WT/WGTDF/W/78  
 
12 June 2015  
(15-3058)  Page: 1/14  
Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance    
 
 INVOCATION OF ARTICLE II.6 BY GATT CONTRACTING PARTIES 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
1  INTRODUCTION 
1.1.  At the 30th meeting of the WTO Working Grou p on Trade, Debt and Finance (WGTDF) held on 
November 11, 2014, WTO Members reached a consensus to commission a factual note to the Secretariat on the instances in which Article II. 6 of the GATT/WTO had been invoked in the past. 
Members issued a strong note of caution, emphasiz ing the factual and historical character of that 
note, which should neither venture into analysis nor affect their rights and obligations under the current agreements. In preparing its note, the Secretariat relied mainly on publicly available GATT documents and archives derestricted by a decision of the General Council in 2006 and accessible 
from the WTO website. 
1.2.  Article II.6 of GATT 1947 provides in its sect ion (a), that "the specific duties and charges 
included in the Schedules relating to contracting parties members of the International Monetary 
Fund, and margins of preference in specific duties and charges maintained by such contracting 
parties, are expressed in the appropriate currency at the par value accepted or provisionally recognized by the Fund at the date of this Agr eement. Accordingly, in case this par value is 
reduced consistently with the Articles of Agreem ent of the International Monetary Fund by more 
than twenty per centum, such specific duties and charges and margins of preference may be 
adjusted to take account of such reduction; pr ovided that the CONTRACTING PARTIES (i.e., the 
contracting parties acting jointly as provided for in Article XXV) concur that such adjustments will 
not impair the value of the concessions provided for in the appropriate Schedule or elsewhere in 
this Agreement, due account being taken of all factors which may influence the need for, or 
urgency of, such adjustments". Section (b) provides that: "Similar provisions shall apply to any 
contracting party not a member of the Fund, as from the date on which such contracting party 
becomes a member of the Fund or enters into a special exchange agreement in pursuance of Article XV." 
1.3.  Most cases described below took place at th e period in which Contracting Parties "agreed to 
keep their exchange rates (the value of their currenc ies in terms of the U.S. dollar and, in the case 
of the United States, the value of the dollar in terms of gold) pegged at rates that could be adjusted only to correct a fundamental disequilibrium in the balance of payments, and only with 
the IMF's agreement".
2 This par value system—also known as the Bretton Woods (global exchange 
standard) system—prevailed until the early 1970's. 
2  INSTANCES IN WHICH ARTICLE II.6 HAS BEEN INVOKED  
2.1.  The Article II.6 (a) procedure has been invoked 11 times: Benelux (1950); Greece (1953); 
Finland (1955, 1957, 1967); Turkey (1959); Uruguay (1961, 1965, 1967); Israel (1975, 1977). Out of the 11 requests for adjustments, 9 led to a GATT Decision approving the adjustment of 
specific tariffs. In two cases, the procedure did not lead to a Decision (Uruguay in 1967, request 
withdrawn; and Israel in 1977, request left with no Decision). Annex A at the end of this Note summarizes the situation in tabular form.  
                                               
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to thei r rights and obligations under the WTO. 
2 Direct quote from th e IMF website, at: https://www.imf.org/exte rnal/about/histcoop.htm  . WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 2 - 
 
 2.1  Benelux – 1950  
The initial request (GATT Document  CP.5/SR.16 of 2 December 1950) 
2.2.  On 30 November, 1950, the Chairman of the Fi fth Session of the Contracting Parties, held in 
Torquay, indicated to Contracting Parties that he had been informed by the Benelux delegation 
that, after the devaluation in 1949, certain adjustments were considered in the specific duties in 
Schedule II, with a view to take into account the change in the par values of the Dutch guilder and of the Belgian franc. These adjustments were considered for 11 specific duties and 7 monopoly 
duties, and were aimed at equalizing the duties levied in florins and in Belgian francs. It was 
agreed to refer the question to the Working Party "B" on Schedules. 
The Decision by the Contracting Parties and its process (GATT Docu ment CP.5/45 of 12 
December 1950)  
2.3.  The Working Party "B" examined the reques t of the Netherlands concerning changes to a 
number of specific duties appearing in Section A of Schedule II. The Netherlands explained that these changes had been justified because of the differing degree of devaluations between the 
Dutch guilder and the Belgian franc (33% and 12%, respectively) and the consequent alteration in 
the relationship of the specific duties in the two currencies, as set forth in Schedule II. In a customs union, it was necessary for the rates to agree. Not all specific duties would increase. 
Details had been provided in annex B of Document  CP.5/45, regarding the items to be adjusted 
and by how much. A draft Decision approving th e proposed adjustments was attached to the 
proposed list of duties. 
2.4.  Since there had been no objection to the proposed changes, the Working Party "B" 
recommended their adoption under Article II.6 (a) of the GATT. The Decision became effective on 
15 December 1950, as reported in the GATT's Basic Instruments and Selected Documents (BISD), Volume II., page 12 of May 1952; and in GATT Document CP/94 of 18 January 1951 regarding the 
Decisions and Resolutions of the Contracting Parties at the Fifth Session of the GATT (Torquay, 
November-December 1950).    
2.2  Greece – 1953 
The initial request (GATT Documents L/97; L/113/Add.1 and Add.2) 
2.5.  As reported in Document L/113 of 28 August 1953, the Greek Government submitted a 
request to GATT Contracting Parties to readjust sp ecific duties based on Article II.6 of the GATT 
1947, following the "official devaluation of 9 April 1953 which was decided by the Greek 
Government in agreement with the International Monetary Fund". As a result of this devaluation, 
the official value of the drachma changed from 15,000 to 30,000 for one U.S. dollar. In its request, the Greek Government considered that "import duties of all kinds payable in paper drachma had to 
be increased by 100% if they were to be maintained at their pre-devaluation level".  
2.6.  As regards to specific duties, the readjustment "raised some difficulties in view of the 
complicated system for the conversion into paper dr achma of specific duties expressed in metallic 
drachma".
3 Also, the Greek Government wished to proceed by stages, as it "was anxious to avoid 
any undue increase in prices in the domestic market", and accordingly "did not wish to effect the abrupt overall re-adjustment (but) rather to proc eed by gradual stages, (…) to the extent they 
thought it was indispensable". 
2.7.  As a result, the Government informed the Contracting Parties that, as a first step, it had 
increased the conversion coefficient of the metall ic drachma to paper drachma from 225 to 300, 
i.e. "to the figure that represents the average official par value of the gold pound after the 
                                               
