WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1  
29 March 2016  
(16-1757)  Page: 1/53  
Trade Policy Review Body 
19 and 21 January 2016 Original: English/anglais/inglés  
 
  TRADE POLICY REVIEW 
GEORGIA  
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 Georgia.1 
 
 
Organe d'examen des politiques commerciales 
19 et 21 janvier 2016 
EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES COMMERCIALES 
GÉORGIE  
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 Géorgie.1 
 
 
Órgano de Examen de las Políticas Comerciales 
19 y 21 de enero de 2016 
EXAMEN DE LAS POLÍTICAS COMERCIALES 
GEORGIA  
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 
Georgia.1  
 
                                               
1 In English only./En anglais seulement./En inglés solamente. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 2 - 
 
  UNITED STATES ............................................................................................................... 3  
EUROPEAN UNION ......................................................................................................... 14  
CHINESE TAIPEI ............................................................................................................ 18  
RUSSIAN FEDERATION ................................................................................................... 19  
TURKEY ........................................................................................................................ .. 31 
CHINA ......................................................................................................................... ... 36 
BRAZIL ........................................................................................................................... 44  
THAILAND ......................................................................................................................  46 
ECUADOR .......................................................................................................................  52 
 
 
 
  
 
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 3 - 
 
  UNITED STATES 
PART I: QUESTIONS ON THE SECRETARIAT REPORT (WT/TPR/S/328) 
 
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
3.2.1 Customs procedures, customs valuation, and rules of origin Pages 37-38, paragraph 3.18: The Secretariat’s Report states that “Georgia has indicated that it is 
going through the necessary process to notify th e WTO of its adherence to the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement (TFA)” and established in April 2015 “the Ministry of Foreign Affairs began the 
necessary procedure to submit the TFA and Category A commitments to the Parliament for its ratification”. Please provide an update on when Georgia expects to formally submit its Category A 
notification and its letter of acceptance of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. 
Answer: 
On November 27, 2015 the parliament of Georgia ra tified the Trad e Facilitation Ag reement and in 
December 2015 Georgia submitted its Category A, B and C notifications and the letter of 
acceptance of the TFA to the Secretariat.  
3.2.6 Government procurement 
3.2.6.1 Overview 
Page 47, paragraph 3.49: The Secretariat’s Report notes that Georgia is an observer to the WTO 
Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), an d that the EBRD noted that Georgia’s public 
procurement reform is “close to achieving compliance with the 2012 WTO GPA.” Additionally, 
Georgia had started the process of accession to the GPA some time ago. Does Georgia have plans 
to continue accession to the GPA? Is there a timeframe that Georgia has for re-engaging with GPA Members on the accession process?  
Answer: 
The issue of joining the GPA Agreement is co nsidered by the Government of Georgia. 
3.4 Measures Affecting Production and Trade 
3.4.3 Standards and other technical requirements 
3.4.3.4 Labelling and packaging requirements Page 63, paragraph 3.134: Please clarify how living modified organisms and genetically modified 
organisms are differentiated in Georgia’s regulations. 
Answer: 
According to Georgian legislation term “Living Modified Organism” - is an organism capable of 
replication, as term “Genetically Modified Organism” - is related to possessed products which do 
not have capacity of replication.  
3.4.4 Sanitary and phytosanitary requirements 
Page 63, paragraph 3.135: The Secretariat’s Report  states “[t]he authorities stated that Georgia 
has gradually developed its national regulatory system in line with the EU and international 
standards.” The United States is concerned that Georgia’s adoption of EU standards and practices may not be science-based and could disrupt trade on U.S. products such as poultry, pork and beef. How will Georgia ensure that their regulatory system is science-based and is implemented 
according to their WTO obligations under the SPS Agreement?  
Answer: 
Georgia will approximate its Legislation to EU legislative acts according to the DCFTA. According to 
the DCFTA, Georgia is not obliged to fully harmonize its legislation with the EU legislation, 
commitment of Georgia is to Approximate, which impl ies possibility to establish transitional periods 
or not to put in legislation some regulations that are not applicable or are not feasible, in this case 
EU should be provided with proper comments/argumentations by Georgian side. 
Regarding the trade of poultry, pork and beef, it should be mentioned that, any product which 
satisfactorily undergoes the state control and is  in line with the requirements of Georgian 
Legislation, can be imported into the country. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 4 - 
 
  Page 64, paragraph 3.139: The Secretariat’s Report states that “nearly 90 SPS regulations in food 
safety, veterinary and plant protection are to be  implemented in 2015.” Have all of the nearly 90 
SPS regulations been fully implemented? If not, please identify which regulations remain to be implemented and when implementation can we expect ed? Also, please identify which of the nearly 
90 SPS regulations have been notified to the WTO. 
Answer: 
According to the DCFTA the main commitment of Georgia is to approximate its legislation to EU 
legislation in sanitary and phytosanitary fields. In this regard the first step was to submit 
approximation list to EU by the end of Febr uary 2015, which has been fully complied. The 
approximation list is already agreed with the European Commission and after the ratification by the Parliament of Georgia the approximation list will become a part of the DCFTA. Accordingly this 
approximation list will replace the list that was mentioned in the report.  
Georgian legislation will be approximated to the EU legislation on a gradual basis, which is due to be done from 2015 till 2027. Georgia will approximate its legislation to 272 EU Legal Acts. 
With regards to your question (Page 64, paragraph 3.139) - Regulations in food safety, veterinary 
and plant protection fields that remain to be implemented (according to new approximation list) are as follows: 
1. Council Directive 89/108/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the 
Member States relating to quick-frozen foodstuffs for human consumption – 2020 year; 
2. Directive 1999/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 February 1999 on the 
approximation of the laws of the Member States  concerning foods and food ingredients treated 
with ionising radiation – 2026 year; 
3. Regulation (EC) No 767/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on 
the placing on the market and use of feed, amen ding European Parliament and Council Regulation 
(EC) No 1831/2003 and repealing Council Directive 79/373/EEC, Commission Directive 
80/511/EEC, Council Directives 82/471/EEC, 83/228/EEC, 93/74/EEC, 93/113/EC and 96/25/EC 
and Commission Decision 2004/217/EC; - 2020 year; 
4. Commission Regulation (EU) No 544/2011 of 10 June 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 
1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the data requirements for 
active substances; 5. Council Directive 64/432/EEC of 26 June 1964 on animal health problems affecting intra-
Community trade in bovine animals and swine; - 2017 year; 
6. Council Directive 2002/99/EC of 16 December 2002 laying down the animal health rules governing the production, processing, distribution and introduction of products of animal origin for 
human consumption – 2018 year; 
7. Council Directive 90/426/EEC of 26 June 1990 on animal health conditions governing the movement and import from third countries of equidae – 2024 year; 
8. Council Directive 2006/88/EC of 24 October 2006 on animal health requirements for 
aquaculture animals and products thereof, and on th e prevention and control of certain diseases in 
aquatic animals – 2017 year; 9. Council Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 laying down animal health and public health 
requirements governing trade in and imports into  the Community of products not subject to the 
said requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to Directive 90/425/EEC– 2017 year; 
12. Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction 
into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community – 2016 year; 
13. Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 
establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides – 2020 year; 14. Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 February 
2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in or  on food and feed of plant and animal origin 
and amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC; - 2016 year; 15. Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 
2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council 
Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC – 2023 year; 16. Council Directive 89/108/EEC of 21 December 198 8 on the approximation of the laws of the 
Member States relating to quick-frozen foodstuffs for human consumption – 2020 year; 
17. Commission Directive 92/90/EEC of 3 November 1992 establishing obligations to which producers and importers of plants, plant products or other objects are subject and establishing details for their registration – 2016; WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 5 - 
 
