WT/REG299/M/1  
 
25 May 2016  
(16-2833)  Page: 1/4  
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Eightieth Session   
 
 FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND COLOMBIA  
(GOODS AND SERVICES) 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 5 APRIL 2016 
Chairman: Ambassador Daniel Blockert (Sweden) 
1.1.  The 80th Session of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (hereinafter 'CRTA' or the 
'Committee') was convened in Airgram WTO/AIR/RTA/5/Rev.1 dated 24 March 2016. 
1.2.  Under Agenda Item D.V of the session, th e CRTA considered the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) 
between the EFTA States and Colombia, goods and services, (hereinafter "the Agreement"). 
1.3.  The Chairman said that the Agreement ha d entered into force on 1 July 2011 for Colombia, 
Liechtenstein and Switzerland, 1 September 2014 for Norway and 1 October 2014 for Iceland. It 
had been notified to the WTO by Colombia, Liec htenstein and Switzerland on 14 September 2011; 
and on 8 January 2015 by Colombia, Iceland an d Norway under Article XXIV:7(a) of the GATT 
1994 and the Understanding on the Interpretation  of Article XXIV of GATT 1994 as an Agreement 
establishing a free trade area (documents WT/REG299/N/1-2) and under GATS Article V:7(a) as 
an Agreement providing for the liberalization of trade in services within the meaning of Article V of 
the GATS (documents S/C/N/600 and Add.1). The te xt of the Agreement was available, together 
with its Annexes, on the Pa rties' official websites.  
1.4.  The Factual Presentation on the goods an d services aspect (document WT/REG299/1 dated 
22 January 2016) had been prepared by the Secr etariat on its own responsibility in full 
consultation with the Parties, in accordance with paragraph 7(b) of the Transparency Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements (document WT/L/6 71). In addition, written questions and replies 
on this Agreement had been distributed in document WT/REG299/2 dated 1 April 2016. Some 
additional responses from EFTA to the EU questi ons had been circulated in an unofficial room 
document (RD/RTA/33) and would be distributed as soon as possible. He proposed to organize the 
consideration of the Agreement by first asking the Parties and then other Members to give any 
general comments. They would then turn to the specifics of the Agreement.  
1.5.  The representative of Colombia thanked the Secretariat for preparing the Factual 
Presentation on FTA between Colombia and the EFTA States. He also thanked the EFTA Secretariat 
and Member States for their excellent and close cooperation in conducting the review, as well as 
Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Thailand and the European Union for their questions to which the Parties had already provided responses.  
1.6.  The FTA between the Republic of Colomb ia and the EFTA States had been signed on 
25 November 2008, with a view to diversifying markets for Colombia's exports and the supply of raw materials, inputs and capital goods in order to enhance the competitiveness of its export 
range. The four EFTA States figured prominently among Colombia's international partners because 
of their dynamic trade and investment flows. 
1.7.  The FTA had entered into force on 1 July  2011 for Colombia, Switzerland and Liechtenstein, 
followed by Norway on 1 September 2014 and Ic eland on 1 October 2014. In Colombia, the 
commitments agreed had been incorporated in Law No. 1372 of 7 January 2010. The FTA 
consisted of 13 chapters and 20 annexes, an exchan ge of letters concerning the supply of pension 
funds management services and a Memorandum of Understanding on services. It was WT/REG299/M/1 
 