3 Document L/97 of 25 June 1953. According to a Note attached to its Schedule of commitment 
(Schedule XXV of the Annecy Protocol of Accession of Gr eece), the Government of Greece had specified that a 
special coefficient would be applied fo r products subject to a specific duty, to make sure that the sum payable 
in Greek's legal currency was converting the initial value of the metallic drachma into paper drachma at the 
prevailing rate of the drachma to the gold pound. This coefficient was capped at 300 by Greek law, and 
reflected in Greece's Schedule of commitments. This adjustment reflected the fact that the value of the gold pound per drachma was considerably higher than its pre-war level.  WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 3 - 
 
 devaluation of 9 April 1953"(Document L/113). This ch ange, of purely monetary nature, had led to 
an increase of specific duties of 33% in value.  
2.8.  For the re-adjustment of the duties them selves, the Government suggested in Document 
L/113 that it could be done in two-ways: either by raising the basic specific duty to a level which 
would correspond to (the remaining) 67%, or the conversion of the specific duty into an ad 
valorem one. For a limited number of tariff items, the basic specific duty had been increased by a 
flat 50% (less than the maximum of 67%), or converted into a maximum ad valorem tariff of 
20%. Two months later, the Government announced that the remaining specific tariff lines would 
be actually subject to an increase of 50% (Document L/113/Add.2 of 20 October 1953).   
The Decision by the Contracting Pa rties of the GATT and its process 
2.9.  The Contracting Parties agreed to review  the changes made by Greece in the context of 
Working Party 6 on Schedules and invited the Repr esentatives of the International Monetary Fund 
to be present at this review (Document SR.8/8 of  1 October 1953). The draft Decision prepared by 
the Secretariat for the Contracting Parties summarized the above-mentioned factual elements 
(Document W.8/31 of 20 October 1953). 
2.10.  The discussion by the Contracting Parties for the rectifications of these Schedules is 
extensively reported in Document G/62 of 23 October 1953. With respect to Greece, the report 
highlights that:  
a. "the Working Party examined in detail the problems arising out of the fact that the Note 
at the end of Schedule XXV, which was intended to allow for automatic changes in the incidence of Greek specific duties in conformi ty with variation in the value of the gold 
sovereign, had proved after the devaluatio n of 9 April 1953 incapable of providing a 
satisfactory adjustment".  
b. "It was therefore felt by the Working Party that in making further readjustment of 
specific duties beyond that allowed by the Note, the principles of Article II.6(a) should be 
applied". 
c. "The Working Party ascertained from the Representative of the Fund that the devaluation 
of the drachma by 50% was made with the concurrence of the International Monetary 
Fund". 
d. "The Working Party accordingly drafted the Decision attached, which is submitted to the 
Contracting Parties for their adoption".
4 This Decision would cover the adjustment 
notified in August 1953 to the Contracting Parties and would also provide for the other 
increases on items which had been (further) notified by the Greek Government" (Documents L/113/Add.1 and Add.2), "insofar  as such increases would not result in 
duties more than 100% in excess of the duty payable before the devaluation and would 
not impair the value of the concessions included in Schedule XXV." 
2.11.  Three members of the Working Party pointed out that the recommendations made "did not 
imply that they agreed that there should always be an automatic proportional increase in specific 
duties in such cases, and that one would have to take into account the general decrease in value of the specific duties of all countries and the extent to which domestic and import prices had in fact risen". The Working Party also came to the conclusion that "the proposal by the Greek 
Government to introduce a minimum ad valorem rate for certain specific rates could not be 
considered rectifications to be dealt with by the working party", and left it to the Contracting Parties affected by these measures to enter into consultation with Greece. 
2.12.  However, the Working Party recommended that the adjustments made by Greece be 
authorized. This was done so by the Contracting Parties on 24 October 1953, as reported in the 
GATT's BISD, Second Supplement, pages 24-25, of 1954.  By their Decision, the Contracting 
Parties concurred that "the increases in specific duties included in Schedule XXV", as notified by 
the Greek Government in Documents L/113 and its addenda, "did not impair the value of the 
                                               
4 The Decision drafted by the Wo rking Party was based on the draf t provided by the Secretariat. WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 4 - 
 
 concessions provided for in those Schedules". It was also decided that "the Government of Greece 
(could) give effect to such increases", provided that the increased duty in paper drachma on any product would not exceed the bound rate by more  than 100%, and that by 23 November 1953 no 
Contracting Party had claimed that any such increase had impaired the value of the concessions 
granted. One Contracting Party entered into consultations with Greece for additional clarifications. 
However, on 12 February 1954 (Document L/184), it was notified that these additional 
consultations had been concluded with finally no objection to the increases decided on October 24, 
1953. Therefore, the Decision of the Contracting Pa rties to authorize Greece to re-adjust its duties 
took full effect on that very date.  
2.3  Finland – 1955 The initial request (GATT Document L/286, complemented by W.9/193) 
2.13.  The request by the Government of Finland was based on the fact that the Finnish markka 
had been devalued twice over a relatively short period of time: on 5 July 1949, from 136 to 160 markka for one U.S. dollar; and on 19 September 1949, from 160 to 230 markka per one U.S. 
dollar. While the first devaluation of the Markka was of "only" 17.6%, in total the markka had lost 
69.85% of its value against the U.S. dollar under the combined effect of the two devaluations. 
2.14.  In Document L/286 of 16 December 1954, the Government of Finland announced its 
intention to request an upward adjustment of its specific duties listed in Schedule XXIV by a 
percentage not exceeding 70%. Pursuant to Arti cle II.6 (a), Finland asked other Contracting 
Parties "to concur that the contemplated adjustment did not impair the value of the concessions embodied in the Schedule".  
2.15.  In Document W.9/163 of 1 February 1955, the Government of Finland provided information 
about the way the above-mentioned two devaluations had affected its wholesale and import prices, and the extent to which the ad valorem equivalent of specific duties applying to Finland's imports 
had fallen each year since 1949. 
The Decision by the Contracting Pa rties of the GATT and its process 
2.16.  The deliberations of the Contracting Part ies in the context of the Working Party 2 on 
Schedules are reported in GATT Document L/335 of 1 March 1955. The Representative of the 
International Monetary Fund was able to confirm that the two devaluations referred to by Finland, and amounting to a total depreciation of 69.85% of  the markka, "had been made consistently with 
the Articles of the Agreement of the International Monetary Fund". 
2.17.  As outlined in Document L/335, the main difficulty facing the Working Party arose from the 
fact that the first devaluation took place after the conclusion of most of the negotiations for Finland's accession to the GATT. The second deva luation occurred after the final completion of 
these negotiations but before the date of the Annecy Protocol, which was the "official date of the 
Agreement" for Finland. In such circumstances, the Document indicates that "the Working Party 
could not recommend that Finland proceed under Article II.6 (a), as, under the terms of the 
Article, the specific duties contained in a Schedule are expressed at the value of the currency on 
the "date of the Agreement"". In their discussion, the Contracting Parties thought that "the best 
course for Finland would have been to insert a note in its Annecy Schedule to the effect that the specific duties contained in the Schedule were ex pressed in markka at the value existing before 5 
July 1949" (before the first devaluation). The Schedule contained no such note.  
2.18.  However, members of the Working Party had felt that, "although Article II.6 (a) was clearly 
not applicable" in this case, Finland should not be denied the possibility of the adjustment 
proposed in Document L/28, and that "the Finnish request should be treated as if that paragraph 
did apply" (Document L/335, page 2). A draft Decision (Spec/166/55) on the adjustment of 
specific duties in Schedule XXIV was circulated by the Secretariat on 23 February 1955, 
summarizing these elements.  
2.19.  By Decision of 3 March 1955 (GATT's BISD Third Supplement, page 28), the Contracting 
Parties authorized the Government of Finland to give effect to the proposed adjustment of specific duties, as notified in Documents L/286 and MGT/3/55 and MGT/3/55/Corr.1., as of April 2, 1955. WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 5 - 
 