  18. Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 
2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition – 2021 year; 19. Directive 2002/32/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 7 May 2002 on undesirable substances in animal feed – 2024; 
20. Regulation (EC) No 1334/2008 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 
2008 on flavourings and certain food ingredients with  flavouring properties for use in and on foods 
and amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/ 91, Regulations (EC) No 2232/96 and (EC) No 
110/2008 and Directive 2000/13/EC – 2020 year; 
21. Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 
2006 on the addition of vitamins and minerals and of certain other substances to foods – 2016 
year; 
22. Regulation (EC) No 1332/2008 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 
2008 on food enzymes and amending Council Directive 83/417/EEC, Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999, Directive 2000/13/EC, Council Directiv e 2001/112/EC and Regulation (EC) No 258/97 
– 2020 year; 
23. Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 
2008 establishing a common authorization procedur e for food additives, food enzymes and food 
flavorings – 2017 year; 
24. Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 
2008 on food additives – 2016 year; 25. Regulation 1935/2004/EC of the European Pa rliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 
on materials and articles intended to come into contact with food – 2018 year; 
26. Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 
2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods – 2016 year; 
27. Commission Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 of 24 July 2009 implementing Regulation (EC) No 
882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Counc il as regards the increased level of official 
controls on imports of certain feed and food of non-animal origin and amending Decision 
2006/504/EC – 2017 year; 
28. Commission Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 of 14 January 2011 on plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with food – 2022 year; 29. Regulation (EC) No 470/2009 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 
laying down Community procedures for the establ ishment of residue limits of pharmacologically 
active substances in foodstuffs of animal origin, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 and amending Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation 
(EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council – 2018 year; 
30. Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 
2003 on the control of salmonella and other spec ified food-borne zoonotic agents – 2019 year; 
31. Regulation (EC) N° 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 
2003 on genetically modified food and feed – 2018 year; 32. Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 
2003 concerning the trac eability and labelling of genetica lly modified organisms and the 
traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending 
Directive 2001/18/EC – 2018 year; 33. Commission Regulation (EC) No 641/2004 of 6 April 2004 on detailed rules for the 
implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 as regards the application for the authorization 
of new genetically modified food and feed, the notifi cation of existing products and adventitious or 
technically unavoidable presence of genetically modified material which has benefited from a 
favourable risk evaluation – 2019 year; 
34. Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the European Pa rliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997 
concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients – 2019 year; 35. Commission Directive 2003/40/EC of 16 May 2003 establishing the list, concentration limits 
and labeling requirements for the constituents of natural mineral waters and the conditions for 
using ozone-enriched air for the treatment of na tural mineral waters and spring waters – 2022; 
36. Regulation (EC) No 183/2005 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 12 January 
2005 laying down requirements for feed hygiene – 2019 year; 
37. Council Directive 92/119/EEC of 17 December 1992 introducing general Community measures for the control of certain animal diseases and specific measures relating to swine vesicular disease 
– 2020 year; 
38. Commission Decision 2000/428/EC of 4 July 2000 establishing diagnostic procedures, sampling methods and criteria for the evaluation of the results of laboratory tests for the confirmation and differential diagnosis of swine vesicular disease – 2020 year; WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 6 - 
 
  39. Council Directive 2008/71/EC of 15 July 2008 on th e identification and registration of pigs – 
2016 year; 40. Directive 2003/99/EC of the European Parliame nt and of the Council of 17 November 2003 on 
the monitoring of zoonosis and zoonotic agents, amending Council Decision 90/424/EEC and 
repealing Council Directive 92/117/EEC – 2017 year; 
41. Commission Regulation (EC) No 2075/2005 of 5 December 2005 laying down specific rules on official controls for Trichinella in meat – 2021 year;  
42. Council Directive 2005/94/EC of 20 December 2005 on Community measures for the control of 
avian influenza and repealing Directive 92/40/EEC – 2016 year; 43. Council Directive 2000/75/EC of 20 November 2000 laying down specific provisions for the control and eradication of bluetongue – 2018 year; 
44. Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 
laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathy – 2016 year; 
45. Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 
on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals and amending Council Directive 92/65/EEC – 2018 year; 
46. Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 
2009 laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 – 2017 year; 47. Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 of 25 February 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) 
No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of th e Council laying down health rules as regards 
animal by-products and derived products not in tended for human consumption and implementing 
Council Directive 97/78/EC as regards certain samples and items exempt from veterinary checks 
at the border under that Directive – 2017 year; 
48. Council Directive 2007/33/EC of 11 June 2007 on the control of potato cyst nematodes and repealing Directive 69/465/EEC – 2016 year; 
49. Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European  Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 
2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council 
Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC – 2023 year; 50. Council Directive 93/85/EC of 4 October 1993 on control of Potato Ring Rot – 2017 year; 
51. Council Directive 2006/91/EC of 7 November 2006 on control of San José Scale (Codified 
version). – 2021 year; 52. Commission Directive 2004/103/EC of 7 October 2004 on identity and plant health checks of 
plants, plant products or other objects, listed in Part B of Annex V to Council Directive – 2017; 
53. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1756/2004 of 11 October 2004 specifying the detailed conditions for the evidence required and the criteria for the type and level of the reduction of the 
plant health checks of certain plants, plant products or other objects listed in Part B of Annex V to 
Council Directive 2000/29/EC – 2018 year; Please be aware that abovementioned timelines indicate the dates of adoption of legislation. Georgia is empowered to establish transitional periods for the implementation of new legislation 
3.4.5 Competition policy and price controls 
3.4.5.1 Competition policy Page 69, paragraphs 3.157-3.159: The Secretariat’s Report discusses the Competition Agency. 
Please provide details on the composition of this agency. Please also provide details regarding the agency’s expertise in conducting investigations and identify the agency’s needs for technical assistance/support. 
Answer: 
The composition of the Agency is the following: Chairman – 2 Deputy Chairmen; Internal Audit; 4 
departments: Administrative Department; Legal and Methodological Support Department; Competition Department and Economic Analysis Department.  
The number of the staff consists of 39 empl oyees. Among them: 11 economists; 6 lawyers; 9 
employers of Competition Department, and 13 other staff members.  As the Competition Agency is newly formed and is already dealing with important cases, it is very 
important to organize seminars and study tours in different competition authorities of the world for 
the staff of the Agency in order to increase their qualification and exchange information. Also it is very important to increase the public awareness in competition principles and consequently 
organize some trainings also for private sector, journalists and judges. In order to conduct such 
activities Agency would need donors’ support.  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 7 - 
 
  3.4.7 Protection of intellectual property rights 
3.4.7.1 Overview Page 72, table 3.20: The table in the Secretariat’ s Report notes that the Law on Copyrights and 
Neighboring Rights was amended in 2013. Please provide a copy of the current law and indicate 
whether there are any future amendments planned. 
Answer: 
The Law on Copyrights and Neighboring Rights most recently was amended in 2015 (please see 
the attached current version of Law). Future am endments are planned in the framework of the 
DCFTA. (Please see the comment of Sakpatenti on para.3.4.7.4 Copyrights and neighboring rights)  
Page 73, paragraph 3.177: The Secretariat’s Report notes that “to obtain IPRs in Georgia, 
applicants must register their IP objects (except copyrights) at Sakpatenti.” It also notes, on page 
75 at paragraph 3.191), that “Sakpatenti has a system for voluntary depositions for protected 
subject matters of copyright.” Please clarify the following:  
 Is “voluntary deposition” the same as copyright registration? (We note that some 
copyright registration numbers are provided on page 75 in table 3.23.)  
 Can an author make a “deposit” of his copyrightable materials at any time, apart from 
registration, or must deposit occur at the same time as copyright registration?  
 Must deposit occur within a fixed period af ter the creation of the copyrighted work? 
 What legal benefits does registration and deposit confer on authors?  
Answer: 
According to the Article 9 of Georgian law on co pyrights and neighbouring rights: 1 Copyright in 
scientific, literary and artistic works is commenced upon their creation. 2. Commencement and enjoyment of a copyright shall not be subject to any registration, special documentation for the 
work or compliance with other formalities.” Sakpatenti has a voluntary system of deposition of 
copies for protected subject matter by copyright which is not connected with commencement of copyrights and only confirms the fact and the date of deposition of the work at Sakpatenti (Article 
91 of law: 
“ARTICLE 91: DEPOSIT OF WORK 1. The author  or other copyright owner may deposit the 
original or a copy of a work with "Sakpatenti”. Person indicated in a deposition certificate shall be deemed to be the author of the work, unless otherwise proved.  
2. Upon deposit of the original or a copy of a work with "Sakpatenti”, the depositor shall not 
infringe copyright of third persons.  
3. The depositor shall be responsible for th e accuracy and reliability of the documents 
deposited with "Sakpatenti”.  
4. If a work is submitted to "Sakpatenti” by the author’s heir, successor in title, or other 
person holding the copyright, the application shall be attached with a document certifying the 
applicant’s succession or owne rship of the copyright.  
5. Upon deposit of a work with "Sakpatenti” th rough a representative of the author of a work, 
the application shall be attached with power of attorney.   6. Information related to a work deposited with "Sakpatenti” in accordance with this Article may 
be made available to the public at the request of the author himself or other owner of copyright.  
 7. Deposition of a work shall be subject to a f ee, which shall be determined by the decree of the 
Government of Georgia.  
In previous version (of 2005) of this provision the term – deposition was called,registration”, but 
the legal result of the registration was the same.  
3.4.7.2 Patents 
Page 74, paragraph 3.185: The Secretariat’s Report states “[i]n August 2009, the Law on Drugs 
and Pharmaceutical Activities was amended. The Law protects the confidentiality of market 
authorization for pharmaceuticals and applications from a non-reliance perspective. It is prohibited to spread the scientific-technical information on pharmaceutical products which was presented by 
the supplier to the administrative authority du ring the registration process, or use such WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 8 - 
 
