any act of infringement"? 
Answers 
The Australian Government does not have a 'preliminary injunction/damages policy'.  
The Australian Government's court action in two separate cases is based upon longstanding 
general law in Australia relating to the recovery of losses suffered by affected persons when an 
ultimately unsuccessful litigant obtained an injunction preventing another party from taking action of some kind. It is not specific to intellectual property. 
In seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the entry of a competitive generic product, the 
patent holder provides the 'usual undertaking' to the courts to compensate any persons adversely 
affected by the operation of the courts' injunction if the litigant is ultimately unsuccessful. Preventing the entry of a competitive generic product through a preliminary injunction results in 
two types of losses: 
 First, the generic pharmaceutical competitor lo ses profits because its product has been kept 
out of the market for a period of time.  
 Second, the Government suffers losses because the prices it pays for pharmaceuticals 
provided to members of the public under th e Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) are 
kept artificially high until the delayed entry of  the generic product into the market triggers 
statutory price cuts.  
The Government's actions are based upon the principle that where the Government suffers losses 
as the result of the actions of another person, the Government is able to seek to recover those losses where it has a legal right to do so.  
The Government's action does not deter companies from enforcing their intellectual property 
rights, including through recourse to provisional measures such as the preliminary injunction.  
This is so for two reasons. First, the originator pharmaceutical company need not seek an 
injunction to keep the generic competitor out of the market – if the originator wins the 
proceedings alleging the infringement; it is entitled to recover from the generic its losses arising from the unrestrained market entry of the generic competitor. 
Second, if the originator company wins its patent infringement case, it does not have to pay any 
compensation to anyone under the undertakings it gave to the court to get an injunction. 
However, if the originator loses the case (that is, it has incorrectly claimed a breach of its patent 
by the generic competitor) it has no intellectual property rights to enforce. It is only then that the 
originator becomes liable to pay compensation to those who suffered loss because of the 
injunction. Such compensation is limited to the losses suffered by affected persons due to the injunction. It does not deter recourse to the preliminary injunction.  
Possible damages are limited to the losses suffered due to the injunction and do not deter recourse 
to the preliminary injunction.  
The threat of possible damages does not flow from the choice of an applicant to enforce its 
intellectual property rights, but from the choice of  the applicant to seek an injunction restraining 
the alleged intellectual property rights infringer from selling its product in the market. The 
applicant can elect not to seek an injunction, thus permitting the competitor to sell its product in the market, and can then seek compensation from the competitor if ultimately the applicant can 
prove its intellectual property rights have been infringed.  
If the originator seeks an injunction against the generic competitor and loses the case, the 
Australian Government considers the originator company should be liable to pay all losses that 
arose because of the injunction. If it were to pay only the losses suffered by the generic WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 190 - 
 
  competitor, it would realise a windfall gain - the profits the originator has made by obtaining the 
higher subsidised prices for its drugs from the Australian Government under the PBS. These windfall gains arise because the statutory reductions to PBS prices, which take effect from the entry of generic competition, have been delayed by the injunction. 
The Australian Government does not have a policy on preliminary injunction damages. 
Australian law provides for the enforcement of patent and other intellectual property rights 
consistently with the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), 
including Article 41. It allows patent holders to seek preliminary injunctions restraining conduct 
which they claim to be in breach of a patent if they wish.  
Where the courts have determined that no intellectual property rights have been infringed, the 
obligation to pay damages for losses resulting from a preliminary injunction is fully consistent with 
TRIPS, including Article 41. The damages are limited to the losses suffered by affected persons 
due to the preliminary injunction. They do not deter recourse to the preliminary injunction or to the enforcement of intellectual property rights more generally. 
4.2 Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries 
4.2.2 Main policy developments 4.2.2.1 Border measures 
Para 4.15 of the Secretariat's report states that exports of certain agricultural products remain 
subject to levies. It is furthermore stated that the revenues generated are used to fund research and development, marketing, residue-testing, plant and animal biosecurity programmes and emergency responses for industry.  
Questions 29, 30 & 31 
 Could Australia provide additional information on the scope of such charges and its 
distribution over the different programmes cited?  
 Could Australia also explain in more detail what kind of marketing programmes are funded in 
this way?  
 Specifically, is promotion of products on overse as markets eligible for funding through levies? 
Answers 
The Australian Government role's, through the Department of Agriculture, is to liaise with 
industries that want a levy system to implement an effective collection system at minimum cost. The government is responsible for the effective delivery of levies, by administering, collecting and 
disbursing levies, on a cost recovery basis, on behalf of industries. 
Application of a levy or export charge on certai n exported agricultural products depends on the 
point at which the product enters the market chain. Export charge usually applies when a producer 
direct exports a product. For some commodities, an export charge applies to all exports (e.g. wine 
export charge). In some cases, a product destined for export is first sold by a producer into the 
domestic market (e.g. to a wholesaler), so levy applies, and then exported at a later stage. In this 
scenario, export charge would not apply because levy has already been paid. Whilst the 
department can identify amounts of export charge paid, we cannot identify whether a product on which levy was paid has remained in the domestic market or been exported. The levy mechanism for some products means that a levy will capture all production (e.g. delivery of grains), regardless 
of whether the product ends up in the domestic or  export market, therefore an export charge is 
not required. 
Most levies and charges have a number of components with each component direct to a specific 
purpose. For example, the levy/charge on fresh apples of 1.845 cents per kilogram is split into four 
components: 1.03 cents/kg for marketing; 0.72 cents/kg for research and development; 0.02 cents/kg for Plant Health Australia membership and programs; and 0.075 cents/kg for residue 
testing.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 191 - 
 
  Identification of revenue raised by each comp onent of over 30 export charges would require 
significant resources. As some exported products may have attracted a levy instead of an export charge, these revenue figures would not accurately reflect the amount of funds raised from products which are exported. 
Revenue from levies is used to fund various activities such as marketing programmes. The 
decision to fund any activity is made by the numerous organisations who receive the levies in consultation with industry. Specific information on the projects that are funded by levies can be 
found on the organisations' websites.  
Some organisations decide to use levy funds for marketing programmes which can include 
promotion of products on overseas markets. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 192 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CHINESE TAIPEI 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 2. TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIME 
2.1 Overview 
Page 26 (Para 2.3) 
Australia continues to screen proposed foreign investments over a certain value to ensure that 
they are in the national interest. However, higher screening thresholds for non-sensitive sectors 
are increasingly being incorporated into RTAs. As at the time of Australia's previous Review, 
proposed investments are almost always allowed, but conditions are often attached, particularly in the real estate sector. In 2011, a foreign equity limit on investment in Qantas airline was removed, bringing FDI restrictions on this airline in line with those applied to all others. Foreign equity caps 
remain in the areas of airports, civil aviation, maritime transport and telecommunications. 
Restrictions on foreign direct investment in residential real estate are also in place.  
Questions 1 & 2 
 What kind of investment thresholds have b een implemented by Australia for non-sensitive 
sectors? 
 What are the reasons for Australia increasingly raising the screening thresholds for non-
sensitive sectors? 
Answer 
The Australian Government reviews foreign investment proposals on a case-by-case basis to 
ensure they are not contrary to the national inte rest. Proposals are subject to review when value 
of the target business exceeds a monetary screening threshold.  
In general, proposals to acquire an interest of 15 per cent or more in any business valued at over 
$252 million (or the higher threshold of $1,094 million for countries where Australia has given 
preferential treatment through free trade agreem ents) are subject to approval. Investments in 
commercial real estate over $55million (or the higher threshold of $1,094 million for countries where Australia has given preferential treatment through free trade agreements) also require prior 
approval. 
All foreign government investors require approval  from the Treasurer before making any direct 
investment in Australia, starting a new business or acquiring an interest in land, regardless of the value. 
The monetary screening thresholds are indexed annually on 1 January, using the DGP implicit price 
deflator for the previous financial year.  
2.6 Framework for Business and Investment 
Page 34 (Para 2.37) 
Proposals for such investments are sent to the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) which 
makes recommendations, within set timeframes, to the Treasurer who may approve; approve with 
conditions or reject the application. As at the time of Australia's previous review, the vast majority 
of applications are approved, often with conditions attached. No proposals were refused in 2012-13.  
Questions 3 & 4 
 Does Australia have a national security re view mechanism for foreign investment?   
 If so, please elaborate on the mechanism and how it works. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 193 - 
 
  Answer 
The Australian Government reviews foreign investment proposals against the national interest on a 
case-by-case basis. The Treasurer can block proposals that are contrary to the national interest or apply conditions to the way proposals are implemented to ensure they are not contrary to the 
national interest. 
National security is one of the factors considered when assessing the national interest. 2.4.1 WTO 
Page 28 (Para 2.14) 
Australia is an original Member of the WTO, and grants at least most-favoured-nation (MFN) 
treatment to all its trading partners. It is not a member of the WTO plurilateral Agreements on 
Government Procurement or Trade in Civil Aircraft. However, Australia announced on 
14 November 2014 that it is working towards acceding to the Government Procurement 
Agreement (GPA) (section 3.2.8). 
3. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
3.1 Overview  
Page 37 (para 3.4) Australia remains an observer to the WTO Committee on Government Procurement (GPA) and is 
working towards possibly acceding to the GPA. Comprehensive chapters on government 
procurement in a number of its regional trade agreements (RTAs) reflect its commitment to respect principles of transparency and non-discrimination in the conduct of its government procurement. Nonetheless, Australia has continued to use government procurement as an 
instrument of economic policy aimed at fostering industrial development in certain sensitive areas 
that are exempt from mandatory rules applying to procurement above certain thresholds. Procurement rules were amended, inter alia, to redefine procurement methods and adjust legal 
terminology. The target of sourcing at least 10 % of purchase value from small and medium sized 
enterprises (SMEs), as well as preference margins for local suppliers and local content requirements by certain state governments, have been maintained or revised but are applied in 
line with RTA commitments. 
Questions 5, 6, 7 & 8 
 Could Australia please state the year–wise value of government procurement awarded to 
foreign bidders during the period since its previous review? 
 Could Australia please identify what the sensitiv e areas (indicated in para 3.4 of Secretariat 
report) are exempt from mandatory rules applying to procurement above certain thresholds? 
 Could Australia please indicate when it will submit its initial offer to the GPA to formally launch 
the accession process? And what is Australian government's plan to accomplish the process to 
become the fully fledged GPA Party? 
 Australia has finished its invitation of submissions from interested parties to inform Government 
consideration of accession in January 2015. Coul d Australia please provide a brief assessment 
of the impact of accession to the GPA? 
Answers 
The Commonwealth Government does not discriminate by collecting information on a supplier's 
nationality for government procurement contracts. While supplier addresses are reported in 
contract notices, this is not a definitive indicator of whether a local or foreign firm has been awarded the contract. Commonwealth Government procurement contracts reported during 
2013-2014 that reported a foreign supplier address totalled $5,414 billion.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 194 - 
 
  A discussion on areas exempt from Commonwealth procurement rules can be found at paragraph 
3.74 on page 62 of the Secretariat's report. A list of exemptions is contained in Appendix A of the 
Commonwealth Procurement Rules on line at http://www.finance.gov.au/procurement/procu rement-policy-and-guidance/commonwealth-
procurement-rules/cprs-appendices.html#appendixa/ . 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. 
Therefore, an assessment of those submissions is not currently available. 
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
3.2.6 Contingency measures 3.2.6.1 Anti-dumping and countervailing measures 
Page 51 (Para 3.38) 
… In January 2014, the sixth tranche of legislative reforms entered into force and included: the 
removal, in certain circumstances, of the need for the Minister to consider the lesser duty rule; 
clarification on the application of retrospective duties provisions; and the introduction of a new 
type of anti-circumvention inquiry to address "sales at a loss" cases. 
Question 9 
Could Australia please provide further explanation of the so-called "sales at a loss" cases, and 
describe how the new type of anti-circumvention inquiry works to address these cases? 
Answer 
The new type of anti-circumvention inquiry addre sses behaviours that are aimed to avoid the price 
effect of dumping or countervailing duties that have been imposed. This can occur when, after the 
imposition of duties, and over a reasonable period, the prices for the goods concerned have not risen commensurate with the level of the duties payable. This type of behaviour causes the 
domestic industry to continue to be injured by the dumped or subsidised goods. The Australian 
authority can examine the circumstances of the sale to determine the reasons for the sales at a loss (such as short term promotional sales, exchange rate fluctuations, expiring stock, etc). The 
inquiry will give due consideration to the char acteristics of the goods concerned, the market 
conditions, the nature of the relationship betw een the importer and exporter, and reasonable 
levels of profit. The Authority will also examine cl osely the possibility that the exporter is providing 
the importer with a reimbursement of some king for the amount of the loss. 
3.4 Measures affecting Production and Trade 
3.4.2 Production assistance 
Page 75 (Para 3.116) 
In October 2014 an Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda was announced 
(section 1.4). It consists of six initiatives aimed at boosting Australian competitiveness over the next 18 months: encouraging employee share ownership; ... and establishing Industry Growth 
Centres to help industry exploit new global markets and supply chains, ... and generate new jobs 
Question 10 
We would appreciate having more information on Australia's initiatives to encourage employee 
share ownership in innovative start-ups and to further enhance domestic employment. Could the 
Australian government, therefore, please provide further details of the improvement in the tax 
treatment of "employee share ownership" and the expansion in employment levels in innovative 
start-ups? WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 195 - 
 