 However, two Contracting Parties claimed that the proposed adjustment to Schedule XXIV had led 
to an impairment of the value of concessions made to them. Thus, the Governments of Benelux and the United Kingdom entered into separate negotiations with the Government of Finland 
(Document L/362 of 9 June 1955). The outcome of  these negotiations has been reported in 
Document L/362/Add.1 of 1 August 1955. 
2.4  Finland – 1957 The initial request (GATT Document L/688, complemented by W.12/10) 
2.20.  In Document L/688 of 27 September 1957, th e Government of Finland notified a further 
depreciation of the par value of the markka , from 230 to 320 markka per one U.S. dollar. 
Accordingly, the Government of Finland informed the Contracting Parties of its intention to re-adjust the specific duties of Schedule XXIV to take account of the new par value of the markka, in 
accordance with Article II.6 (a) of the GATT. The Chairman of the Working Party on Schedules 
issued a short note (Document W.12/10 of 30 October 1957) inviting Contracting Parties to 
consider the Finnish proposal for adjustment, which the Government intended to implement by 1 
January 1958. 
The Decision by the Contracting Pa rties of the GATT and its process 
2.21.  Given the desire by Finland to implement the proposed adjustment under relatively short 
notice, the Working Party on Schedules promptly examined the proposed changes. Discussions are 
reported in Document L/744 of 14 November 1 957. The Representative of the International 
Monetary Fund confirmed the devaluation had been made with the concurrence of the Fund. The Representative of Finland confirmed that his Government wished to obtain the authority to 
increase all the specific duties in Schedule XXI V by 39%, the amount of the devaluation of the 
markka. He indicated that his Government wished to  give effect to these adjustments on 1 January 
1958, and that, in order to do so, it would have to obtain the approval of the Finnish Parliament 
before the latter adjourned on or about 15 December 1957.  
2.22.  The debate focused on the tight timeta ble for the examination of the request by the 
Government of Finland, and, at the same time , the need for Contracting Parties to have the 
necessary time to assess the impact of these adjustments on the value of concessions made by 
Finland. Document L/744 reports that "the devaluation of the Finnish markka had occurred so recently that in the view of the Working Party it would not be easy, in the absence of statistical or other data, for Contracting Parties to decide definitely by the end of November 1957 in all cases 
whether or not any adjustment would impair the value of concessions of interest to them". As a 
result, "to allow time for more considered examination of the effect of the Finnish devaluation, provision has been made for claims of impairment to be lodged up to three months after any 
particular adjustment had been put into effect by the Finnish Government". 
2.23.  The above considerations are reflected in the Decision adopted by the Contracting Parties on 
15 November 1957 (Document L/750 of 20 November 1957), whereby, "the Government of 
Finland may give effect to such adjustment of each specific duty contained in Schedule XXIV as will 
take account of such devaluation of the Finnish markka". However, "if on, or before 29 November 
1957, a Contracting Party shall have declared (…) that the adjustment of any particular duty would impair the value of a concession provided for in the Schedule (…), the Government of Finland shall 
defer such adjustment pending consultation with the Contracting Party concerned". Further to this, 
the Government of Finland provided a list of the adjusted duties which it proposed to put into effect (Document Spec/16/58). In the end, no claim was made by any of the other Contracting 
Parties. The changes to Schedule XXIV took e ffect on February 1, 1958. The Decision was 
integrated in the GATT's BISD, Sixth Supplement, page 22, of March 1958.  
2.5  Turkey - 1959 
Initial request by Turkey (GATT Document AIR/153) 
2.24.  The then Executive Secretary of the GATT, Eric Wyndham White, called a meeting of the 
GATT Inter-sessional Committee to examine a re quest by Turkey, summarized in Document 
GATT/AIR/153 of 26 February 1959, for an adjustment  of specific duties in Turkey's Schedule WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 6 - 
 