  information for the registration of another product.” Please identify the data protection period in 
Georgia.  
Answer: 
Current version of the Law on Drugs and Pharmaceutical Activities doesn’t provide any specific 
period regarding the protection of the informatio n on pharmaceutical products. However, new draft 
amendments prepared by Sakpatenti in accordance  with the DCFTA provides for a period of six 
years from the date of the first authorization in  the market of one of the EU countries or in 
Georgia, during which other applicants are not perm itted to market the same or a similar product, 
on the basis of the marketing authorization grante d to the applicant which had provided the test 
data or studies, unless the applicant which had provided the test data or studies has given his consent. The six year period shall be extended to  a maximum of seven years if, during the first six 
years after obtaining the initial authorization, the holder obtains an authorization for one or more 
new therapeutic indications which are considered of significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. 
Also, if a generic manufacturer applies for market ing approval after the expiration of the data 
protection period, but before the expiration of a patent that covers the drug for which the marketing approval is sought, will the patent owner be notified of such marketing approval 
application, and will the generic marketing approval be granted before the expiration of the patent 
(assuming there is no patent owner consent)? 
Answer: 
No such provision is provided by the Georgian legislation.  
3.4.7.4 Copyrights and neighboring rights 
Page 75, paragraph 3.189: The Secretariat Report here states that the Law on Copyrights and 
Neighboring Rights was most recently amended in 2010. This appears to contradict the information 
on page 72 in table 3.20. Were the most recent amendments to the copyright law in 2010 or 
2013?  
Answer: 
The Law on Copyrights and Neighboring Rights most recently was amended in 2015 (please see 
the comment of Sakpatenti on the paragraph 3.4.7.1 Overview). 
The Secretariat’s Report also notes that amendments are planned to align Georgia’s legislation 
with the DCFTA. What types of amendments, and to which intellectual property laws, are needed 
to align with provisions of the DCFTA? When do es the Republic of Georgia plan to enact these 
amendments? 
Answer: 
In 2014, following new amendments were drafted in accordance with the DCFTA:  
i. Patent Law; 
ii. Trademark Law; 
iii. Law on Copyright and Neighboring Rights; 
iv. Law on Design; 
v. Law on Drugs and Pharmaceutical Activity; and 
vi. Law on Pesticides and Agrochemicals. 
New amendments intend to further approximate Geor gian legislation with that of the EU. One of 
the important issues provided by the above mentioned changes in the IP laws (Patent Law; Trademark Law; Law on Copyright and Neighboring Rights; Law on Design) are the provisions on 
the determination and specification of new adequate provisional measures for effective 
enforcement of IP right holders. In case of infrin gement, the right holder will be able to request 
seizure and destruction of infringing goods, destruction of all associated images and published WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 9 - 
 
  materials on the internet, and all technical devices used for producing infringing objects. Also new 
provisions will stipulate the legal mechanisms for defining the amount of damages and reimbursement of monetary compensation.  
New amendments in Patent Law also provides introduction of the compulsory licensing system in 
Georgia and exemption known as the Bolar provision.  
Amendments of Georgian Law on Copyright and Neighboring Rights in certain cases grants additional terms of protection to the right holder s. Georgia is planning to enact these amendments 
in 2016. 
Page 75, paragraph 3.190: The Secretariat’s Report notes that the term of copyright protection for 
a composite or derivative work lasts 70 years from the work’s publication or creation. Article 2(3) 
of the Berne Convention requires that derivative works “be protected as original works without 
prejudice to the copyright in the original work.” Please explain how a 70-year term satisfies this 
obligation. 
Answer: 
This provision is in compliance with the article 1 (4) of “Council Directive (EEC) No. 93/98 of 
October 29, 1993, Harmonizing the Term of Protec tion of Copyright and Certain Related." and 
applies to the collective works without prejudice to the rights of authors of original works.  
The Secretariat’s Report also explains that th e “[e]conomic right of the person who lawfully 
published or made available to the public a work which was not published or made available to the public previously, is protected for 25 years from the time when the work was first lawfully published or lawfully made available to the public .” Please explain how this complies with the term 
o f  l i f e  o f  t h e  a u t h o r  p l u s  7 0  y e a r s ,  o r  i s  t h i s  o n l y  f o r  w o r k s  t h a t  a r e  n o  l o n g e r  p r o t e c t e d  b y  
copyright?  
Answer: 
According to the Article 18 (8) of the Law on Copyri ght and related rights of Georgia, “the person 
who after expiry of the copyright term, will make  available to the public by publication or 
communication to the public the work not published or communicated to the public earlier for the 
first time, shall enjoy economic rights in this work provided for by paragraph 2 of this Article.” 
Paragraph 6 of Article 32 states that “Economic righ t of the person who lawfully published or made 
available to the public a work which was not published or made available to the public previously (Article 18(8) of this Law), shall run 25 years from the time when the work was first lawfully 
published or awfully made available to the public." Thus this provision applies only for works that 
are no longer protected by copyright. 
Page 75, paragraph 3.192: The Secretariat’s Report notes that, in the context of talking about 
possible special units to tackle internet piracy in Georgia, “[o]nly a collective management society, 
‘Georgian Authors Society’, takes care of authors’ rights on the internet.” Please explain how the Georgian Authors Society differs from the Georgian  Copyright Association (GCA), another collective 
management society. Additionally, please identify the “rights on the internet” that are handled by 
the Georgian Authors Society and explain how the Georgian Authors Society “takes care” of those rights (e.g., licenses, enforces, etc.).  
Answer: 
The fact is that Georgian Authors Society has changed its name in to the “Georgian Copyright 
Association”, thus this is the same organization. The main function of the organization is to grant licenses to users (television and radio broadcasters, restaurants, cafes, Internet providers in .Ge 
domain space, etc.), collect royalties and distri bute them among its members, as well as among 
the foreign authors. 
3.4.7.7 Enforcement  
Page 77, paragraph 3.202: The Secretariat’s Report states that the “Law on Border Measures 
Relating to Intellectual Property provides no ex officio power to any agency.” Please provide 
information as to whether the grant of ex offi cio powers is expected or being contemplated. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Answer: 
Based on the Association Agreement with European Union and in the scope of approximation to the 
corresponding EU regulations in the field of bord er enforcement of IPR, Georgia Revenue Service 
elaborated an approximation plan in three stag es based on which Georgian Law “ On Border 
Measures Related to Intellectual Property Rights” has to be amended in 3 years period (deadline is 
year 2017). According to the plan ex-officio power should be granted to customs authority on the 
last stage of amendments in order to secure effe ctive execution of the right. Under the obligations 
taken by the Georgia in the framework of DCFTA the granting of the ex officio powers to agencies 
will be provided no later than 2018.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
4.2 Energy 
Page 88, paragraph 4.62: The Secretariat’s Report identifies, as one of Georgia’s priorities, 
“creating the conditions for efficient private investment in hydropower and other renewables.” 
Please provide more details with regard to this specific plan. What conditions are to be 
created/improved, and how would these conditions be put in place? 
Answer: 
Over the past several years, Georgian Govern ment has undertaken an ambitious program to 
modernize and liberalize its economy. Institutional reforms have included privatizing large state-
owned entities, reducing the number of taxes and tax rates, improving tax and fiscal administration, restructuring license requirements, simplifying customs and border formalities, and generally undertaking efforts to make it  easier to do business in Georgia.  
Government's effort to attract foreign direct investments resulted in creating an investor-friendly 
environment by offering green-field projects ba sed on the Build-Own-Operate (BOO) principal, 
attractive export markets, free third party access to the grid and efficient legal and regulatory 
framework. 
Liberal tax legislation, Double Taxation Avoidance Treaties with OECD member countries, rapidly expandable export market, simplified procedures , and strong support and commitment aiming at 
developing of renewable energy sources from the Government of Georgia create favorable 
business climate for the potential investors. The Ministry of Energy of Georgia in collaborat ion with USAID’s Hydropower Investment Promotion 
Project conducted study on the hydropower potentia l of the country and identified more than one 
hundred potential projects. These projects were approved and included in the List of Potential 
Power Plant Projects and proposed to the invest ors. Currently, there are 79 potential hydropower 
projects on pre-feasibility study level in the list. 
State owned Joint Stock Company, Georgian Energy Development Fund has conducted 
reconnaissance study on four major river basins of Georgia and identified additional 48 potential hydro power plant projects. These projects will be  added to the List of Potential Renewable Power 
Projects of the Ministry of Georgia.  
Above-mentioned projects are developed in compli ance with the Resolution of Government of 
Georgia #214 (21.08.2013) about “Approving Terms an d Conditions for the Expression of Interest 
for Conduction of Full Technical and Economic Feasibility Study, Construction, Ownership and 
Operation of the Power Plants from the List of Potential Power Plants”. In accordance with the 
Decree, the interested parties participate in the Expression of Interest, which is an open and 
transparent procedure for obtaining rights on development of the project. The winner of the 
Expression of Interest signs the Memorandum of Understanding with the Government of Georgia.  
For the projects, which are not in the List of Potential Power Plant projects, the Minister of Energy of Georgia has issued Order #40, which states the terms and conditions for development of 
projects, which have been identified by the in vestors themselves. The Order was issued on 10th 
April, 2014. It gave opportunity to the potential investors to identify HPP projects that are not 
known to the Ministry of Energy for further development.  Government of Georgia provides Guaranteed Power Purchase Agreements to the investors during 8 
month annually for the first 15 years of the operation to promote investment projects in the 
energy field of Georgia.  
4.2.1 Energy policy 
Page 89, paragraph 4.64: The Secretariat’s Report mentions a long-term energy policy/strategy, 
which includes, among other issues, strategies to attract FDI in the hydropower sector, and 
assessments of the economic potential of renewa ble energy development. Please provide more 
details on this policy or describe more specifically  how the strategy proposes to attract FDI in the 
hydropower sector. Please also share the resu lts of the assessment of the renewable energy WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 11 - 
 