  Answer 
Legislation was recently introduced into the Australian Parliament to improve the tax 
arrangements for employee share schemes (ESS). This  is expected to bolster entrepreneurship in 
Australia and support innovative start-up companies. Small firms sometimes lack the cash flow to 
pay salaries that can allow them to compete internationally. ESS allows firms to be globally 
competitive by supplementing employees' salaries  with equity in the company the work for. 
There are two key changes to ESS tax arrangements, both of which benefit small businesses. 
Firstly, for the employees of all companies, disco unted options will generally be taxed when they 
are exercised (converted to shares), rather than when the employee receives the options. 
Secondly, employees of eligible start up companies will receive an additional tax concession on shares or options that they receive at a small discount. For shares, the discount will be exempt 
from tax, and options will have the tax deferred until sale.  
Subject to the Parliament's passage of the legislation, the new arrangements will apply to ESS 
interests issued from 1 July 2015. 
4.1 Overview 
Page 89 (Para 4.1) Australia has maintained its relatively open trade regime since its last Review. At the same time, 
however, despite certain policy changes, it has co ntinued to provide general and industry specific 
support in different forms to virtually the same sectors. In addition, a number of activities, including cargo-liner shipping conferences and essent ial infrastructure facilities (some of which are 
considered to be "natural monopolies"), such as electricity networks, rail tracks, natural gas 
pipelines, water, communications networks, and post , continue to benefit from special regimes or 
exemptions that restrict competition. The fact that some activities remain protected or otherwise assisted more than others (e.g. manufacturing compared to agriculture) continues to constitute a 
potential impediment to efficient reallocation of resources in the economy as a whole. As a result 
of this and other factors (section 1.2.1 and below), no major improvement in overall multi-factor productivity growth (MFP), and thus international competitiveness, was achieved during the period 
under review.   
Questions 11 & 12 
 Given that Australia maintains a relatively open trade regime overall, does it have any plans to 
further liberalize the particular sectors mentioned above - electricity networks, rail tracks, 
natural gas pipelines, water, communications networks, etc.?  
 If so, could Australia please elaborate further on its plans and inform us of the anticipated 
timeframes? 
Answers 
Australia remains committed to multilateral trade liberalisation through the Doha Round. Australia 
is also negotiating a number of plurilateral agreements with subsets of World Trade Organization 
members, including a Trade in Services Agreement and a Trade in Environmental Goods 
Agreement. Australia is also pushing ahead with bilateral and regional trade agreements. 
Australia maintains specific limits on, or requirements relating to, foreign investment in prescribed 
sensitive sectors, including investments in media; telecommunications; transport; defence and 
military related industries; and the extraction of uranium or plutonium or the operation of nuclear 
facilities. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 196 - 
 
  4.5.5 Financial services  
Page 114 (Para 4.73)  Proposed foreign investments in Australian financial institutions, as with foreign investments in 
other sectors, are subject to a screening process with exceptions applied to a few RTA partners 
(Chile; Korea (Rep. of); New Zealand; and the United States) (section 2). The Financial Sector 
(Shareholdings) Act (FSSA) operates in parallel with this process… 
& 4.5.5.2 Insurance 
Pages 117-118 (Para 4.90) 
… Foreign life insurance companies may only establish as subsidiaries but not branches … . An 
exception exists to this rule for eligible foreign life insurance companies; this currently applies to life insurance providers from the United States; New Zealand; and the Republic of Korea under 
their respective RTAs. Japanese life insurance providers will also receive an exception through the 
recently signed RTA once it enters into force (section 2.4.2.1). 
Question 13 
In signing a RTA, what are the factors that Australia takes into account in deciding whether to 
grant exceptions to its partner/s in the financial services sectors? 
Answer 
The Government welcomes foreign investment. It has helped build Australia's economy and will 
continue to enhance the wellbeing of Australians by supporting economic growth and prosperity. 
The Government reviews foreign investment propos als against the national interest on a case-by-
case basis.  
The Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (the Act)  provides the legislative framework for 
our screening regime. The Act allows the Treasurer or his delegate to review investment proposals to decide if they are contrary to Australia's national interest. 
Australia's Foreign Investment Policy  (the Policy) provides guidance to foreign investors to 
assist understanding of the Government's approach to administering the Act. The Policy also identifies investment categories that need to be  notified to the Government for prior approval, 
even if the Act does not appear to apply. 
The Government expects all investors (both foreign and domestically owned) to comply with 
Australia's laws and maintain high standards of conduct at all times. 
FIRB and FTAs 
The outcome of Australia's regime for the FIRB scr eening of foreign investments from FTA partners 
has been determined in the context of each individual negotiation and consistent with Australia's international trade obligations. 
Page 114 (Para 4.74) 
Various tax measures have been put in place, or are being implemented, to encourage the further 
development of Australia's financial services sector. Offshore Banking Unit (OBU) rules provide for 
a concessional rate of tax (10%) on income earned from eligible offshore banking activities. This 
concession is available to an entity that is declared by the Treasurer to be an OBU. The 
Commonwealth Government has announced that it will modernise the OBU regime to encourage genuine offshore banking activity in Australia, starting in July 2015. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 197 - 
 
  Questions 13 & 14 
 What are the requirements or conditions for offshore banking activities to be considered eligible 
for the 10% of concessional tax rate? 
 Apart from concessional tax rates, are there any other measures that Australia plans to adopt 
in order to encourage the OBU activities starting in July 2015? 
Answers 
The tax laws provide a concessional tax rate of 10 per cent on income derived from a range of 
eligible activities with offshore persons.  
Introduced in 1992, the range of activities eligible for the concessional tax rate included: 
 borrowing or lending money (AUD transactions are generally not allowed);  
 providing certain types of guarantees;  
 eligible contract activity;  
 trading in certain contracts, securities, non-resident shares or trust units, gold, silver or 
platinum bullion or rights in respect of such bullion and foreign currency;  
 making and managing certain investments;  
 providing financial advice; and  
 hedging against interest rate and currency exposure risks in respect of borrowing and 
lending activities. 
While the broad framework of eligible activities  has remained unchanged since 1992, activities 
falling within the framework were expanded in 1996 and 1999.  
The Australian Government has announced it would introduce targeted integrity rules and other 
reforms to modernise the OBU regime. These proposed reforms, which are still subject to the 
legislative processes, are intended to encourage OBU activities. These include: 
 modernising the existing list of eligible activiti es to ensure that the OBU regime operates as 
intended by attracting mobile financial sector activity. The modernisation will target: 
o unfunded lending activities,  
o syndicated lending activities,  
o changing the strict position on restrictions to certain guarantee activities and 
connections with Australia.  
o certain commodities trading activities to be considered eligible  
o certainty around entering into securities lending and repurchase agreements 
o alignment of the tax treatment of non-deliverable forward foreign currency 
contracts with equivalent foreign exchange contracts 
o removing the existing limitation on a portfolio's average Australian investment 
asset percentages 
o clarifying the rules on provision of investment or financial advice to include advice 
on the disposal of investments 
o the addition of leasing activities involving offshore persons to the list of eligible OB 
activities. 
Page 116 (Para 4.81) The report mentions that four major banks have  been designated by APRA as systemically-
important banks (D-SIBs). D-SIBs pose greater systemic risks and will be subject to more 
intensive supervision as well as higher capital requirements from 2016.  
Question 15 
Did any of the four major banks designated by the APRA as being D-SIBs express concern over 
being subject to more intensive supervision? In th e future, will APRA also be asking foreign banks 
to satisfy higher capital requirements?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 198 - 
 
  Answer 
Due to their size, complexity, interconnectedness and resultant impact on the domestic economy, 
APRA's supervision framework has always subjec ted the major banks to a heightened level of 
supervision. Post the global financial crisis, the Basel framework formally recognised domestic 
systemically important banks (DSIB) and requir ed such banks be subject to higher capital 
requirements commensurate with the risks they pose. Given the Australian regulatory capital framework is based on the Basel framework, the major banks generally considered a DSIB capital 
charge to be appropriate. Given their size and ri sk profile, APRA has no plans to impose a DSIB 
capital charge to foreign banks operating in Australia. 
4.5.6 Communications Page 121 (Para 4.104) 
According to the ITU, Australia has a very high level of ICT development and increasing mobile 
broadband subscriptions and penetration rates. The Secretariat Report mentions that after the Australian Government held a spectrum auction in 2013, offering 90MHz of digital dividend 
spectrum (700MHz band) and 140 MHz of spectrum from the 2.5 GHz band, in 2014, it started a 
review of spectrum policy arrangements. The review is expected to report in early 2015, with implementation of reforms to also commence in the same year.  
Questions 16 & 17  
 Could Australia please provide details of the cont ents or suggestions in its review of spectrum 
policy in early 2015?  
 Could Australia please also describe the strategies it expects to deploy in the spectrum planning 
of mobile broadband over the next decade? 
Answers 
The review of Australian's spectrum management framework commenced in May 2014, with the 
purpose of maximising the public benefit derived from spectrum. The recommendations of the 
review are currently being considered by the Aust ralian Government and are not available at this 
time. However a public consultation paper, Spec trum Review – Potential Reform Directions, was 
released in November 2014 that outlined a number of proposals under consideration.  
Please visit www.communications.gov.au/spectrumreview  to view the consultation paper and 
obtain more information on the review. 
Spectrum planning in Australia is carried out by the Australian Communications and Media 
Authority (ACMA), the independent regulator responsible for managing spectrum in accordance 
with legislation and government policy. As part of the spectrum management process, the ACMA analyses changing technology and demand patte rns, and emerging pressures for change. These 
changes are then reflected in ACMA's future spec trum planning and work program to ensure that 
spectrum is allocated and used as efficiently as possible.  
Australia's spectrum planning decisions are reflected in the Australian Radiofrequency Spectrum 
Plan (ARSP), which divides the spectrum into a number of frequency bands and specifies the 
general purposes for which the bands may be used. The ARSP is usually updated at the conclusion of each World Radiocommunication Conference. In  addition, the ACMA prepares an annual Five 
Year Spectrum Outlook, which provides a rolling five ‐year snapshot of the ACMA's spectrum 
demand analysis and indicative work program.  
With regard to spectrum planning for mobile broadband, the ACMA's demand analysis and planning 
strategy is detailed in Towards 2020 – Future Sp ectrum Requirements for Mobile Broadband. The 
ACMA is currently preparing an update of this do cument that will incorporate recent developments 
in Australia and internationally, including preparations for the World Radiocommunication Conference in November 2015 relating to identification of additional spectrum bands for mobile broadband. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 199 - 
 
  4.5.7 Transport 
4.5.7 1 Maritime transport 
Page 124 (Para 4.123) According to the new Coastal Trading (Revitalisin g Australian Shipping) Act of 2012 ... "Foreign 
vessels can engage in coastal trading under a temporary licence, subject to a licensing process 
during which Australian General Licensed vessels have the opportunity to notify their availability to carry out the proposed voyage on competitive terms."  
Question 18 
Could Australia please explain further how the new licensing process for foreign vessels engaged in 
Australian coastal trading applies to interested cargo liners and provide the related regulations? 
Answer 
The requirements for licences to provide maritime transport services in the domestic Australian 
economy are clearly set out in the Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Act 2012 (see http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2014C00575 ). These requirements apply equally to 
international liners and other ships engaged in coastal trading as defined. 
For further information see: 
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/maritime /business/coastal_trading/index.aspx  or contact the 
Shipping Business Unit for specific advice or information 
shippingbusinessunit@infrastructure.gov.au  or +61 2 6274 7474.  
Australian policy statement WT/TPR/G/312 
2.5 Market and Regulatory reforms, including Tax Reform 
2.5.4 Deregulation 
Page 7 (Para 2.19) The Government has taken a three-pronged approach  to addressing regulatory burdens. Its focus 
is on reducing the flow of new regulations, reviewing the stock of existing regulations and 
encouraging regulators to minimise the burdens they impose when administering regulation. As 
part of this agenda the Government is committed to reducing compliance costs by $A 1 billion per 
year for business, individuals and community organi zations. There is also a requirement that any 
new regulations are offset by reductions in other regulatory burdens. 
Questions 19, 20 & 21 
 Could Australia please describe the methodology used to review the stock of existing 
regulations, the principles on which such review is based, and its main priorities? 
 Could we please also have further details of how the government plans to achieve its 
commitment to reduce compliance costs by $A 1 billion a year for business, individuals and 
community organizations, and how results will be evaluated?  
 Is Regulatory Impact Analysis to be used in the process of deregulation? 
Answers 
Methodology  A two-staged process to review the stock of legislation in the Commonwealth was undertaken 
throughout 2014. Firstly, each portfolio was required to identify and count any regulation – legislative or administrative – that imposed a co mpliance burden on non-government entities and WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 200 - 
 
  individuals. Secondly, portfolios were required to quantify the compliance cost of these 
regulations, using random sampling if the entire stock could not be costed.  
Further information on the methodology used to review the stock of regulation can be found at: 
www.cuttingredtape.gov.au . 
$1 billion target  
Since the 2013 election, the Government has announced more than $2.45 billion in red tape 
savings. When reforms contributing to the target are proposed, an estimate is made of the likely 
change in the cost of complying with Commonwealth regulations. In each instance, the department 
must measure both the reduction in compliance costs from removing red tape as well as any additional costs arising from introducing new re gulations. These changes are estimated using the 
Regulatory Burden Measurement Framework. 
Regulatory Impact Analysis  
As part of the deregulation agenda, the Govern ment has strengthened the Regulatory Impact 
Analysis (RIA) framework, with a focus on costing impacts on business, community organisations 
and individuals as part of a broader goal to redu ce the burden of regulation. A Regulatory Impact 
Statement (RIS) is now required for all Cabinet submissions, as well as any non-Cabinet decision made by an Australian Government entity if it is likely to impact on business, community 
organisations or individuals.  
2.5.5 Financial Systems Inquiry Page 7 (Paras 2.21 & 2.22) The Australian Government released the final report of the independent Financial System Inquiry 
on 7 December 2014.  
The report made 44 recommendations to serve as a blueprint for the financial system over the 
next decade. The recommendations are based on the themes of funding Australia's economy and 
boosting competition. They focus on five specific areas: resilience; superannuation and retirement 
incomes; innovation; consumer outcomes; and the regulatory system.  
Question 22 
Could Australia please elaborate further on its plans to promote financial innovation? Will risk 
control measures be covered in the financial innovation plans? 
Answer 
The Inquiry made a number of recommendations that seek to provide more facilitative policy 
settings, enabling financial firms to innovate. This includes by reducing barriers to innovation and 
removing unnecessary impediments. The Government is considering the Inquiry's recommendations. 
Consistent with this and as supported by the Government's Industry Innovation and 
Competitiveness Agenda, Australia is working towards introducing an equity crowdfunding framework. As part of this process, the Government has been consulting on potential regulatory 
models and has sought stakeholder feedback to help inform its decision. The Government is 
mindful that any framework introduced would need to appropriately balance reducing the 
regulatory barriers to crowd-sourced equity funding (CSEF) with maintaining adequate investor protections. 
CSEF has the potential to increase the funding options available to entrepreneurs. This would 
assist in the development of their businesses and contribute to the development of a more 
dynamic, competitive Australian economy. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 201 - 
 