 XXXVII. The Document provides for extensive details  on the reasons for the invocation of Article 
II.6 (a); six months earlier, in August 1958, the Turkish Government had introduced a new 
exchange system, under which Turkish banks had been required to levy a premium (called "exchange sales premium") of 6.20 Turkish pound s per U.S. dollar for each currency sales 
operation. The "premium" would add itself to the prevailing par value of the Turkish pound of 2.82 
pounds per U.S. dollar, and would apply to all imports. GATT/AIR/1953 noted that as a result of the "premium", "the actual par value of the Turk ish pound works out at 9.02 per U.S. dollar (the 
addition of the two), representing a reduction of 32 2% of the official rate of exchange to the U.S. 
dollar." It further specified that the monetary adjustment has been introduced "with the concurrence of, and after negotiations with the International Monetary Fund".  Only a "very limited n u m b e r "  o f  s p e c i f i c  d u t i e s  w e r e  t o  b e  a d j u s t e d  accordingly. The adjustment, which was of an 
exclusively fiscal nature, was meant in no way "to impair the substantial value of the concession 
granted by Turkey". 
The Decision by the Contracting Pa rties of the GATT and its process 
2.25.  The Inter-sessional Committee of the GATT di scussed the proposal to adjust Turkish specific 
duties on 12 March 1959, as reported in GATT Document IC/SR.44 of 23 March 1959. 
2.26.  The Representative of Turkey introduced his Government's application by referring to the 
reform of the exchange system on 4 August 1958,  which justified the readjustment of specific 
duties in accordance to Article II.6 (a) of th e GATT. The Representative of the International 
Monetary Fund gave details about the reform of th e exchange system in Turkey. By the date of the 
Torquay Protocol (1951), the official selling rate (i.e., exchange rate applying to imports) of Turkey 
was 2.8252 Turkish pound per U.S. dollar. Subsequently, an increasing number of multiple rates of 
exchange had been introduced which, in effect, meant a partial depreciation of the buying and selling rates. With effect from 4 August 1958, Turkey had undertook, with the support of the Fund, 
to unify the various rates into one a single effective selling rate, through the application of an 
exchange surcharge of 6.20 Turkish pounds per U.S.  dollar. The addition of the surcharge to the 
old official selling rate resulted in a rate of 9.02 pounds per dollar currently applied, inter alia, to 
all imports. This new rate was recognized by the Fund. 
2.27.   The Representative of the United States called attention to the fact that Article II.6 (a) took 
only account of reductions in the par values, hoping that it was possible to find some way out of this difficulty. The Executive Secretary of the GA TT answered that Paragraph 6 (a) of the Article 
did not in its present form reflect the real intentions of the Contracting Parties. For this reason, the 
text needed to be changed to add the words "rate of exchange recognized by the Fund" at the next 
R e v i e w  S e s s i o n  o f  t h e  G A T T .  H e  s a i d  t h a t  i n  the earlier cases of Greece and Finland, the 
Contracting Parties had adopted an attitude that was consistent with his proposed change. Given 
the wide measure of support expressed by the Contracting Parties for the adjustment requested by Turkey, the Committee asked the Executive Secretary to submit to the Contracting Parties a draft 
Decision to be approved by two-thirds of them (by postal ballot). 
2.28.  The Decision is recorded to have been approved on 10 April 1959. The text of the Decision 
is embodied in Document L/971 of 20 April 1959. It includes a description of the changes pertaining to the new foreign exchange system, an d authorizes the Government of Turkey to give 
effect to the proportionate adjustment, "consistin g in the multiplication by not more than 3.1945 
of the specific rates of duty listed in the Anne x to the Decision", on the condition that "no 
Contracting Party would consider that the adjustment would impair the value of its concessions: if 
this was the case, consultations would defer the Decision". This was finally not the case and the 
Decision came into effect.   
2.6  Uruguay – 1961 
Initial request by Uruguay (GATT Document L/1446) 
2.29.  On 17 April 1961, the Government of Uruguay informed the GATT of its intention to seek 
authorization of the Contracting Parties under Arti cle II.6 (a), for the adjustment of the specific 
rates and the "aforos", the legal and fixed values of merchandises used by Uruguay to levy ad 
valorem tariffs, as per its Sche dule XXXI. The request by the Government is set out in Document 
L/1446 of 21 April 1961. The Government reminded Contracting Parties that it had engaged in a WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 7 - 
 
 major restructuring of its economy, including a liberalization of its trade and exchange rate 
regimes. Details of such reforms had already been extensively discussed by Contracting Parties one year earlier, in the context of an Article XII.4 (c) balance of payments' consultation (Document L/1237 of 4 June 1960).  
The Decision by the Contracting Pa rties of the GATT and its process 
2.30.  The International Monetary Fund had been  invited by the Working Party on the Uruguayan 
Schedule to provide the "necessary informat ion", for the review of Uruguay's request.
5 The Report 
on the meeting of the Working Party is contai ned in Document L/1475 of 15 May 1961. It 
highlights the following facts: 
a. Based on the report of the Fund, it was noted that the Uruguayan official exchange rate 
applying to most imports at the time of Uruguay's accession to the GATT (1949) had 
been 1.90 pesos for one U.S. dollar. Two other exchange rates have been used by the 
Government, one for the imports of "luxury and non-essential goods", at the rate of 2.45 pesos for one U.S. dollar; and one for Government international transactions on goods, 
at the rate of 1.519 pesos per U.S. dollar. 
b. In 1959, the par value of the exchange rate applied to most imports has been 
depreciated from 1.90 to 6.50 pesos for one U.S. dollar, and further changed to 7.40 
pesos for one U.S. dollar in 1960.   
c. As part of the unification of the various ex change rates in late 1960, the peso further 
depreciated against the U.S. dollar, but had been maintained until the meeting of the Working Party in May 1961 at the rate of 11.03 pesos per U.S. dollar, "consistently with 
the Fund Agreement".   
d. As a result of the above and as confir med by the Fund, between 10 October 1949 and 
the review of Uruguay's request, the rate of  exchange for the Uruguayan peso applicable 
for most imports had depreciated against the U.S. dollar by 82.8%; by 77.8% for luxury 
goods, and by 86.2% for Government imports of goods, respectively.  
2.31.  The Government of Uruguay considered that the depreciations having been consistent with 
the Articles of the Fund and having exceeded 20% overall, Uruguay was entitled under Article II.6 
(a) to adjust, as a matter of principle, the specific duties and the "aforos" to take account of the modification of the value of the currency since 1949.  
2.32.  However, at the same time the Government of Uruguay indicated that it had no immediate 
plan for adjusting its specific duties. It wished mainly to get the Contracting Parties' consent for 
the increase in the value of the "aforos" by 200%, undertaken a year earlier, at the time of the last devaluation of the par value of the Urugua yan peso. The Government considered that these 
"aforos", which had been set out in the "General Notes" to its Schedule XXXI, could qualify for the 
adjustment provided in Article II.6 (a) of the GATT, particularly as these fixed values for dutiable  merchandises had not be adjusted since the Uruguay's accession to the GATT.   
2.33.  After some discussion on this question, and in the light of the fact that Uruguay had 
indicated that it had no intention to further increase the "aforos", the Working Party considered that there was no need to examine further the re lationship between the "General Notes" to the 
Schedule and Uruguay's right to recourse to the Provisions of Article II.6 (a) for an adjustment of 
the "aforos". It would suffice for the Working Party to examine the increase in "aforos" in question 
in the light of their effects on the value of concessions. In view of the fact that the Working Party had considered that neither the changes in the valu e of the currency nor the upward adjustment of 
the "aforos" had impaired the value of concessions provided for in Schedule XXXI, it recommended 
in the end that Uruguay's request be adopted. 
                                               