  economic potential. Also, does the strategy include any elements to address environmental and 
social impacts of expansion in the hydropower sector? 
Answer: 
The Main directions of the State Policy in energy sector of Georgia approved by the Parliament of 
Georgia on June 24, 2015, sets out the strategic directions that address the priorities and develops 
opportunities in the energy sector of Georgia.  The document indicates that Georgia is remarkably rich in hydropower resources and has potential 
of wind, solar, biomass and geothermal resources, intends to use these sources for creation of 
additional capacity by means of domestic and foreign investments. “To achieve this goal, it is vital to improve investment climate through creation of stable, transparent and nondiscriminatory legal basis; through deepening strong and stable trading relations with neighboring countries’ energy 
markets; through development of corresponding domestic and cross-border infrastructure; also, 
through support of scientific an d research (R&D)activities”. 
It is outlined that it is important to achieve the deeper economic and political relations, gradual 
approximation of Georgian legislation with the EU  legislation. The above process among the other 
will facilitate creation of attractive and stable investment climate.  The Policy takes into consideration the environmen tal issues as well “while implementing energy 
projects including implementation of large HPP projects, that might have an environmental and 
social impact, it’s vital to take into consideration best international practices, which include environmental and social impact assessment, consultations with local population, information publicity and availability” – is stated in the document.  
The intent of the Policy is development of the long term comprehensive state vision - Energy 
Strategy of Georgia, which is under elaboration. While developing of the Strategy, for analyzing of 
the processes taking place in the energy sector and long-term strategic planning, the linear 
programming and optimization models - MARKAL-Georgia have been used. Strategic planning is 
based on the so-called "Basic Scenario", which reflects the energy supply chain in Georgia's primary energy supply to the consumer, its transformation, including transportation and 
distribution. The projections are based on the ex pected economic development scenarios, taking 
the annual growth of the GDP (cases of annual 3%, 5% and 7% growth). 
4.4 Trade in Services 
4.4.1 Financial services 
Page 96, paragraph 4.95: The Secretariat’s Report states: 
 
Georgia’s financial sector is dominated by the banking sector with a small non-bank 
financial services market and an inactive priv ate securities market. Currently, there are 19 
commercial banks (with branch offices), 16 of which are foreign-controlled. As of the end of 2012, the commercial banks accounted for more than 93% of financial system assets. 
Commercial banks play a leading role in financing the economy. Concentration in the 
banking system is relatively high with the five largest banks controlling more than 80% of total sector assets, while the top two banks—the Bank of Georgia and TBC Bank—control more than 60% of assets (Table 4.7). 
 
Of the 80% of total sector assets controlled by the five largest banks, please identify what share is 
foreign-controlled. 
Answer: 
As of 31 December 2014, the share of non-resident beneficiaries in banks’ assets, according to 
final ownership, stood at 87 percent, while in equity capital it stood at 84 percent. It should be 
highlighted that two largest Georgian banks are li sted and traded on the London Stock Exchange. 
PART II: QUESTIONS ON THE GOVERNMENT REPORT (WT/TPR/G/328) 
 
2 RECENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS AND REFORMS 
2.3 Energy 
Page 6, paragraph 2.23: The Government’s Repo rt mentions a government strategy for the 
electricity sector, the Ten Year Network Development Plan of Georgia 2015-2025. Do any 
provisions of the Plan address the use of altern ative energy sources (e.g., solar, wind)? If so, 
please identify which provisions do so? WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 12 - 
 
  Answer: 
The Ten Year Network Development Plan of Georgia (TYNDP) 2015-2025 includes provisions to use 
alternative energy sources. In particular, in 2016 it’s planned to receive 20 MW wind energy from the projected wind farm “Kartli”. Besides Georgia has significant potential of wind energy with 4 
kW.h of average annual production. There are 9 zones in the country, where it’s possible to 
construct wind farms. Respectively TYNDP high lights wind and solar energy potential and 
assimilation of perspectives in 2026-2050.  
Page 6, paragraph 2.26: The Government’s Report mentions Georgia’s membership in the 
International Renewable Energy Agency, its plans to join the Energy Community, and its position 
of chairman of the European Energy Charter. Please clarify whether Georgia has needed to 
implement any reforms to its renewable energy sector as a result of these international 
commitments/engagements.  
Answer: 
At present there is no specific binding commitm ent for Georgia for the implementation of the 
reforms to its renewable energy sector as a result of the existing international 
commitments/engagements. However, Georgia is a party of Association Agreement with the European Union and through this agreement it is mandated to negotiate its membership in the 
Energy Community. As a result, Georgia is in the process of negotiating draft Accession Protocol 
with the European Commission and in case of becoming a party of the Energy Community Treaty Georgia will be committed to follow the European regulations accordingly. At the current stage it is planned to elaborate National Renewable Action Plan with the aim of developing the use of 
renewable energy sources in Georgia in line wi th the Association Agreement/Energy Community 
Treaty in the coming year. 
2.10 Competition 
Page 11, paragraph 2.65: The Government’s Report states that “[t]he newly formed Competition 
Agency has already gained international and local re cognition. Please provide further details on the 
“international and local recognition” that has been received by the Competition Agency. 
Answer: 
Georgian Competition Agency since its establishment and adoption of 7 by-laws (October 2014) 
finished nearly 10 cases, plus 2 merger cases, on which received positive oral and written feedbacks from international colleagues, namely from the members of International Competition 
Network (ICN), of which the Agency is the member since October 2014, as well as from the 
members of Sofia Competition Network (member since September 2014) and from other independent experts.  
As for internal recognition, the number of the complaints or application on different competition 
issues which are submitted to the Agency shows that private sector already trusts the Competition Agency and is waiting for its decisions on several possible violations of competition legislation by 
certain economic agents.  
2.11 Intellectual Property Rights  
Page 11, paragraph 2.67: The Government’s Report states that the “National Intellectual Property 
Center – Sakpatenti . . . created an IPR enforcement interagency coordination body, which will 
deal with IPR enforcement issues, including implementation of border measures.” Please provide 
further information on this Coordination Body, including the member government agencies, the structure of the Coordination Body, the mission of  the Body, activities already undertaken by the 
Coordination Body and activities planned for the future. 
Answer: 
In accordance with the Association Agreement, signed between Georgia and the European Union, 
Georgia has undertaken commitments to prevent and suppress infringement of intellectual 
property rights and ensure implementation of appropriate sanctions.  By the initiative of Sakpatenti, as the policy-making body in the intellectual property field, the Interagency Coordination Council for Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement has been created. 
The establishment of the Council aims to promot e protection of intellectual property and to 
introduce an effective system of combating infringement of intellectual property rights, to coordinate activity of relevant state agencies and to define general policy, which will facilitate the 
effective implementation of the commitments under the Association Agreement. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 13 - 
 