  Other questions 
In September 2011, Australia began allowing its businesses to import butterfly orchids with culture 
media (large seedlings). After importation, it takes only three to four months of cultivation for them to be ready for market. However, because the Australian phytosanitary inspection authorities 
are ultra-rigorous during customs clearance, the im ported orchids must usually be fumigated. This 
causes most of the plants to wither, entailing losses for both the Australian importers and our exporters, thereby reducing the willingness of businesses on either side to engage in the 
importation or exportation of orchids. Furthermore, the application of phytosanitary standards by 
the authorities of Australian state governments varies with respect to mature butterfly orchid plants, which also makes it very difficult for businesses to deal with. 
Questions 23 & 24 
 Is it possible for the various state phytosanitary inspection authorities to harmonize their 
standards? 
 Could Australia explain the necessity for fumigation? Are there any other alternatives? 
Answers 
The Australian Government Department of Agriculture has moved to a national service delivery 
model that is intended to better identify and address any consistency issues in the inspection and 
clearance processes. Under this service delivery mo del, the Plant Services Group has responsibility 
for managing the border inspections of all nursery stock (and several other plant commodities) through a regional network. If consistency issues are identified they are discussed by the regional 
representatives and resolutions are applied nationally. 
Phalaenopsis orchids exported to Australia under the agreed bilateral Work Plan are subject to 
inspection by the Department of Agriculture, which will verify the plants are free from live regulated insects and disease symptoms. In circumstances where live regulated insects are 
detected, material is held subject to the insects being identified. Identification of insects is 
performed when it is deemed feasible and where the importer agrees to all costs involved.  
If the insects can be identified as a non-regulated pest, then the consignment will not require 
treatment. Where insects detected are either a regulated pest or cannot be identified, the 
consignment will require remedial treatment. Th e type of treatment wi ll depend on the pest 
detected and the level of their mobility. Where flying insects are detected, consignments are subject to methyl bromide treatment, otherwise importers are offered an alternative insecticidal 
dipping treatment. 
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF 
CHINESE TAIPEI 
Follow-up question 1 
According to AusTender reporting data, the percentage shares of the 3 types of procurement 
methods in total procurement counts for the period between February 2012 and December 2014 are 
found to be identical to the shares by procurement value mentioned in Para 3.74. The description for 
3 types of procurement methods in Para 3.74 may be referring to procurement counts, instead of procurement value. Is this understanding correct? 
Answer 
Yes, that understanding is correct. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 202 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THAILAND 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 Page 61 Paragraph 3.71  
Question: 
Please explain in more detail the establishmen t and ensuing implementation of Australia's 
domestic review mechanism for suppliers and how Australia has aligned the procedures with regard to pre-qualification and limited tendering with the revised GPA in preparation for its 
accession . 
Answer 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. The Australian 
Government incorporates its international procurement obligations into the Commonwealth 
Procurement Rules (CPRs). 
Page 62 paragraphs 3.73 footnote 101  
Question:  
Please clarify how Australia's policies which aim at assisting indigenous Australians in the purview 
of government procurement have been undertaken.  
Answer 
The Australian Government currently has an Indigenous Opportunities Policy (IOP) that aims to 
maximise Indigenous employment and business opportunities, including through government procurement. Information on the policy is available online https://employment.gov.au/indigenous-
opportunities-policy . The IOP will be replaced by a new Indigenous Procurement Policy from 1 July 
2015. An overview of this new policy is available online http://www.dpmc.gov.au/indigenous-
affairs/about/jobs-land-and-economy-programme/new-indigenous-procurement-policy .  
Question 
With regard to the policies designed to promote the participation of SMEs in the government 
procurement, we would like to ascertain whether and how Australia could balance between 
attaining the best practice of facilitating the part icipation of SMEs on the one hand, and avoiding 
discriminatory measures that favor only domestic SMEs as unequivocally recognized by the GPA Committee's work programme on SMEs on the other. 
Answer 
The Australian Government has several policies that seek to ensure that Australian and New 
Zealand SMEs have a fair and reasonable opportunity to participate in Australia Government procurement opportunities. One such policy is the Au stralian Industry Participation Plans. Details 
can be found online 
http://www.industry.gov.au/industry/IndustryInitiat ives/AustralianIndustryParticipation/Pages/CG
PAIPplans.aspx . These policies are implemented in a manner consistent with our international 
commitments.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 203 - 
 
  Pages 62-63 paragraph 3.74 
Question  
Recent data has shown that Australia issued th e Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs) in July 
2014, but this report, as mentioned in footnote 108, has referred to the 2012 CPRs. We would like 
to seek clarification as follows: 
 - Are the 2014 CPRs different from the 2012 CPRs? If so, please provide detail.  - Are the 2012 CPRs, including exemptions listed in Appendix A, replaced by the 2014 CPRs 
automatically? Please clarify. 
Please clarify in greater detail the "preferential government procurement policies" for the 
procurements under Appendix A of the 2014 CPRs, especially in the following areas: 
 - real estate property and/or accommodations;  
 - R&D services;  
 - goods & services outside the Australian territory;  - motor vehicles; 
 - government advertising services; and  
 - goods & services from an SME with at least 50% indigenous ownership.  
We would appreciate detail of such policies, including the rationales behind them and other 
relevant information. 
Answer 
The 2014 CPRs replaced the 2012 CPRs. The 2014 CPRs reflect a change in terminology relating to 
government entities. There were no changes to procurement procedures or exemptions. 
The Appendix A exemptions provide that Commonwealth entities may undertake a limited tender 
instead of an open tender. However, the non-discrimination requirements at paragraph 5.3 in the CPRs still apply to most of these procurements.  The Government reserves the right to policy 
flexibility in areas of exemption. 
Pages 63-64 paragraph 3.79 
Question  
Please describe in greater detail how each of Australian states implements price preferences for 
domestically-produced goods in compliance with Australia's ongoing international government procurement commitments.  
Answer 
The states and territories and local authorities ea ch set their own procurement policies. Links to 
the procurement operations of State and Territory Governments can be accessed via the AusTender website ( https://www.tenders.gov.au/?ev ent=public.relatedlink.list ). The States and 
Territories implement policies which aim to raise awareness about Australian capabilities, 
particularly for SMEs. The measures comply with Australia's international trade obligations. 
Question 
In addition, we would like to further seek clarification on how Australian states could implement 
such preferences pursuant to Australia's future international government procurement commitments, especially when Australia becomes a signatory to the GPA. We understand that according to Article V:3(a) of the revised GPA, price preferences programme may be adopted only 
by developing countries as one of the transitional measures. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 204 - 
 
  Answer 
The Australian Government advised that it is working towards accession to the WTO GPA in its G20 
Growth Strategy in November 2014. No decision to accede has yet been taken. 
Page 66 paragraph 3.89 
Question 
As Australia notified that its Rice Marketing Board for the State of New South Wales has export 
monopoly rights, Thailand would like to seek further information as follows:  
 What are the reasons behind maintaining the ex port monopoly rights of state trading above? 
 How does the Board determine the acquisition price and the selling price comparing with 
market prices or the external reference price?  
 What are the Board's criteria for rice acquisition from farmers and the means to encourage 
farmers to sell rice to the Board? 
Answer 
All rice grown in New South Wales (NSW) that is not sold domestically to an authorised buyer is 
divested from producers and becomes the property  of the NSW Rice Marketing Board (the Board). 
The Board seeks to ensure the best possible return s from rice sold outside Australia, based on the 
quality differentials or attributes of Australian rice. The Board has appointed Ricegrowers Limited 
(trading as SunRice) as its sole exporter.  
The Board does not negotiate contracts for the sale of rice. All rice trading is conducted on behalf 
of the Board by Authorised Buyers. Authorised Buyers are able to freely buy and sell rice grown in NSW on the domestic market in Australia. All sales contracts are entered into on a commercial 
basis. SunRice has no obligation to set a benchmark price and has not done so. Export prices are 
determined by the market for Australian rice at levels influenced by the quality of the rice and 
prevailing world prices. 
Australia has progressively reduced the number of State Trading Enterprises (STEs) with export 
monopoly powers from seven in 2004 to one in 2015. The revised draft WTO modalities for agriculture (TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4) would require WTO Members to remove the export monopoly 
powers of STEs. Australia is committed to the removal of STE export monopoly powers as part of a 
final Doha Round outcome. 
Question: What is the definition of "defensive trademark"? 
Answer 
Within Australian legislation the term "defensive trade mark" is not explicitly defined, however its 
meaning is contained within Section 185 of the Trade Marks Act 1995.  
In general terms, a defensive trade mark is a form  of trade mark applied for by a trademark owner 
of a well-known trademark for goods or services for goods and services other than those for which it is well-known. The trademark may be registered for those other goods and services even if the 
owner does not intend to use if for those goods and services. The purpose of filing a defensive 
application is to reduce the possibility of other traders using, or connecting, the trade mark to unrelated goods or services. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 205 - 
 
  Question: 
What is the function or purpose of a "defensive trademark" and how is it different from a regular 
trademark? 
Answer 
Defensive trade marks are designed to limit parties other than the registered owner of the trade 
mark from drawing a connection between unrelated goods or services and the goods or services 
registered by the owner of the trade mark.  
A regular trade mark is a sign used or intended to be used to distinguish goods or services in the 
course of trade by a person with similar good s or services provided by any other person.  
In contrast to regular trademarks, defensive trade marks may apply even if the registered owner 
does not use or intend to use the trade mark in relation to particular goods or services. 
Question: 
What are the criteria for registration of defensive trademarks? Answer 
The procedure for filing a defensive trade mark application in Australia is similar to that for 
"standard" trade marks.  
To qualify for protection, the trade mark has to already be registered in Australia as a standard 
trade mark. The trade mark must have been used to such an extent that the use of the trade mark 
in relation to unrelated goods/services would likely  draw a connection to the goods/services of the 
registered owner.  
The evidence required in support of an application must be of a higher quality than a standard 
application. The application should show evidence  of the extent of use of the trade mark, and 
demonstrate why potential consumers are likely to draw a connection with the registered owner if the trade mark were to be used in relation to unrelated goods/services. 
Question: 
What kind of activities is considered an  infringement of a defensive trademark? 
Answer 
Under Australian legislation infringements to trade mark apply in like fashion for defensive trade 
marks. Specifically, Section 120 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 provides for infringements against trade marks and defensive trade marks. 
Question: 
How many defensive trademarks were registered in 2013? 
Answer 
Six Defensive trade marks were registered in Australia in 2013. 
Question: 
Does Australia provide a legal protection for unconventional trademarks such as scent marks and 
taste marks? If so, how many of them have been registered so far? What are they?  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 206 - 
 
  Answer 
Australia does provide legal protection for scent and taste marks  
Australia has no current taste marks and one current scent mark – eucalyptus-scent for golf tees. Page 119 (paragraph 4.94) 
Question  The paragraph indicates that aggregate foreign equi ty ownership of Telstra is capped at 35%, and 
individual foreign investors are permitted to own only up to 5%. Thailand would like to seek a 
clarification on whether such limitation applies to the whole subsector of retail fixed voice services 
or only to foreign investment in Telstra. To what extent do the limitations apply to other players in the subsector? Are there other measures which limit or restrict market access in this subsector? 
Answer 
Under the Telstra Corporation Act 1991, Telstra, the former monopoly incumbent 
telecommunications operator, is subject to the following restrictions in relationship to foreign ownership and management: 
 A limit on total foreign ownership (35%) 
 A limit on individual foreign ownership (5%) 
 The chair of the board of directors and a majority of directors must be Australian citizens 
These requirements are limited to foreign investment in Telstra rather than the whole subsector.  
The Australian telecommunications market is open and competitive, with minimal entry and 
operational requirements. There are no sector-specific foreign investment or ownership rules, except for Telstra. General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and relevant Free Trade 
Agreement disciplines apply. 
Page 121 (paragraph 4.105) 
Question  
What are the Foreign Investment Review Board's criteria in considering the foreign ownership 
above 5% in the media sector for approval? Please  provide a rationale behind those criteria. If 
such ownership is rejected, is it possible to appeal such decision? What is the appeal procedure? 
Are both administrative and judicial appeals available? 
Answer 
The Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (the Act) provides the legislative framework for 
our screening regime. The Act allows the Treasurer or his delegate to review investment proposals 
to decide if they are contrary to Australia's national interest. 
Australia's Foreign Investment Policy (the Policy) provides guidance to foreign investors to assist 
understanding of the Government's approach to ad ministering the Act. The Policy also identifies 
investment categories that need to be notified to the Government for prior approval, even if the 
Act does not appear to apply (e.g. media).  
Australia maintains specific limits on, or requirements relating to, foreign investment in certain 
sectors, including investments in media. All foreign persons need to notify the Government and get 
prior approval to make investments of 5 per cent or more in the media sector, regardless of the value of the investment. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 207 - 
 