5 The information provided by the Fund was circulated under Documents L/1446, L/1446/Add.1 and 
L/1446/Add.1/Corr.1. These documents were retrieved from WTO archives. They are only available in paper 
copy and for consultation at th e WTO Secretariat, on request. 
 WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 8 - 
 
 2.34.  On 18 May 1961, the Contracting Parties, considering that Uruguay: (a) having no proposal 
for increasing its specific duties and its "aforos" beyond the 200% increase decided in 1960, and (b) recognizing that the change in the value of the Uruguayan peso had resulted in a proportionate reduction of the incidence of those customs duties, which though ad valorem in form, are (were) 
levied on the basis of fixed values (or "aforos"), decided that the Government of Uruguay be 
authorized to maintain the 200% increase of 1 960 in the "aforos" specified in Schedule XXXI. 
(Document L/1490 of 25 May 1961). 
2.7  Uruguay – 1965 
Initial request by Uruguay (GATT Document L/2353) 2.35.  The Government of Uruguay notified the Contracting Parties on 10 February 1965 
(Document L/2353) that it had proceeded with an additional increase of the "aforos" specified in 
Schedule XXXI by 100% on 13 August 1964. It wished to obtain clearance by the Contracting 
Parties for this increase under Article II.6 (a) of the GATT.   
The Decision by the Contracting Pa rties of the GATT and its process 
2.36.  The matter was considered by the Twenty -Second Session of the GA TT very succinctly. A 
draft Decision was submitted to the Contract ing Parties (W.22/15 of 24 March 1965), approving 
the further adjustment based on the fact that since Uruguay's accession the number of pesos to be 
changed for one U.S. dollar had increased by 763%.  
2.37.  The Decision was adopted the following day, on 25 March 1965, as reflected in Document 
L/2416 of 30 March 1965. The Decision refers to the fact the "the change in the value of the Uruguayan peso has resulted in a proportionate re duction of the incidence of those customs duties 
which though ad valorem in form are levied on the basis of fixed values or "aforos"". 
Further request by Uruguay in 1967 (GATT Document L/2879) 2.38.  The Government of Uruguay notified the Contracting Parties on 31 October 1967 (Document 
L/2879) a further increase by 100% of the "aforo s" and requested that this matter be put on the 
agenda of the twenty-fourth session.  
2.39.  In a further communication (Document L/ 2879/Add.1 of 16 November 1967), the delegation 
of Uruguay requested the withdrawal of this item  from the agenda for the twenty-fourth session, 
on the basis of the fact that there were new ec onomic development and reform in progress. The 
matter was left by Uruguay for future consideration. There is no indication that any further step under the Article II.6 (a) procedure took place in this case.     
2.8  Finland – 1967  
Initial request by Finland (GATT Document L/2908) 2.40.  The Government of Finland notified the Co ntracting Parties of its intention to adjust the 
specific duties contained in Schedule XXIV, according to Article II.6 (a) of the GATT, following the 
change in the par value of the markka from 3.20 to 4.19 per U.S. dollar (a devaluation of 31.25%). The proposed adjustment to specific duties was proposed to be no higher than 31%. The 
Government of Finland asked in Document L/2908 of 13 November 1967 that Contracting Parties 
examined its request. 
The Decision by the Contracting Pa rties of the GATT and its process 
2.41.  The Contracting Parties, by their Decision on 20 November 1967, agreed to the proposed 
adjustments to the specific duties contained in Schedule XXIV, subject to no Contracting Party 
declaring that this would impair the value of concession provided for in the Schedule, within the specific time-frame contained in the Decisi on (Document L/2929 of 23 November 1967). The 
Government of Finland circulated the adjusted list of specific duties (a few tariff positions 
concerning live animals and animal products) in Document L/3175 of 25 February 1968, as later 
reflected in GATT's BISD, Fifteen Supplement, page 66, of April 1968.  WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 9 - 
 