  The Coordinating Council will develop a unified strategy for protection of intellectual property 
rights, define priority directions and draft an acti on plan to overcome the identified problems. In 
order to improve the system of protection of righ ts, the Council will also draft relevant legislative 
acts and bylaws, will offer recommendations for various offices and organizations concerning the 
measures to be carried out in the field of intellectual property rights protection and will ensure 
coordinated work of relevant agencies. The members of the Council are representatives of agencies whose functions are related with 
protection and enforcement of intellectual proper ty rights by the state (Prosecutor’s Office of 
Georgia, Ministry of Internal Affairs, and Inve stigation Service of the Ministry of Finance of 
Georgia, Customs Department of Revenue Service and LEPL National Intellectual Property Center 
of Georgia Sakpatenti). Representatives from th e Embassy of the United States of America to 
Georgia and the Delegation of European Union to Ge orgia participate in the work of the Council as 
observers. Three meetings were held so far in the framework of Council. Technical and procedural issues were 
discussed, also by the members were decided to conduct the survey on sectoral study in order to 
identify the industry fields most affected by counterfeiting in Georgia (survey will be based on qualitative and quantitative measurements of th e counterfeiting cases) so the battle will be 
focused on the issues identified in the results of study.  
   WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 14 - 
 
  EUROPEAN UNION 
 
WT/TPR/S/328 – WTO Secretariat's Report 
 
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
4.4 Trade in Services Page 94 
According to the available information, Georgia, wi thin a wider framework of reform of its postal 
services is discussing a new draft law that would give the Georgian National Post a competitive advantage for the next 5 years.  
EU questions No 1 and 2: Could Georgia provide an overview of the new Postal Act, in particular 
specifying clearly services reserved to monopoly and services open to foreign operators? Please 
provide a timeline to reduce the scope of rese rved services as envisaged by the law.  
Answer: 
The draft Postal Law which was elaborated by the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable 
Development of Georgia, several times has b een discussed with the stakeholders like: 
Governmental entities, postal operators, Business Ombudsman, NGOs, the Parliament Sectorial 
Committee, GNCC (Georgian Nation al Communications Commission). 
 The above mentioned draft law was also discussed with the European Commission and was 
updated considering the EU comments. On 26th of  September 2015 the Ministry of Economy and 
Sustainable Development of Georgia held the video conference with European Commission representatives and the agreement was made regarding reserved services, which was the main 
obstacle of law adoption for the last year.  
 At the same time, in current year in tight cooperation with Universal Postal Union were elaborated 
Integrated Postal Reform and Development Plan for Georgia (2015-2017).  
 Currently the draft Postal Law is in process to find out most suitable alternative scenarios of reserved services for considering in the law.  
4.4.2 Telecommunication Services 
Paragraph 4.110, page 9-0  Telecommunications in Georgia are regulated by the independent and self-financed Georgian 
National Communications Commission (GNCC). Despite its regulatory framework is relatively well 
developed, EU companies have experienced difficulties regarding spectrum auctions. More specifically, bidding rounds are set with short deadlines and with late announcements. The lack of 
time and continuity presents an obstacle to predictable and sustainable investments. 
 EU questions No 3 and 4: Is Georgia considering developing a national telecommunication strategy 
extending over several years? Could Georgia otherwise commit to ensuring that procedures for the 
allocation of scarce resources like spectrum will be carried out in an objective, timely, transparent 
and non-discriminatory manner, as set out in the Telecom Reference Paper that Georgia has 
subscribed to? 
Answer: 
Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development wo rks actively to develop ICT field, to create 
relevant action plans, programmes, strategies etc. 
 
Georgian National Communications Commission (GNCC) commenced working on Spectrum Re-farming issues in 2011. First consultation document, that was part of EBRD funded project was published in October 2012, outlining GNCC strategy on spectrum management, analyzing future 
competitiveness of mobile market and defining potential actions to be taken in order to: a) free up 
800MHz and 2.6 GHz bands, b) liberalize 900/1800/2100 MHz bands and c) cope with spectrum imbalances (uneven distribution of spectrum among mobile operators) and duopoly on mobile 
broadband market ( http://gncc.ge/uploads/other/0/898.pdf  -available in Georgian language). WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 15 - 
 
  Based on the results of public consultations (that took approximately 2 years), in July 2014 the 
government of Georgia together with the GNCC, the EBRD and the World Bank experts and with 
the involvement of market players (including mobi le operators active in Georgia) prepared draft 
amendments to the law of Georgia on electron ic communications defining the procedures for 
spectrum harmonization, liberalization, reallocation and compensatory measures related to the 
migration costs and reallocation of spectrum usage.  
GNCC, based on the consultations with market players and taking into consideration the need to 
stimulate competition on mobile broadband market, has defined phased approach (two phases) as a preferred strategy option for liberalization of  GSM/UMTS licenses and auctioning of spectrum 
available in harmonized 800/900/1800/paired 2100 MHz bands. A key issue in this respect was 
that liberalization of GSM/UMTS licenses without release of additional spectrum for mobile 
broadband would cause further distortion of competition on Georgian mobile market by placing two incumbent operators (Magticom and Geocell) even in a more competitive advantage and 
strengthening the duopoly on Mobile broadband market. 
 Phase 1:  During the first phase the following planned actions were completed: 
 
 Revised methodology for setting the spectrum price in the bands designated for 
terrestrial systems capable of providing ECS covering, inter-alia, reserve prices for auctions and fees for license renewal has been developed and respective GNCC 
resolutions have been issued (Draft resolutions were subject to public consultation and 
amended in line with well-reasoned opinions of respective market players); 
 The market value of the spectrum in (liberalized) 800/900/1800/paired 2100 MHz bands 
was estimated using business modeling and benchmarking methodologies (Consultancy 
service was provided by PWC http://gncc.ge/uploa ds/other/0/841.pdf ; draft report was 
subject to public consultation and was co rrected in line with submitted grounded 
arguments); 
 GSM/UMTS (900/1800/paired 2100 MHz) licenses were liberalized in accordance with 
technology and service neutral regime and dura tion of the licenses were extended for 15 
years. Spectrum holdings in 900/1800/paired 2100 MHz bands were reallocated in order 
to a) free up contiguous  spectrum blocks for next auctions and b) ensure access of 
licensees to the adjacent spectrum blocks. (draft GNCC decision was subject to public consultation); 
(Note: According to the amendments to the La w of Georgia on Electronic Communications, 
within three month upon enacting the respective amendments, GNCC had to liberalize issued GSM/UMTS (900/1800/paired 2100 MHz) licenses under harmonized technical norms and 
extend their duration for 15 years starting from modification date (GSM/UMTS licensees had 
the possibility to give up some part of their spectrum holdings and licensees had to be reimbursed for the relinquished spectrum. License holders had to pay respective license fees for their license duration extensions).  
 