  The Treasurer can block proposals that are contrary to the national interest or apply conditions to 
the way proposals are implemented to ensure they are not contrary to the national interest. 
Applicants cannot seek review of foreign investme nt decisions (but can challenge the process by 
which a decision is made). 
Page 14 (paragraph 3.25) 
Question: 
Please elaborate more on how the implementation  of the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment 
(Raising the Bar) Act 2012 "raises the quality of the granted patents,  allows free access to 
patented inventions for regulatory approvals and research, [and] reduces delays in resolution of 
patent and trade mark applications." We would appreciate it if Australia could share with us the guidelines in order to achieve these outcomes.  
Answer 
Raising the quality of granted patents 
The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 ('RTB Act') amends the 
Patents Act to address four key areas of patentability. The RTB Act:  
1. amended the Patents Act to remove restri ctions on the information and background 
knowledge taken into account when assessing whether an application is sufficiently inventive to 
justify a patent;  
2. bolstered the requirement that a patented invention be useful: that is, that the invention 
works in the way that the patent says it does and that the specification explains how the invention works;  
3. raised the standards set for disclosure of an invention. The amendments address 
circumstances where the information disclosed in a patent specification, although sufficient to make one thing within the scope of each claim, is not sufficient to make the invention across the 
full scope of each claim. The changes ensure that granted patents are no broader than the 
invention which has been disclosed; and  
4. amended the Patents Act to increase certai nty in the validity of granted patents. The 
changes expand the grounds that the Commissioner can consider, and apply a consistent standard 
of proof across all grounds, so that the Commissioner is not obliged to grant patents which would not pass scrutiny in a court challenge. 
The RTB Act amended the Patents Act to introduce two new exemptions from patent infringement. 
Allows free access to patented inventions 
The experimental use exemption amends the Patent s Act to leave researchers free to conduct their 
experiments without worrying about the patent sy stem. The amendments are designed to clarify 
that research and experimental activities relating to patented inventions are exempt from 
infringement. 
The RTB Act also introduces an exemption for activities undertaken solely for the purpose of 
gaining regulatory approval to market or manuf acture a patented technology. This expands the 
existing exemption for pharmaceutical inventions to all technologies; recognising that technologies other than pharmaceuticals may also suffer delays in bringing products to market as a consequence of pre-market and pre-manufacturing regulatory approval processes.  
Reduces delays in the resolution of patent and trade mark applications WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 208 - 
 
  The RTB Act amends the Patents and Trade Marks Ac ts to refine opposition proceedings to better 
meet their intended purpose as a means for settling disputes quickly and inexpensively. The amendments include reducing some of the opposition periods, introducing a stricter test for granting extensions of time in oppositions, and aligning some aspects of the patents and trade 
marks opposition processes. 
The Bill also amends the Patents Act to tighten the timeframes within which divisional applications 
can be filed, reducing opportunities for abusive use of these types of application. 
Guidelines 
IP Australia publishes manuals for patent and trade marks examination, which include guidance on 
the application of the various amendments in the RTB Act. Further information on the RTB Act, including the explanatory memorandum, can be found by searching the Bill Homepage at 
http://www.aph.gov.au/parliamenta ry_business/bills_legislation . 
Question: 
In paragraph 3.18 mentions that the service sect or accounts for 70% of GDP, and also Australia 
introduced several reforms in this sector, especially unilateral reform measures affecting specific 
sectors such as the financial sector, the transport sector and logistics or sector of higher education. In this regard, could Australia give further details of the reforms? 
Answer 
Australia continues work to remove red tape burden and support small businesses to make 
Australia more competitive and to drive more jobs and higher living standards. 
The Government has initiated several reviews to identify areas of reform, including: 
The Tax White Paper 
The Competition Policy review The Financial Systems Inquiry 
Discussions papers (on the Tax White Paper) and Review Reports (for the Harper Competition 
Review and the Murray Financial System Inquiry) can be accessed on public websites. 
Page 22 paragraph 3.80 
Question It is indicated that Australia services providers will benefit from new access to China's significant 
and growing services sectors under the China- Australia Free Trade Agreement. What are the 
sectors/subsectors in which China will significantly open up new access to Australian investors? 
What are the commitments of the parties with regard to market access? 
Answer 
In relation to services market access, both parties make liberalising commitments. China's market 
access commitments for Australian services suppliers include insurance, banking, securities and 
futures, legal services, education, telecommunications, tourism and travel related services, health and aged care, construction and engineering, manufacturing services, mining services, 
architecture and urban planning and transport. China also made MFN commitments in a number of 
sectors. ChAFTA provides Chinese service suppliers  with the assurance that they will be treated 
equally with Australia's other key FTA partners, including by providing market access outcomes broadly equivalent to Australia's FTAs with Japan and Korea. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 209 - 
 
  A range of China's services commitments under ChAFTA allow for the delivery of services in China 
through the establishment of a commercial presen ce. These include in relation to health, aged 
care, shipping, architecture and urban planning, legal and mining services, as well as financial services including banking, insurance and funds management sectors. This represents a significant 
improvement in the investment environment for Australian services firms. 
Page 121 paragraph 4.106 
Question  
Do the local-content requirements, referred to in the paragraph, mean that the content of the 
production in television broadcasting must be produced only by local or domestic production house? Could Australia elaborate more about these requirements? 
Answer 
The Broadcasting Services (Australian Content) Standard 2005 defines what constitutes an 
'Australian' programme for the purpose of the Australian content requirements. 
Broadcasting Services (Australian Content) Standard 2005 
A programme is considered 'Australian' if it is: 
1. Produced under the creative control of Australians, which means: 
a. the producer/s of the programme are Australian, and 
b. the writer/s OR the director/s of the programme, and 
c. 50 per cent of the leading actors (including voice actors or on-screen presenters) are 
Australian, and 
d. the programme is produced and post-produced in Australia. 
Drama programmes also require at least 75 per cent of the major supporting cast to be Australian. 
Animated programmes also require at least three of the following creative positions to be held by 
Australians – production designer, character de signer, supervising layout artist, supervising 
storyboard artist or key background artist.  
2. An official co-production (consistent with offi cial film co-production agreements in place), an 
Australian/New Zealand programme or a New Zealand programme (consistent with Australia's 
obligations under the Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement). 
Page 35 (paragraph 2.35) 
Question: Does Australia have any plan to increase monetary thresholds in the screening process for 
investment of non-sensitive sectors by investors incorporated in other RTA/FTA partners than 
those mentioned in the paragraph? What are the no n-sensitive sectors and what are the criteria to 
determine them? Will Australia expand the scope  of non-sensitive sectors in the future?  
Answer 
The Australian Government reviews foreign investment proposals on a case-by-case basis to 
ensure they are not contrary to the national interest.  
I n  g e n e r a l ,  p r o p o s a l s  t o  a c q u i r e  a n  i n t e r e s t  o f  1 5  p e r  c e n t  o r  m o r e  i n  a n  A u s t r a l i a n  b u s i n e s s  
valued at over $252 million (or the higher threshold of $1,094 million for countries where Australia has given preferential treatment through free trade agreements) are subject to approval. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 210 - 
 
  The countries that have the higher threshold are US, NZ, Chile, Japan and Korea (and soon China 
once the China-Australia FTA enters into force). Ho wever, for investments in sensitive sectors, the 
lower $252 million threshold still applies for these countries. The prescribed sensitive sectors are: media; telecommunications; transport; defence and military related industries; and the extraction 
of uranium or plutonium or the operation of nuclear facilities.  
There are no current plans to extend the higher threshold more broadly or change the list of 
sensitive sectors. 
Thailand Prawns - SPS measures on Poultry and Shrimp products 
Thailand raised in her statement the SPS measur es on poultry and shrimp products under the 
Australian Food Standard Code. Paragraph 5 of Thailand's statement states:  
'Despite the bilateral talks looking into the possibi lity of trade expansion, Thailand's agricultural 
exports to Australia, especially poultry and shrimp products, have been facing the restrictive 
measures of Australia under the Australian Food Standard Code. We are looking forward to resolving this issue in the near future.' 
Answer 
Australia's biosecurity measures for prawns and prawn products are biosecurity measures applied 
under the Quarantine Act 1908 . The measures manage biosecurity risks to aquaculture production 
systems in Australia. We are not aware of any curr ent food safety issues involving prawns from 
Thailand under the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. 
Thailand – Prawns from Australia processed in Thailand for re-export to Australia Thailand is seeking reduced testing for Australian wild caught prawns exported to Thailand, 
processed in Thailand and re-exported from Thailand to Australia. 
The Department of Agriculture carried out a deskto p evaluation of Thailand's biosecurity systems 
and the on-site verification visit in Thailand (23 – 27 March 2015).  
This visit was to verify that the Thai Department of Fisheries has biosecurity integrity measures in 
place to prevent cross-contamination and substitution with non-Australian origin prawns throughout their importation, processing in Thailand and subsequent export to Australia. 
The Australian Department of Agriculture is currently preparing a draft audit report that will be 
sent through the Australian Embassy in Thailand to the Department of Fisheries for comment. 
Thailand – Prawns compartmentalisation Thailand is seeking reduced testing requirements for Thai-grown uncooked prawn imports into 
Australia (currently testing is at 100%). 
To achieve this Thailand is proposing to develop a prawn disease-free compartmentalisation 
system. 
During the re-export verification visit (23-27 March 2015) Thai government officials were advised 
on the process of establishing a compartmentalisation system.  
Trade in frozen, peeled prawns exported from Th ailand to Australia is already taking place. 
If the evaluations of Thailand's biosecurity systems and compartmentalisation process are 
successful, prawns imported from these systems would not be subject to 100 % on-arrival virus 
testing. However, a certain frequency of random verification testing may apply in line with the 
Australian imported food programme. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 211 - 
 
  Thailand – Duck Meat 
Thailand has advised that access for cooked duck meat is its second highest market access priority 
for Australia after mangoes (which is already be ing progressed). The Australian Department of 
Agriculture advised Thailand that approval of market access for cooked duck products requires an 
assessment of the biosecurity risks posed by co oked duck meat and measures that may be 
required to reduce these to an acceptably low level. This work will be considered for inclusion in the department's future work programme of biosecur ity risk analysis subject to prioritisation and 
availability of resources. 
Thailand – chicken meat The Chicken Meat Import Risk Analysis (IRA) that was completed by the Australian Department of 
Agriculture in 2008 established risk management measures that are strict to ensure that exotic 
disease agents of poultry do not enter Australia via chicken meat products. The conditions apply to 
all exporting countries, and are not Thailand specific. 
At the 2014 TAFTA SPS meeting Thailand advised that there is currently no commercial interest for 
exporting chicken meat to Australia. 
The Australian Department of Agriculture will consider an application for assessment of 
equivalence from Thai authorities for inclusion in its work program. Equivalent risk management 
measures might include such things as compartmentalisation and flock accreditation schemes. 
However, any submission proposing equivalent measures would require a rigorous assessment on a case-by-case basis, including an on-the-ground inspection. 
Alternatively, import requirements outlined in the IRA report include the application of cooking 
processes for the management of a number of dise ase agents. Note that chicken products which 
are slow cooked, i.e. for long periods of time at  the required temperature, could be eligible for 
export. 
 WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 212 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF TURKEY 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312  
3.2.2.5 Trade Policies and Practices by Measur e – Measures Directly Affecting Imports – 
Tariffs – Tariff Preferences, pp. 45, para 3.23 
Question 
It is mentioned in the Secretariat Report that "Australia maintains numerous unilateral preferential 
and regional trade agreements. Tariff- and TRQ-free access is provided to goods originating in the 
50 LDCs, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, and Singapore. However, bilateral tariff reductions 
resulting from recently signed RTAs have led to  lower tariffs for some developed countries than 
those granted to around 90 developing economies en titled to benefits from Australia's Generalized 
System of Preferences (GSP)." 
Could Australia kindly detail her Generalized System  of Preferences in terms of the conditions of 
being a beneficiary, types and provisions of gradua tion from the System, regular review periods of 
the System etc.? 
Answer 
The Australian System of Tariff Preferences (ASTP) is a long-standing policy which provides 
preferences for a range of developing countries. While Australia was undertaking unilateral tariff 
reforms, the ASTP provided a margin of preference  over the general rate. Presently, it provides 
duty-free, quota-free access for least developed countries while it provides other developing countries with duty-free and preferential access on  a broad range of goods where Australia levies a 
tariff. To claim a preferential rate under the ASTP, goods are required to meet a basic rule of 
origin, details of which can be found at http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page6015.asp .   
pp. 26, para. 2.3 
Question: 
It is stated in the report that "Australia continues to screen proposed foreign investments over a 
certain value to ensure that they are in the national interest. However, higher screening thresholds for non-sensitive sectors are increasingly being incorporated into RTAs. As at the time of 
Australia's previous Review, proposed investments are almost always allowed, but conditions are 
often attached, particularly in the real estate sector. In 2011, a foreign equity limit on investment in Qantas airline was removed, bringing FDI restrict ions on this airline in line with those applied to 
all others. Foreign equity caps remain in the area s of airports, civil aviation, maritime transport 
and telecommunications. Restrictions on foreign direct investment in residential real estate are 
also in place."  
a. Could Australia provide more information about the screening process for foreign 
investments? What is the threshold for screening ("a certain value") and what is the definition of 
"national interest" in this context?  
b. What are the conditions for investments in real estate sector? Could Australia provide more 
information about the restrictions on the sector? 
c. What were the FDI restrictions on Qantas Airline? What are the current limitations? Could 
Australia provide more information about FDI restrictions for Qantas Airline? 
Answer 
Foreign investment proposals will be reviewed on a case by case basis to ensure they are not 
contrary to Australia's national interest.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 213 - 
 