- 2 - 
 
  supplemented by three agreements on basic agricult ural products signed bilaterally with each of 
the EFTA countries, whose concessions were line with the specific interests of the Parties. Conditions for the dismantling of import duties on  processed agricultural products, fish and other 
marine products, and industrial products had been agreed between the four EFTA States and 
Colombia. 
1.8.  The Agreement under consideration met the requirements of Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 
and promoted comprehensive economic developmen t of the trading partners, with the ultimate 
aim of contributing to poverty reduction and the creation of new employment opportunities. One of 
the compatibility criteria for FTAs under Arti cle XXIV of the GATT 1994 was the "elimination of 
duties on substantially all trade". 
1.9.  In this connection the Factual Presentation stated, in paragraphs 3.18, 3.21 and 3.24, that at 
the entry into force of the Agreement, Colombia had liberalized duties on 56.2% of tariff lines for 
imports from Iceland, Norway and Switzerland.  According to the document, by 2023 all duties 
would have been eliminated on 92.9% of tariff lines in Colombia's reduction timetable for all the 
EFTA countries. By the end of the transition period, only 476 tariff lines would remain dutiable in 
Colombia for imports from Switzerland, 553 for those from Norway and 557 for those from Iceland, all of them concerning the agricultural sector. 
1.10.  The following provisions were a non-exhaustive list of trade regulations to facilitate bilateral 
trade and were set out in the Agreement under co nsideration: the possibility of exporting and 
importing capital goods and remanufactured products of the metal-mechanical industry; retention of the use of special import and export procedures and free zones together with the benefits 
provided under the Agreement; prohibition of export subsidies for agricultural products; 
maintenance of the price band system and Colo mbia's policy on imports of used goods; 
establishment of criteria for determining origin to ensure that goods worked or processed in the 
territory of any of the Parties would be accorded preferential tariff treatment; the submission of 
electronic customs declarations and paperless trade administration; coordination between authorities at the border to ensure physical inspection at the same time and in the same place; 
issuance of advance rulings on tariff classification  and origin; signature of an agreement on mutual 
administrative assistance on customs matters; application of bilateral safeguards during the tariff reduction period; and application of anti-dumping  and countervailing measures according to WTO 
rules. 
1.11.  The Agreement also met the requirements  of Article V of the GATS. The Secretariat's 
Factual Presentation compared Colombia's commitments in the Agreement with its WTO commitments. Table 4.7 showed that, overall, Colombia had added new commitments in the 
services sector, except for health-related an d social services. The Agreement retained MFN 
exemptions in telecommunications, road transport and audiovisual services, as well as the horizontal limitations specified under the WTO. Colombia had added commitments in professional 
services, and had broadened the scope of its telecommunications commitments by laying down 
regulatory conditions consistent with internationa l standards. As regards the movement of natural 
persons supplying services, the common objective agreed was to facilitate the entry, temporary stay and work of natural persons on a mutually advantageous basis and in keeping with the other 
commitments undertaken. 
1.12.  A moderate and gradual opening up of financ ial services authorized the cross-border supply 
of certain financial services and the entry of foreign financial institutions in the form of branches. 
The supply of financial services in Colombia required prior authorization from the Government. As 
regards tourism and travel-related services, Colombia had liberalized hotels and restaurants and tourist guides services, and various subsectors such as maritime, air, rail and road transport 
services, as well as services auxiliary to all modes of transport. Recreational, cultural, and sporting 
services had been partially liberalized. 
1.13.  The Agreement also had provisions on SPS, TBT, government procurement, intellectual 
property rights and competition policy. With this presentation he hoped to have demonstrated that 
the Agreement eliminated customs duties on substantially all trade, contained bilateral trade 
facilitation provisions that went beyond those set out in the WTO Agreements, did not introduce more restrictive trade regulations vis-à-vis  third parties, and that the specific commitments on 
trade in services had substantial coverage. His delegation remained at the disposal of Members to 
answer any questions they might have. WT/REG299/M/1 
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.14.  The representative of Switzerland, speaki ng on behalf of the EFTA States, thanked the 
Secretariat and partners from Colombia for their excellent collaboration in preparing for the 
review. The signing of a Joint Declaration on Cooperation between the EFTA States and Colombia in 2006 had provided the impetus for developing fu rther the economic and trade relations between 
the EFTA States and Colombia. Full-fledged negotiations on an FTA had begun a year later and had 
been successfully concluded - after five rounds - in June 2008. An FTA had been signed in 
November of the same year, and it had entered into force between the five Parties between July 
2011 and October 2014. 
1.15.  Colombia and the EFTA States enjoyed close and dynamic economic and trade relations. 