 2.9  Israel – 1975 
Initial request by Israel and first Decision by the Contracting Parties 2.42.  The Government of Israel notified the Contracting Parties on 23 December 1974 (Document 
L/4134) of its decision on 10 November to devalue the Israel pound from its earlier par value of 
4.2 pounds per one U.S. dollar to 6 pounds per one U.S. dollar, a depreciation of 43%. It wished 
to adjust the specific duties contained in Schedule XLII under Article II.6 (a). The Council approved the request made by Israel at its meeting on  3 February 1975 (Documents L/4134 and C/M/103). 
Further request by Israel (1977)  
2.43.  Since that date, the value of the Israeli pound had been reduced several times, in 
conformity with the Decision of the Government of  Israel, notified in the context of a balance-of-
payment safeguard procedure (Document L/4112 /Add.2 of 27 June 1975). The notification 
specifies that: "the Government (of Israel) in a Decision to authorize a Ministerial Committee to 
change from time to time the rate of exchange at  a rate not exceeding 2% in intervals of not less 
than thirty days, has in effect adopted a syst em of limited and frequent devaluations."  
2.44.  At the GATT Council on 11 November 1977, the Representative of Israel announced a 
number of far-reaching economic reforms had been decided on 28 October 1977, which included, inter alia, the unification of the rate of exchange and the transformation of the Israel pound into a 
convertible currency. Hence, the exchange rate sy stem, which previously involved multiple rates 
and a policy of frequent small depreciations, had been abandoned and replaced by a floating 
exchange rate system. Other reforms announced on this occasion were the removal of most foreign exchange restrictions relating to foreign trade, the abolition of the system of temporary 
surcharges on imports, the continuation of the programme of import liberalization, which included 
large-scale reduction of duties. The Representative  of Israel added that the depreciation of the 
Israeli pound would require "appropriate adjustments to be made in the specific rates of duty 
bound in the Schedule, in accordance with the provisions of Article II.6 (a)". Furthermore, he 
considered the reduction in the other rates of duty as "an important contribution by Israel in the context of the Multilateral Trade Negotiations" (Tokyo Round). The Council took note of that 
statement (Document C/M/123 of 23 November 1977). 
2.45.  As announced, four months later, the Government of Israel sought the concurrence of the 
Contracting Parties for an adjustment of its specific duties in accordance with the principles of Article II.6 (a), in a request made on 3 March 1978 (Document L/4639). The request refers to the 
need for adjusting specific duties since the 1974 devaluation of the par value of the pound. Since 
then, and the last Article II.6 (a) adjustment, the Israel pound for one U.S. dollar had depreciated from 6 pounds per one U.S. dollar to 16.26 pounds per one U.S. dollar, the (market) rate 
communicated by the Government of Israel in its new request. The Government of Israel 
considered that the depreciation exceeded the 20% required in Article II.6 (a), and was entitled to 
reflect in Schedule XLII the reductions in the value of the Israel pound since 19 November 1974. 
2.46.  The discussions in the GATT Council, held on 14 March 1978, raised questions of principle 
on the application of Article II.6 (a). According to the meeting's Report, contained in Document 
C/M/124 of 5 April 1978, the Representative of Israel made the points that the Contracting Parties had approved a similar request on 7 February 19 75, and since then the value of the pound, as 
determined by the exchange market, was now approximately 16 pounds per one U.S. dollar. He 
stressed that the proposed adjustments in the Schedule would not go beyond the effective rate of depreciation and that they would not impair any concession contained in Israel's Schedule. His 
delegation was nonetheless "aware of the fact this request touched a matter of principle. When 
Article II.6 (a) was drafted, Contracting Parties maintained the value of their currencies in terms of gold or dollar of a fixed gold content and change s in the par value were made in accordance with 
the Article of the Agreement of the IMF. Today, the par value system was no longer applied and 
floating exchange rates systems had become the ru le rather than the exception.  The IMF still 
exercised a surveillance of exchange rates prac tices, but pending the entry into force of the 
proposed amendments of its Articles of Agreement, it did it on the basis of informal guidelines for 
the management of floating exchange rates. Ma ny delegations, including its own, had stressed 
that the breakdown of the Bretton Woods syst em required consequential changes in the 
application of the General Agreement. The application of Article II.6 (a) which made specific WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 10 - 
 
 reference to the par value system was a case in point". As a result, he thought that before the 
Council acted on his country's request, the Contracting Parties reviewed the provisions of Article II.6 (a) and "consult as to their appropriate application under the present circumstances". His delegation was ready to have the Council delay the Decision on its country's request in order to 
conduct the appropriate consultations, which should be held preferably in the Balance-of-
Committee. 
2.47.  Contracting Parties, as reported in Document C/M/124, raised similar questions. The 
Representative of the United States agreed with the principle that Article II.6 (a) should apply 
under a flexible exchange rates system. A number of questions that required detailed examination arose, for example "what standard should be used when a Contracting Party could invoke this Article, and what constituted an appropriate tariff adjustment in the light of a particular shift in 
exchange rates". He recommended the establ ishment of a Working Party to examine the 
applicability of Article II.6 (a) in the context of the new monetary system. He was agreeable to refer the matter "to the Balance-of-Payments Committee on the basis of a special mandate; in any 
case the International Monetary Fund would have to be involved. 
2.48.  The Representative of the European Communi ties did not share the view that Article II.6 (a) 
"should be applied under a floating exchange rate  system. The question of whether fixed point of 
reference should be abandoned required serious consideration. The question could (also) be asked 
whether in the present monetary situation it would not be more advisable to convert specific duties into ad valorem under a renegotiation in accordance  with the provisions of Article XXVIII, including 
the special provision in favour of developing countries". The matter should be deferred to the next 
meeting of the Council for furthe r consideration and reflection. 
2.49.  The Representative of Switzerland said that "while the right to adjust specific duties also 
under the present monetary system could not be contested, the modalities of application of the 
provision of Article II.6 (a) raised many questions", in particular "should the loss of value of a 
particular currency be calculated? With reference to a specific currency or a basket of other currencies". Also, "what would be the base date for which to determine the depreciation of the 
currency". The outcome of the case presented by Israel could have far-reaching consequences 
since it could set a precedent for the future. He referred to his own country, which applied only specific duties. All the implications of this request needed to be considered with interested delegations. 
2.50.  The Representative of Canada said that hi s delegation had a preference for examination of 
the matter in a Working Party, possibly to be carried out in the Balance-of-Payments Committee, and with the participation of the International Monetary Fund. 
2.51.  After consultations, the Contracting Parties reverted to the matter at the Council meeting on 
17 May 1978 (Document C/M/125). They agreed to  establish a Working Party, which terms of 
reference are detailed thereafter. It was agreed that measures adopted by Israel would be 
considered later in the light of the results of that Working Party. The terms of reference for the 
Working Party have been set as such by the GATT Council:  
a. "to examine the modalities for the application of Article II.6 (a) in the current monetary 
situation; to consult with the International Monetary Fund on this matter under the 
provisions of Article XV:2; and to report to the Council".  
b. It is also indicated that Membership of the Working Party "should be open to all the 
Contracting Parties interested and indicating their wish to serve on the Working Party" 
(Document C/M/125). 
2.52.  The Report of the Working Party on specific duties, which met five times between June 1978 
and October 1979, is contained in Document L/4 858 of 2 November 1979. As indicated by this 
Report, a Representative of the International Monetary Fund participated in all the meetings of the 
Working Party.
6 The report eventually proposed guidelines for Decisions under Article II.6 (a) of 
                                               