  The national interest, and hence what would be contrary to it, is not defined in the Foreign 
Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975. Instead, the Act confers upon the Treasurer the power to decide in each case whether a particular investment would be contrary to the national interest. 
The Government typically considers the following factors when assessing foreign investment 
proposals in any sector: 
 national security; 
 competition; 
 impact on other Government policies (including taxation); 
 impact on the economy and the community; and 
 the character of the investor.  
Proposals subject to review when value of th e target business exceeds a monetary screening 
threshold. Types of proposals that are screened include: 
 Acquisitions of 15 per cent or more in Australian businesses valued above $252 million (or 
the higher threshold of $1,094 million for count ries where Australia has given preferential 
treatment through free trade agreements). 
 All direct investments, establishment of new businesses and land acquisitions by foreign 
government investors. 
 Acquisitions of rural land where the cumulative value of rural land that the foreign person 
already holds exceeds, or immediately following the proposed acquisition is likely to exceed, $15 million (apply to all non government investors except those countries where Australia has given preferential treatment through free trade agreements). 
All residential real estate applications are considered in light of the overarching principle that 
foreign investment in residential real estate should increase Australia's housing stock, for example, by purchasing new housing or developing vacant land. Non-resident foreign persons are generally 
prohibited from buying existing dwellings in Australia. Temporary residents are allowed to buy one 
established dwelling to use as their residence while they live in Australia, but this must be sold when they leave. 
p 3, para 2.36 
Question:  
It is indicated that new business proposals and acquisitions of land made by foreign government 
investors are put under the screening process regardless of their value. In this respect, could 
Australia kindly clarify the definition of foreign government investor? What is the status of state 
owned enterprises? Are state owned enterprises co nsidered as foreign government investors? If 
so, is there a certain ownership threshold? For example, what is the case if a state owned 
enterprise has a 55% share of another company an d that company applies for acquisition of land? 
In the same manner, what happens if the share is, say, 30%? 
Answer 
Foreign government investors include:  Investments that involve interests below 10 per cent may also be considered direct 
investments if the acquiring foreign government investor is building a strategic stake in the target, or can use that investment to influence or control the target.  
 Foreign government investors include:  
 a body politic of a foreign country;  
 entities in which governments, their agencies or related entities from a single foreign 
country have an aggregate interest (direct or indirect) of 15 per cent or more;  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 214 - 
 
   entities in which governments, their agencies or  related entities from more than one foreign 
country have an aggregate interest (direct or indirect) of 40 per cent or more; or  
 entities that are otherwise controlled by fore ign governments, their agencies or related 
entities, and any associates, or could be controlled by them including as part of a 
controlling group.  
State owned enterprises are considered foreign government investors.  All foreign government investors must notify the Government and get prior approval before 
making a direct investment in Australia, regardless of the value of the investment.  
 A n y  i n v e s t m e n t  o f  a n  i n t e r e s t  o f  1 0  p e r  c e n t  o r  m o r e  i s  c o n s i d e r e d  t o  b e  a  d i r e c t  
investment. 
 Investments that involve interests below 10 per cent may also be considered direct 
investments if the acquiring foreign government investor is building a strategic stake in the 
target, or can use that investment to influence or control the target.  
Foreign government investors must also notify and get prior approval to start a new business or to 
acquire an interest in land (including an interest in rural land), as well as any interest in a 
prospecting, exploration, production or mining te nement. This is consistent with the Government's 
longstanding practice. 
P34, para 2.39 
Question: 
It is mentioned in the report that "In respon se to increased community concern about foreign 
investment in agriculture, the Government has stated that it will lower the existing foreign 
investment screening threshold for purchases of agricultural land and will introduce a foreign 
ownership register. The Parliamentary Standing  Committee on Economics has also recently 
undertaken an inquiry into Australia's foreign investment policy on residential real estate, amid 
concerns about housing affordability for Australians. In its report, released in November 2014, the 
Committee noted shortcomings both in terms of data collection and monitoring of compliance with policy requirements. It recommended that the current framework for foreign investment in 
residential real estate should be maintained and supplemented by new data collection, audit, 
compliance, and enforcement processes, financed by administrative fees. It also advocated stronger penalties as well as policy amendments requiring temporary residents to divest an established property within three months if it ceases to be their primary residence." 
As indicated in the report, the Australian Government has a plan to lower the existing foreign 
investment screening threshold for purchase of agricultural land and will introduce a foreign ownership register. When is the legislation change on this policy going to be enforced? What is the 
plan for the new threshold? Will there be another limitation other than lowering the threshold 
(such as a percentage ceiling limit within the total land acquisitions)?  
Answer 
To improve transparency around foreign investment in agricultural land, the Australian 
Government has lowered the threshold for these investments.  
From 1 March 2015 foreign investors need to obtain prior approval for acquisitions of an interest in 
rural land where the cumulative value of the rural land already owned, including the proposed 
purchase, is $15 million or more. Consistent wi th free trade agreement commitments, this will 
apply to all non government investors except those from the United States, New Zealand, Chile, Singapore and Thailand.  
The Government will also improve transparency in foreign investment in agricultural land by 
establishing a foreign ownership register. The register will start collecting information on existing foreign ownership and subsequent transactions of all substantial foreign interests in agricultural WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 215 - 
 
  land. The Government is working with the states and territories so that the register will ultimately 
include all land title transfer information from existing state and territory land title collection processes.  
The Government is working quickly to legislate these commitments. 
3.4.2 Production assistance, pp. 75, para. 3.116. 
Question 
It is mentioned in the report that "In October 2014 an Industry Innovation and Competitiveness 
Agenda was announced. It consists of six initiatives aimed at boosting Australian competitiveness 
over the next 18 months: ....; and establishing Industry Growth Centres (food and agribusiness, mining equipment, technology and services, oil, gas and energy resources, medical technologies 
and pharmaceuticals, and advanced manufacturing sectors). The proposed $A 188.5 million funded 
Industry Growth Centres are to help industry exploit new global markets and supply chains, invent 
and commercialize new products and services, and generate new jobs. These centres, which will be led by industry, will bring together expertis e from business and industry, the scientific and 
research communities and the university sector." 
It is understood that the establishment of Industry Growth Centres is counted among the six 
initiatives defined under the Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda. Could Australia 
provide more in-depth description of these centres on two separate grounds; firstly by presenting 
the mechanisms that will be employed for the primary objectives (such as helping industries exploit new supply chains) to be materialized, secondly the status of development in the first 5 months since the announcement was made? 
Answer 
The aim of the Industry Innovation and Competitiv eness Agenda is to foster the right economic 
conditions to enable business to innovate and create opportunities. The Agenda is focussed on 
strengthening the economy and delivering benefits to the community, including through less 
reliance on government, facilitating business to help identify market gaps and capitalise on opportunity, and more long-term investment. 
The $188.5 million Industry Growth Centres Initiative (the Initiative) is a key element of the 
government's new industry policy direction. The Initiative will identify opportunities to reduce regulatory burden, increase collaboration and commercialisation, improve capabilities to engage with international markets and global supply chains, and enhance management and workforce 
skills. Initially, five Industry Growth Centres (Growth Centres) will be established in key growth 
sectors of the Australian economy within the Industry Portfolio: Advanced Manufacturing; Food and Agribusiness; Medical Technologies and Pharmaceuticals; Mining Equipment, Technology and 
Services; and Oil, Gas and Energy Resources.  
A key activity of each Growth Centre will be to set a long-term strategy for their sector. This will 
be outlined in the Sector Competiveness Plan, which will describe how to lift the capability of the 
sector, boost productivity, skills, create jobs, and engage with international opportunities. Initially 
Chairs, in consultation with their sectors, will lead the development of a Growth Centre proposal for the Minister's consideration. During this phase Chairs will focus on the strategic intent of the Growth Centre, initial activities, the expected governance arrangements and locations of the 
Growth Centre, and generating momentum.  
Growth Centres will develop national networks between business, research and government to 
deliver tangible benefits to business. They will wo rk with business, researchers and government on 
practical ways to grow the sectors, boost productivity and create jobs 
It is expected that the Advanced Manufacturing; Food and Agribusiness; and Mining Equipment, 
Technology and Services Growth Centres will start operating from the middle of the year.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 216 - 
 
  4.4 Trade Policies by Sector – Manufacturing, pp. 106, para. 4.52 
Question 
Could Australia kindly explain in a detailed way what these mentioned strengths and opportunities 
are? Does Australia consider these advantages sufficient enough to enhance export 
competitiveness of Australian manufacturing industry? 
Answer 
Notwithstanding the challenges facing Australian Manufacturing due to a small domestic market 
and strong import competition, there are a number of indicators of strengths in the manufacturing 
sector. It is the largest performer of Business R&D by industry division: In 2011-12 (the latest available data), Australian Manufacturing accounted  for 24.4% (or A$4.5 billion) of Australia's total 
intramural Business Expenditure on R&D (BERD) and has consistently been in the top two BERD 
performers over many years. In 2012-13, over half  of the manufacturing respondents to a national 
innovation survey indicated having engaged in some form of innovation activity during the reference period, while about 44% had implemented an innovation during the reference period. 
Australian manufacturing is still a major contributor to Australia's export income, contributing 
33.1% (or A$90.4 billion) to Australia's total export credits in 2012-13, second behind Mining. An example is Australia's food industry, which together with its agribusiness, has long been 
recognised as one of the world's best for food safe ty and food quality. However, the Government is 
aware that all trade exposed industries will have to continue to invest in continuous innovation and advanced skills in order to enhance or sustain the sectors' export competitiveness. The food and agribusiness Growth Centre, for example, can assist food manufacturers to work with packaging 
companies and researchers to consider packaging solutions to extend the shelf life of products, 
especially into regional export markets where the lack of refrigeration is a problem. 
4.4 Trade Policies by Sector – Manufacturing, pp. 106, para. 4.54 
Question 
It is addressed in Secretariat Report that "…the Commonwealth Government will focus on 
initiatives to promote national competitiveness and productivity including: economy-wide 
measures to boost the competitiveness of manufacturing and lower the costs of doing business 
(e.g. costs of energy and regulation); options to encourage innovation; options to accelerate the development of productivity-enhancing infrastructure ; options to encourage the growth of small to 
medium-sized businesses; and, economy-wide incentive mechanisms to boost investment." 
Could Australia kindly provide further information regarding abovementioned economy-wide 
measures? 
Answer 
The Australian Government provides support for structural adjustment in manufacturing through 
regional Innovation and Investment Funds, which emphasise new business development that leads to sustainable job creation. However, other Australian Government support for manufacturing does 
not guarantee employment in the manufacturing  sector. Rather, this support, e.g. the 
Manufacturing Transition Programme, aims to assist Australian manufacturing firms undertake new business development projects that build innovative capabilities and lead to higher value manufacturing activity, including development and adoption of new technologies and processes. 
Manufacturing support emphasises transition by manufacturing firms to higher-value added 
activities through new capital investments, investments in innovation, worker upskilling or reskilling and R&D, and expansion into new market s. Such support also assists the manufacturing 
sector to adapt to increasing competition through the reduction or phasing out of tariffs and other 
trade barriers. It is through the production of g oods and related services for which there is market 
demand that jobs can either be created or sustained.  
There are measures that indirectly support manufactu ring the funding of the research activities by 
public research organisations including CSIRO,  AIMS, or the Rural Industries Research and 
Development Corporation. These measures assist manufacturing sectors through knowledge WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 217 - 
 