Colombia was an important trading partner for EFTA in South America. In the last decade, merchandise trade had grown at an average annu al rate of over 12%, peaking at over US$1.3 
billion in 2014. Imports from Colombia amounted to over US$700 million in 2015. The main import 
items were precious stones and metals, coffee, fruits, and machinery. Exports to Colombia were valued at about US$500 million: the main export articles being pharmaceuticals, organic 
chemicals, optical and medical instruments, and machinery. 
1.16.  The Agreement was broad-based and contained provisions on trade in goods, trade in 
services, investment, protection of intellectual property rights, government procurement and 
competition policy. It provided for substantive concessions by all sides while taking into account 
the sensitivities of the respective Parties. 
1.17.  Trade in basic agricultural products was covered by bilateral agricultural agreements 
between the individual EFTA States and Colombia. These agreements formed an integral part of 
the instruments establishing the free trade area. Trade between the EFTA States and Colombia 
held much potential and the EFTA States viewed the Agreement as an important instrument for promoting and deepening economic cooperation betw een the Parties. In this context, the Parties 
had held their first Joint Committee meeting under the Agreement in November 2014. The meeting 
had welcomed the smooth and effective implementa tion of the Agreement, and had assessed the 
potential for further development. Before closing, he thanked WTO Members who had sent written 
questions ahead of the meeting for their interest in the Agreement. Replies had been provided and 
the EFTA States looked forward to resp onding to further questions, if any. 
1.18.  The representative of the European Union said that it had submitted some advance 
questions (on commercial presence and SMEs' access to government procurement markets) after 
the deadline to which it had not yet received responses. In addition, she had two further 
questions.  She asked whether the Parties could cl arify whether they had reviewed their schedules 
of specific commitments and their lists of MFN exemptions in line with Article 4.18 of the 
Agreement. On investment she wondered whether the Parties had reviewed the status of non-
conforming measures in accordance with Article 5.4 of the Agreement. 
1.19.  The Chairman said that responses to the questions that had arrived from the EU after the 
deadline had been circulated in the unofficial room document he had referred to in his introduction 
(document RD/RTA/33). 
1.20.  The representative of the United States  noted the unfortunately low levels of tariff 
liberalization of agricultural products in the Agreement. With respect to services, the Factual 
Presentation noted that the Parties' MFN obligat ions under the Agreement did not apply to more 
favourable treatment granted under future RTAs with third countries, but that the Parties must be afforded adequate opportunity to negotiate simi lar benefits. He would submit the question in 
writing, but he was interested in how this process had worked in practice. The Factual Presentation 
also noted that each Party's services schedule specified among other things the time-frame for implementation and date of entry into force of the respective liberalization commitment. He asked 
the Parties to explain how the time-frame for implementation and entry into force of their 
respective services liberalization commitments di ffered from the time-frame for implementation 
and entry into force of the Agreement as a whole. With respect to services commitments generally, for a number of Parties to the Agre ement the Factual Presentation showed that 
commitments were not vastly different than those undertaken in the GATS. This was unfortunate. 
The Factual Presentation appeared to suggest that the Parties' commitments with respect to national treatment for investment in non-services sectors were undertaken on a negative list basis 
but with respect to investment in services sect ors were undertaken on a positive list basis. He 
would be interested in hearing from the Parties why they had adopted two different approaches to WT/REG299/M/1 
 
- 4 - 
 
  the issue of national treatment for commercial pr esence in the Agreement. He had already noted 
his delegation's interest in the EFTA Parties' notification of the FTA with the Gulf Cooperation Council and he called attention to Colombia's non-notified ALADI agreements and requested that Colombia notify these as well. 
1.21.  The representative of Thailand thanked the Parties for the responses to their questions. 
1.22.  The representative of Switzerland said that the Parties would provide written responses to 
the questions. The representative of Colombia echoed the response of the representative of 
Switzerland. 
1.23.  The Chairman said that the consideration of the Goods and Services Aspects of the Free 
Trade Agreement between the EFTA States and Colombia, had allowed Members to clarify a 
number of questions and the Committee had now concluded oral discussion of the RTA in 
accordance with paragraph 11 of the Transparency  Mechanism. If any delegations wished to ask 
follow up questions they were invited to forwar d submissions in writing to the Secretariat by 
13 April 2016 and Parties were asked to submit replies in writing by no later than 27 April 2016. In 
accordance with paragraph 13 of the Transparency Mechanism all written submissions, as well as 
minutes of this meeting would be circulated promptly, in all WTO official languages, and would be made available on the WTO website. 
1.24.  The Committee took note of the comments made. 
__________