 2x10 MHz spectrum in 800 MHz band was auctioned (draft auction decision was subject 
to public consultation);  
 800 MHz band was cleaned up from Magticom’s CDMA license (draft GNCC decision was 
subject to public consultation);  
Phase 2:  During the second phase it was planned to auction all spectrum available within 
800/900/1800/paired 2100 MHz bands, including spectrum relinquished by mobile operators under 
liberalization/refarming process.   First phase was successfully completed and now three mobile operators are offering mobile 
broadband (LTE) services to thei r customers, Magticom and Geocell under their liberalized licenses 
and Mobitel using recently acquired 800 MHz spectrum.   
On 15 June, 2015 the GNCC published short consultation document, outlining the main approach 
towards allocation of additional harmonized spectrum for MFCN and upcoming auction timelines planned under second phase. GNCC received feedback from interested parties and updated the WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 16 - 
 
  document accordingly. Consequently, amended document was published on 25 August, 2015 
(http://www.gncc.ge/uploads/other/1/1550.pdf  - available in Georgian language). Additionally, the 
GNCC will publish draft auction document (amount of spectrum available under each lot (within 
800/900/1800/2100 MHz bands), spectrum caps, coverage obligations, detailed auction 
procedures, etc.) that will be separately subject to the public consultation.  
Please note that consultation documents published by the GNCC are neither legally binding, nor necessarily set out the Commission‘s final or definitive position on particular matters. Thus 
timelines indicated for the auctions are not yet fixed. Though, GNCC plans to complete 
800/900/1800/2100 MHz bands award process in the first half of 2016. Public consultation is one of the key regulatory tools implemented by GNCC to improve transparency, efficiency and effectiveness of deci sion making process. GN CC is always actively 
seeking the opinions of interested and affected gr oups, which is done at every stage of regulatory 
process and will be ensured for upcoming auctions.  
4.5 Tourism 
Paragraph 4.150, page 105 
The report describes several actions carried out by Georgia reflecting the importance of the 
tourism sector in the country's socio-economic development.  
 
EU question No 5: Could Georgia describe which investments have been are carried out and/or will 
be carried out in the forthcoming years to further develop its tourism sector in accordance with the National Tourism Development Strategy 2025? 
Answer: 
By 2025 Georgia will be at the forefront of tourism competitiveness, through strategic investments 
in infrastructure, education, marketing, and the development of unique Georgian visitor 
experiences that appeal to high-value markets aro und the globe. Some of the key investments will 
be implemented to advance Georgia’s winter resort destination and supporting infrastructure.   
Herewith, in order to further address tourism infr astructure needs the Government of Georgia with 
the support of the World Bank in 2012 started im plementing regional investment activities, 
specifically Regional Development Programs that support rehabilitation and expansion of tourism 
infrastructure region by region. Two projects  focusing on the Kakheti region (Regional 
Development Project, RDP $75 million) and the Imereti region (RDPII, $37.5 million) are already 
under implementation. Third project (RDPIII, $ 75 million), focusing on two more regions, 
Samtskhe-Javakheti and Mtskheta-Mtianeti will be  carried out within the nearest future. The 
projects focus on benefitting the local residents of each region, including restoration of historical 
houses with traditional architecture, urban regeneration, improved municipal services and infrastructure, tourism SMEs support and job creation, development of an attractive, varied and 
safe tourism circuits. Each project is expected to boost the volume of private sector investment in 
the region; and increase points of sales (tourism-related enterprises) in renovated culture heritage sites and historic cities.  
More detailed information can be found in the provided Strategy and Action Plan. 
WT/TPR/G/328 – Georgia's Report 
Paragraph 2.64: 
EU question No 6: Could Georgia explain how the Competition Agency's structural and operational 
independence from the Government, ministries and other State bodies is ensured? 
Answer: 
According to the Law on Competition (Article 16 (10)) Agency is independent in performing of its 
activities and the process of decision-making.   Article 17 - Principles of Agency’s activities are as follows: 1. independence, non-discrimination, 
unbiasedness, transparency and accountability. 
2. To ensure transparency of the Agency’s activities its decisions shall be public.  
Article 17
1 (2) - Chairman of the Agency shall make decisions independently, on the issues within 
the Agency’s competence, he/she shall act on behalf of the Agency, represents it in relations with WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 17 - 
 
  the other authorities and organizations, solves the issues within the objectives, functions and 
authorities of the Agency.  Competition Agency doesn’t have any superior body and is accountable only to the Prime Minister 
of Georgia. Agency prepares the Annual Report for the Prime Minister once per year.  
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 18 - 
 
  CHINESE TAIPEI 
Question: 1. Georgia has established e-visa portal website in February 2015. However, due to technical 
problems, people of the Separate Customs Territo ry of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu are not 
able to apply visa application through the online system. Could Georgia resolve this technical 
problem in order to allow our people go to Georgia for business, investment or tourism? 
Answer:  Georgia thanks the Separate Customs Terri tory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu 
for the expressed interest. In this view, Georgia is working towards resolution of the issue posed 
by the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu.  
2. Up to December 2015, we receive visa-waiver, landing-visa privilege or electronic visa 
treatment from 158 countries and territories worldw ide. Meanwhile, Georgia also gives visa-free 
treatment to 94 nations. Does Georgia have any plan to give us visa-waiver or landing-visa 
treatment in the future to promote our bilateral trade and investment opportunities? 
Answer:  The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu is not included in 
the Georgia’s visa-free country list; however, we are looking for solutions in view of the issue 
posed in the first question. As for the landing-visa  treatment, per the Law of Georgia on the Legal 
Status of Aliens and Stateless Persons (in force since September 1, 2014) Georgia has no visa 
treatment on the border check-points, apart from exceptional situations.  
 
  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 19 - 
 
  RUSSIAN FEDERATION 
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT (WT/TPR/S/328) 
 SUMMARY 
21 p.9 
 New amendments to the Law on Competition were adopted in March 2014. This law was developed 
as part of the anti-monopoly reform and aims to strengthen the institutional framework for 
promoting free trade and competition. The Government also issued a decree to set up the Competition Agency, which oversees most econom ic sectors except for energy and telecoms. 
 
Question:  Could the Georgian Government specify the authority, which is responsible for the 
competition policy in energy and telecoms?  Does the Law on Competition apply to the mentioned 
sectors? 
Answer: 
In energy sector the responsible body is - Georgian National Energy and Water Supply 
Regulatory Commission  and in telecoms - Georgian National Communication Commission.  
Competition Agency cannot make a decision on alleged restriction of competition in regulated 
sphere of economy.  
If the complaint on alleged violation of competition in the regulated sphere of economy is submitted to the Agency, it shall forward such co mplaint to the relevant regulating body of the 
regulated sphere of economy. 
Georgian National Communications Commission is in charge of pre-regulation in the sphere of electronic communication, as well as monitoring of fulfillment of the specific obligations imposed 
on the authorized persons by Georgian National Communication Commission, in accordance with 
the rules established by Georgian Law on Electronic Communication, the Commission considers and resolves the disputes between the authorized pe rsons, including disputes related to fulfillment 
of the specific obligations imposed on the authorized persons. 
 Actions of the economic agents operating in the electronic communications sphere intended for or 
resulting in competition distortion or restricting (with the exception of pricing, interconnection and 
standard service terms and conditions) shall be regulated by the Georgian Law on Competition. 
However, sanctions defined by the Article 33 of Georgian Law on Competition does not apply to the economic agents operating in the regulated economic sectors.  
 
The cooperation between the Competition Agency an d the sectoral regulators is regulated under 
the Law on Competition (VI Chapter).  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIME 
2.5.3 Other agreements and arrangements 2.40 p.31   
China: Georgia and China have signed a joint declaration concerning a joint feasibility study on a 
possible Georgia-China Free Trade Agreement. The first meeting of the Joint Working Group set up 
for this purpose was held in April 2015, at which the parties agreed that the Working Group will 
study and identify the benefits and impacts that may derive from a possible FTA and will prepare a 
final joint feasibility study report, including recommendations. Georgia and China have also signed a memorandum of understanding on strengthening cooperation for the Silk Road Economic Belt 
initiative. 
 Question 1: In the light of the above mentioned completing a joint feasibility study on a possible 
Georgia-China Free Trade Agreement could the Georgian Government provide us with up-to-date 
information explaining any progress and results with respect to this process?  
Answer: 
The Joint Feasibility Study on Georgia – China Free Trade Agreement was concluded in September 
2015. In December 2015 Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of Commerce of the WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 20 - 
 