  transfer of industry relevant research and not through direct financial support. The Australian 
Government's Industry Growth Centres Initiative (the Initiative) is an initiative in the Government's Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda and aims to lift competitiveness and productivity by focusing on areas of competitive strength and to help Australia transition into 
smart, high value and export focused industries. The $188.5 million Initiative is a key element of 
the government's new industry policy direction. It will identify opportunities to reduce regulatory 
burden, increase collaboration and commercialisa tion, improve capabilities to engage with 
international markets and global supply chains, and enhance management and workforce skills. 
Initially, five Industry Growth Centres (Growth Centres) will be established in key growth sectors of the Australian economy within the Industry Portfolio: Advanced Manufacturing; Food and Agribusiness; Medical Technologies and Pharmaceuticals; Mining Equipment, Technology and 
Services; and Oil, Gas and Energy Resources.  
A key activity of each Growth Centre will be to set a long-term strategy for their sector. This will 
be outlined in the Sector Competiveness Plan, which will describe how to lift the capability of the 
sector, boost productivity, skills, create jobs, and engage with international opportunities. Initially 
Chairs, in consultation with their sectors, will lead the development of a Growth Centre proposal for the Minister's consideration. During this phase Chairs will focus on the strategic intent of the 
Growth Centre, initial activities, the expected governance arrangements and locations of the 
Growth Centre, and generating momentum. Grow th Centres will develop national networks 
between business, research and government to deliver tangible benefits to business. They will work with business, researchers and government on practical ways to grow the sectors, boost 
productivity and create jobs. It is expected that the Advanced Manufacturing; Food and 
Agribusiness; and Mining Equipment, Technology and Services Growth Centres will start operating 
from the middle of the year. 
4.4.1 Automotive, pp. 111, para. 4.62. 
Question 
As stated in the report, "Following the closure announcements of the local motor vehicle 
producers, a $A 155 million Growth Fund was announced on 30 April 2014 to assist industry 
transition out of car manufacturing in Australia by 2017. The Growth Fund, which forms part of the Industry Investment and Competitiveness Agenda, is to help generate future jobs and supply-
chain business opportunities in Victoria and South Australia affected by the closures. The Growth 
Fund includes: a $A 30 million Skills and Training Program; a $A 15 million boost to the AISAP; a 
$A 20 million Automotive Diversification Programme; a $A 60 million Next Generation Manufacturing Investment Program to accelerate private sector investment in high value non-
automotive manufacturing sectors in Victoria and South Australia; and, a $A 30 million Regional 
Infrastructure Program to support investment in non-manufacturing opportunities in affected regions." 
Given that it has been almost one year since the announcement of the Growth Fund; would it be 
possible to quantify the effects of the above ment ioned Programs included in the Fund? In other 
words, could Australia kindly specify to what exte nt the budget of each Program has been utilized 
towards helping generate future jobs and supply-chain business opportunities in Victoria and South 
Australia affected by the closures? 
Answer 
The Growth Fund is a four year initiative, intended to transition workers, firms and regions to new 
opportunities in a timely way as vehicle manufacturing comes off line. Most elements of the Fund 
have only recently commenced with one element yet to commence. For these reasons, it is not yet possible to measure the effects of the various el ements of Growth Fund. Further time and data 
collection is necessary before any outcomes can be quantified. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 218 - 
 
  pp. 124, para. 4.123 
Question: 
It is mentioned in the report that "…In vari ous submissions, including from the ACCC and the 
Business Council of Australia, concerns have been expressed that the objective of the regime of 
revitalising domestic shipping is not being met; the regime is adding to domestic freight costs; and 
the efficient operation of ships is being compromi sed by compliance with complex rules, as well as 
administrative burdens arising from its related licensing regime.248 The Government is currently 
considering submissions and developing options to remove unnecessary burdens on the coastal 
shipping industry." 
Regarding the paragraph, could Australian Delegation provide a brief information about her plans 
and schedule for the evaluation and settlement of the issue? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is working to help build a more competitive and efficient shipping 
industry and is committed to reforming the coastal shipping sector. The Australian Government is 
currently considering a range of policy options relating to coastal shipping and will make a public 
announcement regarding any changes to existing policy in due course. 
pp. 126, para. 4.128 
Question: In the report, it is stated that "There are over 80 ports in Australia with more than 95% of volume 
being handled in 20 of them. Ports may be owned by the private sector, state or territory governments, or leased by state or territory governments to the private sector. Full information 
was not available on the ownership and management status of Australia's main ports. However, 
two major ports were privatized by the government  of New South Wales during the Review period 
(section 3.4.5). Average clearance times for sea cargo have been reduced to 0.2 days 
(section 3.2.1). On average, port productivity in Australia appears comparable to similar overseas 
ports. However, it varies between Australia's po rts. For example, Melbou rne's port processed on 
average 67 TEUs per hour in 2013, while the port of Freemantle processed an average of 41 TEUs 
per hour.254" 
Given that information, is it feasible for Australian Government to provide comprehensive 
information on the ownership and management status of Australia's each ports? 
Answer 
The table below lists 23 Australian ports which together account for 97 per cent of total throughput 
in mass tonnes in the 12 months from July 1 2012 to June 30 2013. The table highlights ports 
wholly owned and managed by government, and th ose owned and managed by private companies.  
Ownership details for the private companies that manage ports are available on their respective 
websites: 
 http://www.portofne wcastle.com.au/   
 http://www.portbris.com.au/home   
 http://www.nswportsbotany.com.au/   
 http://www.flindersports.com.au/index.html   
 http://www.geelongport.com.au/   
 http://www.portofportland.com.au/   WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 219 - 
 
  Port (State or Territory)  Type  Total throughput 
2012/13 (Mass 
tonnes)  Management  Ownership  
Port Hedland (Western 
Australia)  Bulk  288,443,039 Pilbara Ports Authority Government 
Port of Dampier (Western 
Australia) Bulk 180,365,873 Pilbara Ports Authority Government  
Port of Newcastle (New 
South Wales) Bulk 148,861,567 Port of Newcastle Pty Ltd Private 
Hay Point (Queensland) Bulk 96,540,226 North Queensland Bulk 
Ports Corporation Government  
Port of Gladstone 
(Queensland) Bulk 85,293,760 Gladstone Ports 
Corporation Government  
Port of Brisbane 
(Queensland) Multi-cargo 37,563,421 Port of Brisbane Pty Ltd Private 
Port of Melbourne (Victoria)  Multi-cargo 35,059,320 Port of Melbourne 
Corporation  Government  
Port of Fremantle (Western 
Australia) Multi-cargo 31,980,238 Fremantle Ports Government  
Weipa (Queensland)  Multi-cargo 29,041,572 North Queensland Bulk 
Ports Corporation Government  
Port Kembla (New South 
Wales)  Multi-cargo 23,935,068 NSW Ports Pty Ltd Private 
Port Botany (New South 
Wales)  Multi-Cargo 21,582,856 NSW Ports Pty Ltd Private 
Abbot Point (Queensland)  Bulk 17,744,621 North Queensland Bulk 
Ports Corporation Government  
Port of Geraldton (Western 
Australia)  Bulk 15,444,843 Mid West Port Authority Government  
Port of Bunbury (Western 
Australia) Bulk 15,331,906 Bunbury Port Authority Government  
Port Adelaide (South 
Australia)  Multi-cargo 15,166,339 Flinders Port Holdings 
Pty Ltd Private 
Port Esperance (Western 
Australia) Bulk 13,875,044 Esperance Ports Sea and 
Land Government  
Port of Geelong (Victoria)  Multi-cargo 12,836,648 GeelongPort Pty Ltd Private 
Port of Portland (Victoria)  Multi-cargo 5,333,712 Port of Portland Pty Ltd Private 
Port of Darwin (Northern 
Territory) Multi-cargo 4,299,008 Darwin Port Corporation Government 
Port of Albany (Western 
Australia) Multi-cargo 4,100,634 Albany Port Authority Government 
Port of Burnie (Tasmania)  Multi-cargo 3,636,605 TasPorts Government 
Port of Devonport 
(Tasmania) Multi-cargo 3,454,798 TasPorts Government 
Port of Mackay 
(Queensland) Bulk 3,269,967 North Queensland Bulk 
Ports Corporation Government 
2.2. Domestic Economy, pp. 4, para.2.3 
Question 
The Government Report states that "Activity outside of the resources sector is expected to 
strengthen over coming years…" 
Could Australia kindly explain her strategy on strengthening the non-resources sectors? 
Answer (see answer to earlier question also) 
The aim of the Industry Innovation and Competitiv eness Agenda is to foster the right economic 
conditions to enable business to innovate and create opportunities. The Agenda is focussed on 
strengthening the economy and delivering benefits to the community, including through less 
reliance on government, facilitating business to help identify market gaps and capitalise on opportunity, and more long-term investment. 
The $188.5 million Industry Growth Centres Initiative (the Initiative) is a key element of the 
government's new industry policy direction. The Initiative will identify opportunities to reduce WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 220 - 
 
  regulatory burden, increase collaboration and commercialisation, improve capabilities to engage 
with international markets and global supply chains, and enhance management and workforce 
skills. Initially, five Industry Growth Centres (Growth Centres) will be established in key growth sectors of the Australian economy within the Industry Portfolio: Advanced Manufacturing; Food 
and Agribusiness; Medical Technologies and Pharmaceuticals; Mining Equipment, Technology and 
Services; and Oil, Gas and Energy Resources.  
A key activity of each Growth Centre will be to set a long-term strategy for their sector. This will 
be outlined in the Sector Competiveness Plan, which will describe how to lift the capability of the 
sector, boost productivity, skills, create jobs, and engage with international opportunities. Initially 
Chairs, in consultation with their sectors, will lead the development of a Growth Centre proposal for the Minister's consideration. During this phase Chairs will focus on the strategic intent of the 
Growth Centre, initial activities, the expected governance arrangements and locations of the 
Growth Centre, and generating momentum.  
Growth Centres will develop national networks between business, research and government to 
deliver tangible benefits to business. They will wo rk with business, researchers and government on 
practical ways to grow the sectors, boost productivity and create jobs 
It is expected that the Advanced Manufacturing; Food and Agribusiness; and Mining Equipment, 
Technology and Services Growth Centres will start operating from the middle of the year. 
p15, para 3.37 
Question: It is mentioned in the Government Report that "The conclusion of free trade agreements are also 
contributing to the liberalisation of Australia's  foreign investment regime. Investors from the 
United States, New Zealand (as of March 2013), Republic of Korea and Japan are permitted a higher threshold of $A 1,094 million, before invest ments are subjected to scrutiny by the Foreign 
Investment Review Board. The higher threshold w ill also extend to Chinese investors upon entry-
into-force of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement." 
 Given the application of different investment th resholds to the WTO members, how does Australia 
plan to address disadvantageous situation posed to the WTO members other than mentioned 
above? 
Answer 
Foreign investment screening thresholds are based on negotiated outcomes between Australia and 
its trading partners. 
Para. 2.19 
Question  
T h e  G o v e r n m e n t  R e p o r t  s t a t e s  t h a t  " T h e  G o v e rnment has taken a three-pronged approach to 
addressing regulatory burdens. Its focus is on re ducing the flow of new regulations, reviewing the 
stock of existing regulations and encouraging re gulators to minimise the burdens they impose 
when administering regulation." 
Could Australia kindly give information if the dere gulation process of Australia involves reducing 
the regulations on trade and especially on those applicable to imports? 
Answer 
Australia's deregulation agenda cuts across all sectors in the economy and does not specifically 
target the trade (imports) sector. Specific meas ures which have been taken in relation to 
individual regulations are listed in the Parliamentary repeal day pages of the Cutting Red Tape 
website at: http://www.cuttingredtape.gov.au/ . WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 221 - 
 
  3.3 Trade and Investment Policy – Agriculture, pp. 12, para. 3.5 
Question 
Could Australia kindly specify how much agricultural production and exports could be affected 
owing to recent severe drought and exchange rate  appreciation? What are the shares of European 
and Asian countries in the total agriculture exports of Australia?  
Answer 
The impact of drought on agricultural production is dynamic. The effect on agricultural exports 
vary with the extent (amount of country affected) and duration of drought. For the broadacre 
livestock sector, drought initially results in increased meat production and exports as scarce feed results in high feed costs and therefore increase d numbers of animals sent for slaughter. This 
higher availability for slaughter leads to falling prices. When seasonal conditions improve, a period 
of high livestock demand for herd and flock rebuilding reduces supply for slaughter and prices 
therefore rise, but production and exports coul d fall. The recent severe drought has mostly 
affected beef production. As a result of the drought, which began in the Australian summer of 
2013–14, beef cattle slaughter increased by 12 per cent to 9.5 million head in 2013–14 and is 
forecast to remain around this level in 2014–15.  Beef production increased by 10 per cent in 
2013–14 to 2.5 million tonnes and is forecast to remain around this level in 2014–15. Beef exports 
rose by 17 per cent to 1.2 million tonnes in 2013–14 and are forecast to remain around this level 
in 2014–15. Assuming seasonal conditions improve in 2015–16, cattle slaughter, beef production and beef exports are all forecast to fall by 6 per cent, 5 per cent and 5 per cent, respectively as herds are built. 
For winter and summer crops, the impact of recent drought is mainly on production in Queensland 
and New South Wales. As presented in Table 1, ABARES estimates that summer crop production in Queensland was around 1.491 million tonnes in 2013-14, a decline of 27 per cent from the 
average of 2.049 million tonnes in the 5 years to 2012-13. 
The Australian dollar depreciated markedly against the US dollar in 2013–14 to average US92 
cents (down from an average US103 cents in 2012–13). In mid April 2015 the Australian dollar 
was trading around US76 cents, compared with US94 cents in early July 2014. Using the ABARES 
forecast of farm export earnings of $40.3 bi llion in 2014–15 and the assumed average exchange 
rate of US83 cents for the year, ABARES estima tes that, other things being unchanged, a further 
depreciation of the Australian dollar by 1 US cent would result in an increase in total farm sector 
income of around $320 million in 2014–15. 
The share of the value of total agricultural expo rts to Asia in 2013–14 was 62 per cent and to EU-
28 was 7 per cent. The shares ten years earlier (i.e. 2003–04) were 52 per cent for Asia and 10 
per cent for EU-28. 
Table 1: New South Wales & Queensland crop production  
(kt) 
Crop 
  New South Wales  Queensland  2011-12  
2012–13  
2013–14a 
5-years 
to 2012-
13 
2011-12  
2012–13  
2013–14  
5-years 
to 2012-
13 
Total winter crop 11,955 11 127  9,677  11,020  2,330  2,157 1,645 2,051  
Wheat 8,473 7,365 6,612 7,728 1,886 1,614 1,200 1,677 
Barley 1,425 1,286 1,380 1,518  191  170  138  159 
Canola 1,092 1,495  900  780  1  1  0  2 
Total summer crop 3,101 3,222  2,150  2,334  2,394  2,260 1,491 2,049  
Grain sorghum 814 747 250  762 1,416 1,475  850 1, 354 
Cottonseed 1,065  949  831  687  665  490  421  404 
Rice  912 1 158  828  608  0  0  2  1 
a  ABARES estimate. 
Source:  ABARES; Australian Bureau  of Statistics; Pulse Australia.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 222 - 
 