6 As noted in Document L/4858, the Fund staff prepared at the request of the working party two reports 
entitled "The Measurement of Changes in Exchange Rates for the Purpose of Adjustment of Specific Duties" and 
"A Note on Alternative Indices of E ffective Exchange Rates" (IMF Document SM/79/62 of February 26, 1979). It 
is reported that: "the Representative of the Fund noted that, in preparing the reports, the Fund staff had tried WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 11 - 
 
 the General Agreement, which have been considered  by the Contracting Parties at the meeting of 
the GATT Council on 29 January 1980. Reports on this GATT Council meeting are available in Document C/M/138 of 12 February 1980, further summarized in Document L/5072 of 20 November 1980.  
2.53.  Document C/M/138 reports on the statements made by three delegations (the European 
Communities, Israel, and India). The Representati ve of the European Communities argued in 
favour of the adoption of the Working Party's report. The Representative of Israel agreed with this 
view. He called attention on page 5 of the Working Party's report concerning his Government's 
pending request with respect to the adjustment of specific duties (L/4639). The Working Party's report had indeed stated in page 5 that "witho ut wishing to prejudice the determination of the 
present monetary situation, the Working Party agr eed that the pending request for the approval of 
specific duty adjustments submitted by Israel in  March 1978 should be treated as provided in the 
guidelines". The Representative of Israel also in formed the Council that a further devaluation of 
the Israeli pound had taken place in the meantime, and indicated that his authorities would shortly 
submit a request in respect of these further chan ges, which they also expected to be approved 
according to the new procedures. The Representati ve of India noted that under the prevailing 
international monetary conditions, characterized by  considerable exchange rate fluctuations, the 
Contracting Parties had the right to adjust specific duties. While no single method of measuring 
currency depreciations was satisfactory from all points of view, he believed that a measurement in terms of the currencies of the trading partners of the Contracting Party wishing to adjust its specific duties was more appropriate than the ot her two methods considered by the Working Party. 
He concluded that the adjustment of specific duties as a result of currency depreciation should not 
be undertaken in a rigid and mechanical manner, and that such adjustment should not lead to a net increase in the level of protection.  
2.54.  Document L/5072 of 20 November 1980 further summarizes, and complements Document 
C/M/138. It is stated that, "at the meeting on the Council on 29 January 1980, several Representatives comments on the report of the Working Party, (and that) it was noted that no 
single method of measuring a currency depreciation was satisfactory from all points of view. A 
measurement in terms of the currency of the trading partners of the Contracting Party wishing to adjust its specific duties was more appropriate than the other two methods considered by the Working Party. An adjustment of specific duties should not be undertaken in a rigid and 
mechanical manner, and it should not lead to a net increase in the level of protection".   
2.55.  Both Documents highlight the fact that the Council took note of the individual statement and 
adopted the report of the Working Party, including the guidelines. 
2.56.  These guidelines are described  in extenso  in Box 1. 
2.57.  After January 29, 1980, there had been some discussion at the Council regarding the GATT 
body competent to handle Article II.6 (a) cases. While the Committee on Balance-of-Payments 
Restrictions had been initially tasked, it was suggested at the GATT Council on 10 November 1980 
that the function assigned to the Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions should be allotted to the Committee on Tariff Concessions, which was agreed by the Council (Document L/5072). 
2.58.  There is no indication, though, that the requ est of Israel had ever been formally agreed by 
the Council. No new request, as had been mentioned by the Representative of Israel on 29 January 1980, seemed to have made. 
                                                                                                                                               
to cover the operationally feasible aspects of the subject. The role of the Fund in the activities of the working 
party was to provide technical information to the Co ntracting Parties, the Fund having no mandate to 
participating in interpreting the General Agreement" (L/4858, page 1). WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 12 - 
 
 Box 1: Guidelines for decisions under Articl e II.6 (a) of the General Agreement adopted 
by the Council on 29 January, 1980 (L/4938) 
Note:       For the purposes of these guidelines the terms "specific duty concession" and "bound specific duty" 
mean any specific duty or charge or margin of prefer ence in a specific duty or charge provided for in 
the appropriate Schedule annexed to the General Agreement. In the present monetary situation the CONTRACTING PARTIES shall apply the provisions of Article II.6 (a) as 
set out below unless they consider that this would not be appropriate in the circumstances of the particular 
case, for example because it would le ad to an impairment of the value of a specific duty concession: 
 
(a) If a contracting party, in accordance with Articl e II.6 (a) of the General Agreement, requests the 
CONTRACTING PARTIES to concur with the adjustment of bound specific duties to take into account 
the depreciation of its currency, the CONTRACTING PARTIES shall ask the International Monetary 
Fund to calculate the size of the depreciation of the currency and to determine the consistency of 
the depreciation with the Fund's Articles of Agreement. 
(b) The size of the depreciation shal l be calculated by comparing the import-weighted average exchange 
rate during the six months preceding the date of the legal instrument through which the specific 
duties to be adjusted were last bound or the da te of the last authorization by the CONTRACTING 
PARTIES to adjust the specific duties, whichever date is later, with the import-weighted average 
exchange rate during the six months preceding the contracting party's request. The CONTRACTING 
PARTIES shall not apply these guidelines to depreciations that took place before the advent of the 
present monetary situation. At least one year sh all have elapsed between the relevant base date 
and the contracting party's request.  If different base dates apply to  various duties to be adjusted, 
the depreciation since each of these dates shall be  calculated. The calculation of the depreciation 
should normally be based on the currencies of trad ing partners supplying at least 80 per cent of the 
imports of the contracting party making the requ est. The Fund shall be asked to provide the 
CONTRACTING PARTIES with the statistics used in the calculation and information on the sources of 
these statistics. If a contracting party does not define its specific duties in terms of its domestic 
currency but in terms of another unit (e.g. one or se veral other currencies or an  international unit of 
account) the depreciation to be taken into account shall be the depreciation of the unit chosen. If 
contracting parties members of a customs union define their common specific duties in terms of a 
unit of account composed of the currencies of the members, the depreciation to be taken into 
account shall be the average depreciation of the unit  of account in terms of the currencies of third 
countries each weighted by its share in the total imports of the customs union. 
(c) The CONTRACTING PARTIES shall be deemed to have authorized the contracting party to adjust its 
specific duties to take into account the depreciation if the International Monetary Fund advises the 
CONTRACTING PARTIES that the depreciation calcul ated as set out in paragraph (b) above is in 
excess of 20 per cent and consistent with the Fund's Articles of Agreement and if, during the sixty 
days following the notification of the Fund's advice to the contracting parties, no contracting party 
claims that a specific duty adjustment to take into account the depreciation would impair the value 
of a concession. If such a claim is made the adjustment shall be deferred pending consultations 
between the contracting parties concerned. The consul tations shall not last longer than ninety days 
unless otherwise agreed between the contracting parties concerned. If, after such consultations, the 
claim is maintained the question shall be decided by the CONTRACTING PARTIES. 
(d) If, during the six months beginning six months afte r the notification of the Fund's advice to the 
contracting parties, a contracting party claims that the value of a specific duty concession adjusted 
in accordance with the above procedures is impa ired because the depreciation calculated as in 
paragraph (b) has been partly or fully reversed and if consultations between the two contracting 
parties have not resolved the matter, the CONTRA CTING PARTIES shall examine the matter and, if 
appropriate, modify or wi thdraw their authorization.   WT/WGTDF/W/78 
 