  People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of  Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia 
on Launching the Negotiations for a China-Georgia Free Trade Agreement was signed. 
Question 2: Could Georgia provide more detailed information on participation in Silk Road 
Economic Belt initiative within the context of the signed MoU with China? 
Answer: 
The historic Silk Road was the world's longest trade route on land. Although the ancient Silk Road 
was eventually replaced by shipping routes via sea,  there is a great incentive to revive the historic 
link under the spirit of cooperation and mutual benefit as current modes of transportation are far 
more swift and convenient.  
Notably, Georgia has a growing role as a regional  hub for regional trade. Georgian Government’s 
aim is to take advantage of strategic positioning between Europe and Asia and revitalize role in 
trade and exchange between across the Eurasian co ntinent. The New Silk Road project aims to 
rebuild this bridge between West and East, and Georgia is committed to the success of this vision. 
MoU with China envisages cooperation in the fiel ds of infrastructure development, investment 
promotion and optimization of trade structure. 
The Government of Georgia strongly supports implementation of infrastructure projects. For this 
purpose, particular importance is attached to the implementation of Baku – Tbilisi – Kars new 
railway connection line, the construction of the new Deep Sea port in Anaklia, construction and 
rehabilitation of the East-West Highway and modernization of main railway line. 
It must be noted that the first railway freight transportation from China in the direction of Georgia 
was carried out in close cooperation with the railw ays of Georgia, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan and 
the province of China – Xinjiang on January 29-February 6, 2015. The project created an 
opportunity for the freight to move from China to the Black Sea ports of Georgia without delay in 
the shortest possible time; in result, the transit time has been reduced from 40-45 to 9 days 
compared to the carriage by sea.  
Also, in the framework of the mentioned MoU Free Trade Agreement negotiations with China were 
launched. 
At the same time in October 15-16, 2015 under th e patronage of the Prime Minister and with 
support of the Government of the People's Repu blic of China Tbilisi Silk Road Forum 2015 was 
held. The forum was attended by public and private sector representatives from 34 countries. 
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
3.4.4 Sanitary and phytosanitary requirements 
3.135 p.63 
 The main factors hampering food exports from Georgia are weak food safety regulations and 
supervision capacity, and the lack of best inte rnational practices among food producers. Thus, 
improved food safety management would benefit both public health and trade. The authorities stated that Georgia has gradually developed its nati onal regulatory system in line with the EU and 
international standards. The legislative approximation process has been moving faster since the 
DCFTA with the EU was signed. The Government also facilitates the establishment of good 
agricultural practices in different fields.  
Question 1 : Please clarify, which EU legal acts and relevant international standards have formed 
the basis for Georgian food safety regulations and its amendments? 
Answer: 
According to the DCFTA the main commitment of Georgia is to approximate its legislation to EU 
legislation in Sanitary and phyt osanitary fields. In this regard the first step was to submit 
approximation list to EU by late February of 2015, which has been fully complied. The 
approximation list is already agreed with the European Commission and after the ratification by 
the Parliament of Georgia the approximation list will become a part of the DCFTA.  Please find the legal approximation list on following web page: http://www.moa.gov.ge/?menui d=37&lang=1#.Vo0H0ktqtfg.   WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 21 - 
 
  Question 2 : Please specify the national regulations, which have been changed. What practical 
problems/shortcomings Georgia faced while developing its national regulatory system in line with the EU and international standards? 
Answer: 
Response is provided under the question on paragraph 3.139 p.64 Question 3 : Please provide more detailed information, describing the implementation process of 
the EU standards, which are considered to be more  restrictive in comparison to the standards of 
the international organizations. 
Answer: 
Georgia is gradually approximating its legislation to EU legislation. At this stage, there are not 
identified EU SPS standards (regulations), which are more restrictive in comparison to the 
international ones.  
Question 4 : Please specify the timeframe for completion of harmonization of Georgia’s national 
SPS regulatory system with the correspon ding EU legislation on food safety. 
Answer: 
Georgian legislation will be approximated to the EU legislation on a gradual basis, which is due to 
be done from 2015 t ill 2027. In total Georgia will approximate its legislation to 272 EU Legal Acts 
(in Secretariat report paragraph 20, pg.9 number of legal acts is indicated 350 instead of 272). 
3.138 p.64 
Some research found that the incidence of food-b orne diseases continued to increase after 2009, 
which may be attributed to a lack of food safety control. The NFA elaborated an Annual Control 
Plan of Food/Feed Business Operators (FBOs), who ar e responsible for food safety and quality. The 
NFA is the only authority that can inspect FBOs. The authorities stated that the number of NFA staff increased between 2013 and 2014 when capacity-building programmes were strengthened. 
As a result, the number of FBOs inspected by the NFA increased threefold from 2013 to 2014, and 
the number of both follow-up inspections and sanctions imposed increased significantly.  
Question: Please provide more details with regard to the Annual Control Plan of FBOs (its 
content). Do the EU control bodies recognize the mentioned Plan for 2015?  
Answer: 
The National Food Agency presents its annual control plan to the Ministry of Agriculture of Georgia 
and it has to be approved by the Minister of Agriculture (Order #2-272 issued on December 25, 
2015 by the Minister of Agriculture of Georgia). It  reflects the number of regular inspections and 
the list of risk based business operators, where th e inspections have to be implemented. Also, the 
plan consists of the monitoring program, which determines the number of samples and 
parameters.  
3.139 p.64 
The Ministry of Agriculture sets food-safety polic y and standards, and the Ministry of Health and 
Social Affairs contributes by defining parameters  of food safety for human health. In 2010, the 
Government adopted a comprehensive SPS strategy (Decree No. 1756), which was later amended by Decree No. 783 in May 2014. According to the am endment, nearly 90 SPS regulations in food 
safety, veterinary and plant protection are to be implemented in 2015, and the main framework 
for the development of Georgian legislation is the list adopted according to the DCFTA 
requirements. 
 
Question 1:  Please specify mentioned SPS regulations ( 90) in food safety, veterinary and plant 
protection to be implemented in 2015? Please provide the EU regulations, which are relevant to 
the mentioned Georgian SPS regulations? 
Answer: 
According to the DCFTA Agreement the main co mmitment of Georgia is to approximate its 
legislation to EU legislation in Sanitary and phytosanitary fields. In this regard the first step was to 
submit approximation list to EU by late Februa ry of 2015, which has been fully complied. The WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 22 - 
 
  approximation list is already agreed with the European commission and after the ratification by the 
Parliament of Georgia the approximation list will become a part of the DCFTA Agreement. Accordingly this approximation list replaced the list indicated in the report (nearly 90 SPS regulations in food safety, veterinary and plant protection fields). 
In 2015 following Legal acts were adopted: 
In veterinary field:   Governmental Decree No.: 348, on “implementing of preventive-quarantine measures on 
Animal transmitted deceases “which establishes rules on fighting against animal decease 
(Newcastle decease, swine African and classical plague). (Adopted on: 14th of July, 2015). Based on following EU legal acts – 1. Council Directive 2001/89/EC of 23 October 2001 on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever. 2. Council Directive 92/66/EEC 
of 14 July 1992 introducing Community measures for the control of Newcastle disease. 3. 
Council Directive 2002/60/EC of 27 June 2002 laying down specific provisions for the control of African swine fever and amending Directive 92/119/EEC as regards Teschen disease and 
African swine fever. 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N 228 of 27 may 2015 on ovine and caprine Animal 
Identification/Registration and Registration of Their Holdings/Temporary Holdings Rule.  
Based on following EU legal acts – 1. Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 of 17 December 2003 
establishing a system for the identification an d registration of ovine and caprine animals and 
amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Directives 92/102/EEC and 64/432/EEC; 2. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1505/2006 of 11 October 2006 implementing Council Regulation 
(EC) No 21/2004 as regards the minimum level of checks to be carried out in relation to the 
identification and registration of  ovine and caprine animals. 3.  
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N764 of 31 December 2014 on Bovine Animal 
Identification/Registration and Registration of Their Holdings/Temporary Holdings Rule. 
Based on following EU legal acts – 1. Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and 
registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and 
repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97. 2. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1082/2003 
of 23 June 2003 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 
1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the minimum level of 
controls to be carried out in the framewor k of the system for the identification and 
registration of bovine animals. 3. Commission  Regulation (EC) No 911/2004 of 29 April 2004 
implementing Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
as regards eartags, passports and holding re gisters; 4. Commission Regulation (EC) No 
494/98 of 27 February 1998 laying down detaile d rules for the implementation of Council 
Regulation (EC) No 820/97 as regards the application of minimum administrative sanctions 
in the framework of the system for the identifi cation and registration of bovine animals. 
In Food Safety Field: 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N639 of 18 December 2015 on 
pharmacologically active substances and their classification regarding maximum residue 
limits in foodstuffs of animal origin. Based on Commission Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 
of 22 December 2009 on pharmacologically active substances and their classification regarding maximum residue limits in  foodstuffs of animal origin. 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N55 of 12 February 2015 on Approval Special 
Official Control Rule of Animal Origin Food. Based on Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules for 
the organization of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human 
consumption 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N578 of 10 November 2015 on implementing 
measures for the Rapid alert system fo r food and feed. Based on: Commission 
Regulation (EU) No 16/2011 of 10 January 2011 laying down implementing measures for 
the Rapid alert system for food and feed; WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 23 - 
 