  3.9 Investment, pp. 15 para.3.37  
Question 
It is mentioned in the Government Report that "The conclusion of free trade agreements are also 
contributing to the liberalisation of Australia's  foreign investment regime. Investors from the 
United States, New Zealand (as of March 2013), Republic of Korea and Japan are permitted a 
higher threshold of $A 1,094 million, before invest ments are subjected to scrutiny by the Foreign 
Investment Review Board. The higher threshold w ill also extend to Chinese investors upon entry-
into-force of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement." 
Given the application of different investment thre sholds to the WTO members, how does Australia 
plan to address disadvantageous situation posed to the WTO members other than mentioned above? 
Answer 
The general thresholds below which foreign investments are not screened by the Foreign 
Investment Review Board (FIRB) are guaranteed in the investment commitments in Australia's 
free trade agreements.  
Foreign investment screening thresholds are based on negotiated outcomes between Australia and 
its trading partners.  
3.12 Trade and Investment Pr omotion, pp. 16, para.3.43 
Question 
The Government Report states that "Austrade directs more of its resources to Asian and other 
growth and emerging markets, which have significant commercial potential and provide 
opportunities aligned with Australia's comparative advantages." 
We are aware that Austrade, the agency of Australia responsible for enhancing trade and 
investments worldwide, has an operating office in İstanbul. Could Australia provide information 
about the efforts of Austrade in the Middle East? 
Answer 
Austrade has an office in Istanbul, which opened in  the early 1990s. The office is part of Austrade's 
European operations. 
Austrade's operations in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) are managed from the agency's 
MENA hub office in Dubai. Austrade's network in the region has representation in six locations in four countries: United Arab Emirates (Dubai an d Abu Dhabi); Saudi Arabia (Riyadh and Jeddah); 
Kuwait (Kuwait City); and Morocco (Rabat). 
Austrade works closely with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, other Australian 
government agencies, State Government representatives, industry marketing bodies, and business 
chambers to promote Australia's economic interests in the Middle East. 
To make the most effective use of available resources, Austrade has aligned its network to 
prioritise the agency's activities in Gulf Cooper ation Council member states as well as Morocco. 
These markets offer the strongest alignment between Australian capabilities, market demand, and 
the capacity to pay for Australia's high -value, high quality goods and services. 
In comparison with other countries in the region, these priority markets present a more conducive 
operating environment for Australian businesses, including SMEs. Many of these markets also have 
significant earnings from energy exports enabling them to undertake major investment into their 
own economies, creating emerging opportunities for Australian businesses. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 223 - 
 
  These countries are also increasing investment in education, training and skills creating 
opportunities that the Australian education sector is well placed to meet.  
Investors from the energy-exporting markets in the region, particularly those in the Gulf, are also 
looking to expand their long-term global investments, with the potential to significantly increase 
their investments in Australia. Austrade is working with key investors from the region, including 
sovereign wealth funds, to attract new productive direct investment into key sectors in Australia. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 224 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312 WT/TPR/S/312 page 8, paragraph 10  
Question 1  
The Secretariat Report states that Australia maintained export assisting tax concessions (e.g. 
Tradex).  Are agricultural commodities/products eligible under the Tradex program? If yes, what 
agricultural commodities/products benefited from this program in 2013 and 2014? What were the 
destinations of these exports?  
Answer 
The Tradex Scheme provides imports destined for export (either directly or following further 
processing or manufacture) with an up-front exemption from Goods and Services Tax (GST) and 
import duty that would otherwise have been payable.  
Where goods imported under Tradex are not export ed, Tradex duty (equivalent to the duty that 
would otherwise have been payable on import) becomes due. The GST that would have been 
applicable at the time of import also becomes due. 
Tradex is a self-assessment Scheme, where the benefits are claimed on imports destined for 
export, with evidence of export maintained, an d audits carried out on a risk managed basis. 
Tradex does not apply to domestically produced agricultural commodities/products and data is not 
kept on the destination of exports of goods imported under Tradex.  
WT/TPR/S/312, page 26, paragraph 2.2 Question 2 
The Secretariat report notes Australia has "commenced its domestic approval process to ratify the 
WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation…" In light of this statement, when does Australia anticipate being in a position to notify the WTO of its acceptance of the TFA?  
Answer 
Australia commenced its domestic approval process for the WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation 
(ATF) in 2014. The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCOT) is required to consider any 
treaty action, and recommended that binding trea ty action take place regarding the ATF in its 
report dated 26 March 2015. Australia will need to seek Executive Council approval to accept the ATF. We are expecting Australia will be in a posi tion to formally accept the ATF before the middle 
of 2015.  
WT/TPR/S/312, page 47, paragraph 3.31 
Question3 
According the WTO Secretariat report, "Fees and charges relating to quarantine processes were 
last amended in 2014 and are also imposed on a cost-recovery basis." Could Australia provide a 
more detailed explanation regarding what administrative support costs, if any, were included as part of the "cost-recovery" analysis used to develop the quarantine fees?  
Answer 
The Australian Government Department of Agriculture implemented new rates of charge for a 
number of biosecurity (quarantine) services effective 1 July 2014. For quarantine services, the Department of Agriculture operates under full cost  recovery. As such, administrative support costs WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 225 - 
 
  are included in the cost recovery cost base to be  recovered from fees and charges. Administrative 
support costs include a share of departmental corporate overheads in addition to related programme support.  
WT/TPR/S/312, page 68, paragraph 3.97:   
Question 4 
The Secretariat Report indicates that the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC) has a 
program offering direct loans to buyers. Does EFIC  offer direct loans to buyers of agricultural 
products? If so, what was the total of such loans in 2013 and 2014? What were the products, 
tenors, and destinations associated with these transactions?  
Answer 
To date, EFIC has not offered any direct loan facilities to overseas buyers of Australian agricultural 
products. 
WT/TPR/S/312, page 68, paragraph 3.97  Question 5 
What is the percentage of total Australian agricu ltural exports in 2013/14 that received Export 
Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC)-provided financial support? What is the percentage of total Australian cattle exports in 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 that received EFIC-provided financial 
support? 
Answer 
The percentage of total Australian agricultural exports in 2013-14 that received EFIC-provided 
financial support was around 0.1 per cent. The percentage of total Australian cattle exports in 
2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 that received EFIC-provided financial support was 19 per cent, 26 per 
cent, 5 per cent and 2 per cent respectively.  
WT/TPR/S/312, page 68, paragraph 3.97 
Question 6 
The Secretariat Report states that the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC) continued 
to provide various financial support to Australian companies exporting or investing in emerging 
and frontier markets. Correspondingly, according to the 2014 response to the WTO Questionnaire 
on Export Competition, Australia reported provid ing over A$190 million in support for agricultural 
products from 2010 – 2013 under EFIC's Foreign Exchange Facility Guarantee (FXG) program. Could Australia provide the specific destinations of the agricultural products supported under this 
program?  
Answer 
EFIC does not collect this data from its third party providers.  
WT/TPR/S/312, page 68, paragraph 3.97 
Question 7 
The Secretariat Report outlines various Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC's) export 
support mechanisms. Could Australia provide annual  average premium rates/fees for agricultural 
exports for each of the following programs in 2013 and 2014? 
 Export Working Capital Guarantee 
 Risk Participation Agreements WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 226 - 
 
   Export Finance Guarantee 
WT/TPR/S/312, page 68, paragraph 3.98 Question 8 
It is noted that the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC) does not usually provide 
short-term credit insurance due to the abundance of private sector capacity. Does EFIC have a 
policy that identifies when private sector financing is available and then scales back EFIC short-term lending? If so, what is this policy and how does it function? 
Answer 
For the Export Working Capital Guarantee, premiums are based on factors including exporter 
credit-worthiness, payment terms of the export co ntract, and tenor length. For Risk Participation 
Agreements, risk fees are quoted by the lead bank  on a case by case basis, factoring in risk 
variables such as assessed riskiness of counterparty and tenor of exposure, amongst others. For 
the Export Finance Guarantee, risk fees are calc ulated based on assessed creditworthiness of the 
borrower, the tenor and frequency of repayments and assessed credit enhancement, including loan 
collaterals, if any. 
EFIC's mandate is to operate in the market gap. An independent review in 2000 assessed that 
there was sufficient private market capacity in th e short-term credit insurance business and that 
Australian exporters would not be disadvantaged sh ould EFIC exit the market. In 2003, EFIC sold 
its short-term credit insurance business. EFIC has ceased all short-term credit insurance activity since the sale. 
WT/TPR/S/312, page 68, paragraph 3.98 
Question 9 
The Secretariat Report states the level of official support from the Export Finance and Insurance 
Corporation (EFIC) depends on the degree of local/national content. What is the local/national 
content requirement for agricultural products receiving EFIC support? Will EFIC cover non-
local/national agricultural content under any of its programs? If yes, what is the minimum percentage of Australian content required? 
Answer 
To be eligible for EFIC's support, export transactions, including agricultural exports, must be 
wholly or substantially produced or manufactured in Australia. Third country sources may also be eligible for support but only where the Australian content within the supported transaction meets 
the wholly or substantially criteria. 
WT/TPR/S/312, page 69, paragraph 3.99 Question 10 
The Secretariat Report indicates national interest account exposure in 2013/2014 was $A 867 
(footnote 140). Are agricultural commodities supported under the "national interest account? What portion of this amount is related to agricultural products? If any of this amount is related to 
agricultural products, could Australia please provide the products, average tenors, total values, 
and destinations of these export transactions by year? 
Answer 
Of the AUD867 million national interest exposure at 30 June 2014, AUD231 million relates to 
agricultural products, almost entirely from pr e-2003 short term credit insurance wheat export 
support. These debts, however, relate to rescheduled  Paris Club debts, i.e. they include capitalised 
overdue interest.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 227 - 
 
  WT/TPR/S/312, page 69, paragraph 3.99 
Question 11 
The Secretariat Reports states that Export Finance and Insurance Corporation's obligation to third 
parties are ultimately guaranteed by the Government. Accordingly, Section 8 of the EFIC 
legislation (Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Act of 1991) states that "By force of this 
section, the due payment by EFIC of any money that becomes payable by EFIC to a person other than the Commonwealth is guaranteed by the Commonwealth". Could Australia confirm that the 
indemnification by the Australian government applies to both the EFIC's commercial account and 
the national interest account? 
Answer 
The indemnification by the Australian Government applies to EFIC's business activities, which 
includes the Commercial and National Interest Accounts.  
WT/TPR/S/312, page 69, paragraph 3.102 Question 12 
The Secretariat Report indicates that in 2012/13 agriculture/forestry/fishing sector accounted for 8 
percent of the Export Finance and Insurance Corpor ation's total support. It is USG's understanding 
that this includes support for cattle exports at te rms of greater than 180 days under EFIC's Export 
Finance Guarantee Program (EFG). What is the total value of these transactions in 2013 and 2014? 
And what is the average tenor of these transaction in 2013 and 2014? 
Answer 
EFIC support for breeding and dairy cattle an d the supply of associated equipment and 
infrastructure under the EFG program totalled AUD 16.14 million in 2013 and AUD 21.44 million in 
2014. The average tenors for these transactions were over 180 days but were no longer than the economic life of the financed goods.  
WT/TPR/S/312, pages 86-87, paragraph 3.4.6.3.1 
Question 13 On February 13, 2014, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) released a report entitled 
"Copyright and the Digital Economy." The report contained a number of recommendations for 
amending and revising Australia's copyright law, with one key recommendation calling for the introduction of a fair use style exception to Aust ralian Copyright Law. What is the status of the 
recommendations contained in the ALRC's inquir y and report? Will the government be calling for 
any of ALRC recommendations to be introduced into Parliament? If so, what is the timeline for 
such action? 
Answer 
The Australian Government is continuing to consider the recommendations of the Australian Law 
Reform Commission.  
Additional copyright questions 
Question 14 
a. On December 10, 2014, the Australian Attorney General and Communications Minister 
published an open letter to internet service pr oviders (ISPs) and copyright holders encouraging 
them to jointly prepare an industry code to address and deter online copyright infringement in 
Australia. Specifically, the letter called for the development of an education and warning notice 
scheme and for a process of "facilitated discovery to assist rights holders in taking direct WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 228 - 
 