- 13 - 
 
 APPENDIX A – GATT DECISIONS UNDER ARTICLE II.6 (a)  
 
Summary of the decisions of the CONTRACTING PARTIES  
under Article II.6 (a) to authorize  
adjustment of specific duties 
 
 
Country 
 Benelux Decision Date 
 15 December 1950 BISD Ref. 
 II/12 
   
Finland 3 March 1955 
15 November 1957 20 November 1967 3S/28 
6S/22 15S/66 
   
Greece 24 October 1953 2S/24 
   
Israel 3 February 1975 C/M/103, 
124,125, 138 
   
Turkey 10 April 1959 8S/24 
   
Uruguay 18 May 1961 
15 March 1965 10S/34 
13S/20 
Note:  In addition to the above 9 Decisions, Articl e II.6 (a) has been invoked on two other occasions, 
with no final decision taken by the GATT (U ruguay, 1967 – request withdrawn; and Israel, 
1977 – request left with no decision).  
Source:  Analytical Index of the GATT, Ar ticle II Schedules of  Concessions, p.98. 
 
  
  
 
 APPENDIX B – RELEVANT GATT DOCUMENTS INVOKING ARTICL E II.6 (a), available at https://www.wto.org/englis h/docs_e/gattdocs_e.htm   
 
 
__________ WT/WGTDF/W/78  
 
- 14 - Cases Request by the Government  Report of Working Party on Schedules Decision of the Contracting Parties  
Benelux  GATT/CP.5/ 
SR.16 2 December 1950 
Summary Record of the 16th Meeting,  
7.Rectifications to Schedule II (Benelux) GATT/CP.5/45 12 Dec. 1950 
Report of Working Party "B" on 
Schedules GATT/CP/94  
 (II/12) Decision of 15 Dec. 1950  on the 
adjustment of certain specific duties and 
charges in Schedule II (Benelux) 
 
Finland  L/286 16 December 1954 
Schedule XXIV-Finland Adjustment of 
Specific Duties L/335 1 March 1955 
Finish Application for the 
adjustment of specific duties in 
Schedule XXIV BISD 3S/28 Decision of 3 March 1955  
MGT/3/55 
 1 January 1955 
Schedule XXIV - Finland - Proposed 
Adjustments of Specific Duties Submitted 
to the contracting parties by the Finnish 
Delegation 
 
Finland  L/688 
 27 September 1957 
Schedule XXIV-Finland Adjustment of 
Specific Duties  L/744 
 14 November  1957  
Schedule XXIV-Finland - 
Adjustment of Specific Duties, 
Report by the Working Party on 
Schedules  L/750 
(BISD 6S/22)  20 November 1957 
Schedule XXIV-Finland-  Adjustment of 
Specific Duties – Decision adopted by the 
Contracting Parties on 15 November 1957   
 
Finland  L/2908 
 13 November 1967 
Schedule XXIV-Finland Adjustment of 
Specific Duties   
  L/2929 
(BISD 15S/66)  23 November 1967 
Schedule XXIV -  Adjustment of Specific 
Duties – Decision of 20 November 1967   
 
Greece  L/113/ 
Add.1 & Add.2 28 August 1953 
Greek Schedule – Adjustment of Specific 
Duties under Article II: - Proposal of the 
Greek Government G/62 
 23 October 1953  
Working Party 6 on Schedules – 
Report to the Contracting Party  BISD 2S/24 Decision of 24 October 1953  
 
Israel  L/4112 19 November 1974 
Israel – Measures to safeguard the 
balance of Payments Position  C/M/103 
 
 
 
 18 February 1975 
Council - Minutes of Meeting - Held in the 
Palais des Nations, Geneva, on 3 and 7 
February  1975. Point 3) Schedule XLII – 
Israel – Adjustment of Specific Duties  L/4134 
 23 December 1974  
Schedule XLII – Israel – Adjustment of 
Specific Duties. 
 L/4639 3 March 1978 
Schedule XLII – Israel-  
Adjustment of Specific Duties  L/4858  2 November 1979  
Report of the Working Party on 
Specific Duties  (Guidelines of for 
decisions under Art. II:6(a) of the 
general Agreement) C/M/124  
 
 
C/M/125 
 
 
C/M/138 5 April 1978  
Council - Minutes - Held on 14 March 1978 
 
30 May 1978 
Council - Minutes - Held on 17 May 1978   
 
12 December 1980 
Council - Minutes - Held on 29 January 1980 
 
Turkey  GATT/AIR/153 
 26 February 1959 
Meeting of Intersessional Committee - 
Adjustment of Specific Duties in Schedule 
XXXVII – Turkey IC/SR.44 23 march 1959 
Intersessional Committee – 
Summary Record of the meeting.  L/971 
(BISD 8S/24)  20 April 1959 
Schedule XXXVII – Turkey -  Adjustment of 
Specific Duties – Decision of 10 April 1959   
 
Uruguay  L/1446/ 
Add.1 & Corr.1 21 April 1961 
Schedule XXXI – Uruguay – Proposed 
Adjustment of Specific Duties and "Aforos" L/1475 15 May 1961 
Report of the Working Party on the 
Uruguayan Schedule   L/1490 
(BISD 10S/34)  25 May 1961 
Schedule XXXI – Uruguay -  Adjustment of 
"aforos" – Decision of 18 May 1961   
 
Uruguay  L/2353 
  10 February 1965 
Uruguay - Adjustment of "Aforos" in Schedule XXXI – Communication from the Government of Uruguay    L/2416  
(BISD 13S/20)  30 March 1965  
Uruguayan Schedule -  Adjustment of 
"aforos" – Decision of 25 March 1965   
 31 October 196 7 ( L/2879)  Further request by the Government of Uruguay,  but withdrawn their request in 16 November 1967  ( L/2879/Add.1 )