  copyright infringement action against subscribers subject to multiple notices." We would like to 
ask several questions about the process for developing this industry code: 
(1)  The aforementioned December 10, 2014 letter re quests that the industry code be developed 
"with a view to registration by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) 
under ... the Telecommunications Act[.]" Assuming the relevant stakeholders are able to reach 
agreement on such a code, could you please describe the process for actually "registering" the code under the Telecommunications Act?  In the event a mutually agreed upon code is 
presented for registration, is the ACMA required to conduct its own review of the code before 
formally accepting it for registration? If so, what steps does such a review entail? And what is the estimated timeline for completing it? 
(2) Section 121 of the Telecommunications Act gives the ACMA authority to "direct" 
persons/participants to comply with any registered industry codes they are contravening? 
What is the process, if any, for determining whet her a participant is acting in contravention of 
a registered industry code? 
(3) On February 20, 2015, in direct response to the Government's letter of December 10, 2014, a 
draft version of the industry code was released for a 30 day public comment period. The draft version of the industry code was released/published by Communications Alliance (a trade 
organization that was formed in 1997 "to provide a unified voice for the Australian 
communications industry"). The document released for public comment states that the document was drafted by the Online Copyrigh t Infringement Working Committee ("Working 
Committee") of the Communications Alliance. The Working Committee apparently consists 
entirely of members from the telecommunications industry (with the exception of one law firm 
whose role is not clear). The Working Committee, in turn, worked closely with a "Stakeholder Group." The Stakeholder Group included representatives from rights holder and consumer 
representative organizations and "provided inpu t and guidance on successive drafts of the 
code." Is not clear, however, from the document released on February 20, 2015, who amongst the participating stakeholders possesses the authority to decide what text will actually be 
included in any industry code that might ultimately be submitted to the ACMA for 
registration. Could you explain whether, under  the current process (spearheaded by the 
Working Committee of the Communications Alliance), the express consent of all stakeholders 
(including rights holders and consumer representative organizations) is a precondition for 
finalizing the document and submitting it for registration with the ACMA? Or, are the members 
of the Working Committee and the Communication s Alliance merely required to invite 
comment and input from members of the Stakeholder Group and give due consideration to 
their respective views (without any obligation to incorporate such input into the final version of 
the industry code)? 
(4) The Government's aforementioned letter of Dece mber 10, 2014 further provided that if the 
relevant stakeholders cannot voluntarily agree on a code by April 8, 2015, the government will 
act to prescribe its own "binding arrangements either by an industry code prescribed by the Attorney-General under the Copyright Act or an industry standard prescribed by the ACMA, at 
the direction of the Minister for Communications under the Telecommunications Act[.]" Could 
you please cite the relevant and underlying legal authorities in both the Copyright and 
Telecommunications Acts for prescribing such binding arrangements and also generally describe processes and procedures that would be followed in developing and implementing 
such mandatory obligations? What would the time lines be for prescribing such arrangements?  
b. On 14 October 2011, the Attorney-General launched a public consultation paper outlining a 
proposal to amend the Copyright Act to br oaden the scope of the safe harbour scheme 
contained therein. Public comments were received in response to the consultation paper. Could 
you please provide a status update on this consultation process and what changes to the law, if any, might result from this process? Finally, could you address whether any changes made to the scope of entities that could potentially qualify for the safe harbour under the Copyright 
Act would have any corresponding effect on the scope of those entities that will be covered by 
the terms of the industry code that was rele ased for public comment on February 20, 2015? 
c. The Government's letter of December 10, 2014, noted that the Government also intends to 
introduce legislation that would "enable a cour t to order the blocking of overseas hosted 
websites that can be shown to be primarily for the purpose of facilitating online copyright WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 229 - 
 
  infringement." Could you please provide us an update on this legislation?  It appears that any 
such legislation would be strictly limited to websites that are operated outside of Australia. Could you please describe whether current Australian law permits the issuance of orders to block access to websites that are hosted/operated within Australia? If so, could you 
cite to the relevant legal authority that permits such blocking orders to be issued and provide 
any examples of where said authority has been utilized? 
Answer 
Q.1 Under section 117 of the Telecommunications Act 1997 , once an industry code has been 
submitted by a body or association, the Australi an Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) is 
required to register it if they are satisfied that:  
 the code provides appropriate community safeguards 
 the body or association has published a draft code and invited the public and industry to 
make submissions, over a period of at least 30 days, and considered any submissions, and 
 the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, the Australian Competition and Consumer 
Commission, a consumer body, and where applicable, the Privacy Commissioner have been 
consulted. 
Registration of a code is the responsibility of  t h e  A C M A .  T h e  A C M A ' s  d e c i s i o n  i s  b a s e d  o n  i t s  
assessment of the code presented against the crit eria set out under sections 112 and 117 of the 
Telecommunications Act 1997 . The timeframe for registration is a matter for the ACMA. However, 
the draft code released by the Communications A lliance indicates that a notice scheme under the 
code should be in place by 1 September 2015 at the latest.  
Qs. 2-4  The body or association drafting an industry code can submit that code at any time. 
However, in the case of the proposed code for on line copyright infringement, the Attorney-General 
and the Minister for Communications wrote to the relevant Internet Service Provider industry 
association, rights holder organisations, major Internet Service Providers and major rights holders 
requesting that they submit the code by 8 Ap ril 2015. The letter of 10 December 2014 asked that 
Internet Service Providers and rights holder s develop the code and urged parties do so 
consensually. It was anticipated that Communications Alliance, and the relevant Internet Service 
Provider industry association, would lead the code  development process due to their experience in 
developing codes under the Telecommunications Act 1997  and because they represent a section of 
the telecommunications industry, consistent with subsection 117(1)(a) of the Act. 
In addition, in registering the code the ACMA must be satisfied that a draft code has been 
published and that the public and industry, including rights holders in this case, have been invited 
to make submissions. 
Q.5 An industry code was submitted to the ACMA fo r registration on 8 April 2015. Therefore, there 
is currently no need for the Government to introduce binding arrangements, pending consideration of the code by the ACMA.  
In determining authorization liability, under subs ections 36(1A) and 101(1A) of the Copyright Act, 
compliance with any relevant industry codes of practice is relevant, in determining authorisation liability, to a court's assessment of whether a person has taken 'reasonable steps'. The Government intended that any voluntary industry code or prescribed code or prescribed standard 
would be relevant to a court's assessment of whether a person has taken reasonable 
steps. Paragraph 1.1.4 of the industry code indicate s that it is intended to be a relevant code of 
practice for the purposes of sections 36(1A) and 101(1A) of the Copyright Act. 
Under subsections 36(1A) and 101(1A) of the Copyright Act 1968, compliance with any relevant 
industry codes of practice is relevant, in determining authorisation liability, to a court's assessment of whether a person has taken 'reasonable steps'. If an industry code is not submitted by 
8 April 2015, the Australian Government will consider the option of developing a relevant industry 
code of practice for the purposes of these subsections.  WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 230 - 
 
  Q.6 On 30 July 2014, the Attorney-General and Mini ster for Communications released the Online 
Copyright Infringement Discussion Paper for public  comment. This included a proposal to extend 
the safe harbour scheme. This proposal was modi fied from the proposal contained in the 2011 
consultation paper, on the basis of comments received during consultation on that proposal.  
The Australian Government decided not to procee d with extension of the safe harbour scheme as 
part of its package of measures to target online copyright infringement. However, the Government 
is continuing to consider extension of the safe harbour scheme as a possible future reform 
proposal.  
The draft code applies to 'the Carriage Service Pr oviders (CSPs) section of the telecommunications 
industry under section 110 of the Telecommunications Act'. Any future extension of the safe 
harbour scheme will not amend the definition of CS P and therefore will not affect the scope of the 
entities covered by the draft code.  
Q.7 The Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015 was introduced into Parliament on 
26 March 2015. If passed, this Bill would enable a copyright owner to apply to the Federal Court of 
Australia for an order requiring a CSP to block access to an online location (e.g. a website) that 
has the primary purpose of infringing or fa cilitating infringement of copyright.  
This legislation is intentionally limited to online locations outside of Australia. In relation to online 
locations within Australia, the copyright owner can currently take direct action against the operator 
of the online location under section 115 of the Copyright Act 1968, without needing to involve the 
CSP. An injunction is one of the remedies available under section 115. 
ANSWERS TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE  
GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES 
Follow-up question 1 
Document # RD/TPR/421 (Australia's Responses to Questions), page 161. The United States asked 
in Question 14.a.2: "Section 121 of the Telecommunications Act gives the ACMA authority to 
"direct" persons/participants to comply with any registered industry codes they are contravening. What is the process, if any, for determining whether a participant is acting in contravention of a 
registered industry code?" 
Australia's responses do not directly respond to this question. Could Australia please provide a 
response to this question?  
Answer 
There is no explicit process set out under the Telecommunications Act for the ACMA to determine 
whether a participant is acting in contravention of a registered industry code. In addition to general administrative powers, the ACMA has inve stigatory powers which could be relied upon to 
identify non-compliance. As to whether any enfo rcement action is undertaken, this would be 
determined on a case-by-case basis and inform ed by various matters, including the ACMA's 
compliance and enforcement policy. If the ACMA de cides to give a direction to a participant to 
comply with an industry code, that direction woul d be subject to merits review under Part 29 of 
the Telecommunications Act. Merits review under the Telecommunications Act provides that applications may be made on certain decisions of the ACMA to be reviewed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal following a process of internal reconsideration by the ACMA.  
Follow-up question 2 
RD/TPR/421, page 161: The United States asked in Question 14.a.3: "Could you explain whether, 
under the current process (spearheaded by the Working Committee of the Communications 
Alliance), the express consent of all stakeholders (including rights holders and consumer 
representative organizations) is a precondition for finalizing the document and submitting it for registration with the ACMA? Or, are the members of the Working Committee and the WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 231 - 
 
  Communications Alliance merely required to invite comment and input from members of the 
Stakeholder Group and give due consideration to their respective views (without any obligation to incorporate such input into the final version of the industry code)?" 
Australia's response to these questions is apparently contained on page 162 under the subheading 
"Qs. 2-4." Australia's response however does not directly address the questions quoted 
above. Rather, Australia only states that partie s were urged to develop the code "consensually" 
and that it was anticipated that the internet se rvice providers would "lead the code development 
process[.]"  Could Australia please provide a direct response to these questions? Our questions are 
aimed at getting a clearer understanding of whether the right holder and consumer representatives that were part of the "Stakehold er Group" were given veto power over the final 
text of the industry code that was submitte d to the Australian Communications and Media 
Authority (ACMA) for registration on April 8, 2015. 
Answer  
Under paragraphs 117(1)(e) and 117(1)(f) of the Telecommunications Act, before submitting the 
code to the ACMA for registration, the Communications Alliance was required to have published a 
draft code, invited participants in that section of the industry, and the public, to make submissions within a period of at least 30 days on the draft code. The Communications Alliance was required to 
consider any submissions made in response to the draft code. There is no requirement for 
Communications Alliance to incorporate all submitte rs views in the code submitted to the ACMA for 
registration. Any views of stakeholders contained in any submissions, and whether the Communications Alliance gave consideration to such views, will form part of the ACMA's 
consideration of the submitted code. 
Follow-up question 3 
The Secretariat observed that Australia does not have a unified analytical framework to assess the 
costs and benefits of SPS measures for stakeholders along the supply chain, including those 
affecting foreign suppliers. The United States believes this is a very important issue in the development of SPS measures. Does Australia have any plans to consider the introduction of this 
cost-benefit framework for proposed SPS measures? 
Answer  
Australia maintains a strict sanitary and phytosanitary regime, which is proportionate to Australia's 
appropriate level of protection. Our approach to quarantine is designed to preserve Australia's 
favourable pest and disease status and our unique native flora and fauna. The Australian 
Government maintains its commitment to a robust, science based, framework to protect Australia's unique environment and biosecurity status. Australia bases its national standards as 
closely as possible to those of the World Organisa tion for Animal Health (OIE), the International 
Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and the Code x Alimentarius Commission. However, in some 
cases, relevant standards do not exist or the international standards do not deliver the level of 
protection required by Australia to maintain its appropriate level of protection. 
The SPS Agreement clearly states the economic factors that can be taken into account during risk 
assessment. The use of cost/benefit analysis, as st ipulated in the report, does not comply, in our 
view, with the SPS Agreement and Australia therefore has no plans to conduct a cost-benefit of its 
SPS measures. WT/TPR/M/312/Add.1 
 
- 232 - 
 
  ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF URUGUAY 
Report by the Secretariat WT/TPR/S/312  
Question Within the program of grants for the developm ent of export markets (EMDG program), export 
subsidies for agricultural products are awarded? If so, what are these products? 
Answer  
The Export Market Development Scheme (EMDG) is currently operational until the 2015-16 grant 
year, which is the 2016-17 financial year in which grants for the 2015-16 grant year are paid. The 
continuation of the scheme is subject to the Government's consideration of and response to the EMDG Review 2015. The Review is currently underway and is scheduled to report to Government 
in June 2015.  
Number and value of EMDG grants paid (fro m applications received in FY 2013-14 for 
Grant, Year 2012-13) 
Industry Number of grants paid Value of grants paid 
(aggregate) 
Agriculture 69 $AU2,442,458 
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing support services 16 $AU631,694 
Aquaculture 5 $AU100,911 
Food & beverage manufacturing 141 $AU5,185,824 
Grand total 231 $AU8,360,887 
Source: EMDG database (accessed 24/3/2015).  
State Trading 3.3.3 
Question 
Within the State Trading (3.3.3) includes "... the Paddy Marketing Board of New South Wales, 
which has the monopoly right over exports ...", what is the objective of maintaining this policy? 
Answer 
All rice grown in New South Wales (NSW) that is not sold domestically to an authorised buyer is 
divested from producers and becomes th e property of the NSW Rice Marketing  Board (the Board). 
The Board seeks to ensure the best possible return s from rice sold outside Australia, based on the 
quality differentials or attributes of Australian rice. The Board has appointed Ricegrowers Limited (trading as SunRice) as its sole exporter.  
The Board does not negotiate contracts for the sale of rice. All rice trading is conducted on behalf 
of the Board by Authorised Buyers. Authorised Buyers are able to freely buy and sell rice grown in 
NSW on the domestic market in Australia. All sales contracts are entered into on a commercial basis. SunRice has no obligation to set a benchmark price and has not done so. Export prices are 
determined by the market for Australian rice at levels influenced by the quality of the rice and 
prevailing world prices. 
Australia has progressively reduced the number of State Trading Enterprises (STEs) with export 
monopoly powers from seven in 2004 to one in 2015. The revised draft WTO modalities for 
agriculture (TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4) would require WTO Members to remove the export monopoly powers of STEs. Australia is committed to the removal of STE export monopoly powers as part of a final Doha Round outcome. 
__________