   Resolution of the Government of Georgia N419 December 29, 2010 on the Approval of 
the General Plan For Crisis Management in the field of the Safety of Food and Feed (amended in 2015); 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia 2015 10  November N581 on microbiological criteria 
for foodstuffs; based on: Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 
on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs; 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia 2015 10 November N577 on the traceability 
requirements. Based on: Commission Implemen ting Regulation (EU) No 931/2011 of 19 
September 2011 on the tr aceability requirements set by Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council; 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia 2015 9 November N567 on maximum levels for 
certain contaminants in foodstuffs. Based on: 1. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 
of 19 December 2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs. 2. Council Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 of 8 Febr uary 1993 laying down Community procedures 
for contaminants in food 
In phytosanitary field: 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia №8 of 26 January 2015 on Approval Rules for the 
Notification of Incompliance of Consignments to the Phytosanitary Requirements During the 
International Shipments. Based on: Commission Directive 94/3/EC of 21 January 1994 establishing a procedure for the notification of interception of a consignment or a harmful organism from third countries and presenting an imminent phytosanitary danger. 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia №190 of 27 April 2015 on Approval the Conditions 
Under Which Certain Harmful Organisms, Plants, Plant Products and Other Objects May be Introduced into Georgia for Trial or Scientific Purposes and for Work on Varietal Selections. 
Based on: Commission Directive 2008/61/EC of 17 June 2008 establishing the conditions 
under which certain harmful organisms, plants, plant products and other objects listed in Annexes I to V to Council Directive 2000/29/EC may be introduced into or moved within the 
Community or certain protected zones thereof, for trial or scientific purposes and for work 
on varietal selections 
Question 2:  Please clarify whether the Georgian competent authorities intend to notify these SPS 
regulations to the WTO? Could Georgia please pr ovide the internet link where the relevant draft 
regulations are available? 
Answer: 
Draft regulations are available on the following web-page: 
http://www.moa.gov.ge/i ndex.php?lang=1. Georgia will notify new SPS regulations to the WTO.  
Question 3:  Please specify whether food safety requirements are the same for imported and 
domestic products? 
Answer: 
Same food safety requirements apply for imported and domestic products. 
3.140 p.65 
Imports of animals and animal products must be accompanied by a veterinary certificate issued in 
the country of origin. Imports of plants an d plant products must be accompanied by a 
phytosanitary certificate. For food of animal origin, the veterinary/health certificate is required. The NFA is responsible for issuing import/transit  permits for goods subject to phytosanitary and 
veterinary controls. 
Question: Please provide more information on the phytosanitary control procedure, both for 
imports and exports?  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 24 - 
 
  Answer: 
Since July 1, 2009 the Revenue Service (RS) started to undertake full documentary, identity check 
and physical check of imported products subj ect to phytosanitary control with or without 
laboratory sampling. Identity check includes visual inspection to ensure that phyto-sanitary 
certificate(s) or other document(s) provided by the Georgian legislation match with the product 
i t s e l f ,  a s  w e l l  a s  f o r  t h e  p r e s e n c e  a n d  c o n f o r m i t y  o f  t h e  m a r k i n g  w h i c h  m u s t  a p p e a r  o n  t h e  packaging of products. The procedure also includes  thorough examination of transportation means. 
According to the resolution N 429, RS has obligation to regularly send information to the NFA 
which consists of data on consignment, serial number of control act and results from checks. Based on this information the monitoring plan for phytosanitary control should be updated, adjusting the frequency of physical checks and sampling at the BIP. According to the existing 
monitoring plan, samples should be examined by accredited laboratories.  
Positive results of tests, undertaken either based on monitoring plan or due to a suspicion, are immediately notified by the RS to the NFA. In this case, the NFA may re-examine the case, and 
provide the RS with relevant notification. 
The RS has obligation to take into account the noti fication of the NFA and either continue, stop or 
prohibit the clearance process of these goods, accordingly. 
In accordance with EU recommendations the electronic pre-notification acts of veterinary (common 
entry veterinary document) and phytosanitary (common entry phytosanitary document) control 
have been developed, which consists of two parts: 
 The first part – “pre-notification” is filled by the owner of goods 
 The second part – “The decision on consignment” is filled by authorized person 
The data received from  electronic pre-notification acts are accessible for NFA 
Additional information about phytosanitary control procedures could be found on the following 
web-page:  
http://nfa.gov.ge/files/PDF/1323087159_Mtavrobis_dadgenileba_-_429_ingl.pdf.  
3.141 p.65 
Border inspection is conducted by the Revenue Service, and is free of charge. The standard 
processing time is not defined, while the normal time for documentary, identity and physical checks ranges from 20 minutes to five days in the case of laboratory analysis. If a consignment is found to be not in conformity with Georgian SPS requirements, the goods are: prohibited from 
being imported into Georgia; subject to treatmen t, sorting, packing replacement if such actions 
preclude the identified risk; subject to destruction; or subject to suspension. 
Question 1: Please identify the role of the Revenue Service in the phytosanitary quarantine 
control system?  
Answer: 
According to primary legislation of Georgia (The Georgian Code on Food and Feed Safety, 
Veterinary and Plant Protection; Tax Code – Sanitary Border Quarantine control) LEPL Revenue 
Service of the Ministry of Finance (RS) implemen ts state phyto-sanitary and veterinary border-
quarantine controls based on rules defined by  the Ministry of Agriculture and Georgian 
government. This decision was part of the border control related reform, aimed, among others, at 
introduction of streamlined procedures at the border crossing related area and eradication of 
corrupt practices, significantly undermining trad e relations and country’s economic development. 
The sphere of competence of the RS is defined as the operational authority, and that of the 
Ministry of Agriculture as the policy decision-makin g authority, according to the Resolution N429 of 
the Government of Georgia on Approval of the Rule of Carrying out the Phytosanitary Border 
Quarantine and Veterinary Border-Quarantine Control of December 31, 2010. 
The spheres of competence, division of power and cooperation practices between National Food 
Agency (NFA) and RS are defined by Government Resolution N 429. From July 1, 2009 the RS started to undertake full documentary, identity check and physical check of imported food products with or without laboratory sampling. Identity check includes visual inspection to ensure that the 
veterinary or phyto-sanitary certificate(s) or other document(s) provided by the Georgian 
legislation match with the product itself, as well as for the presence and conformity of the marking which must appear on the animals themselves or on the packaging of products. The procedure also 
includes thorough examination of transportation means. According to the Resolution N 429, RS has 
obligation to regularly send information to the NFA which consists of data on consignment, serial WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 25 - 
 
  number of control act and results from checks. Based on this information the monitoring plan for 
veterinary control and monitoring plan for phytosanitary control should be updated, adjusting the frequency of physical checks and sampling at the BIP. According to the existing monitoring plan, samples should be examined by accredited laboratories.  
Positive results of tests, undertaken either based on monitoring plan or due to a suspicion, are 
immediately notified by the RS to the NFA. In this case, the NFA may re-examine the case, and provide the RS with relevant notification. 
The RS has obligation to take into account the noti fication of the NFA and either continue, stop or 
prohibit the clearance process of these goods, accordingly. Cooperation and exchange of information between  the NS and RS is regulated by Government 
Resolution N 429.  
Structural changes established in the customs department on April 25, 2013. During the structural 
changes, EU funded ‘’Twinning’’ project recomm endations were taken into consideration. In 
particular, in Customs department sanitary, phyto-sanitary and veterinary control divisions was 
established as separate structural unit.  
Question 2: What factors determine the inspection mechanism for plant products? 
Answer: 
Georgia Revenue Service is providing state phytosanitary border quarantine control. Phytosanitary 
control procedures are conducted to control the plant pests and to prevent their spread in the 
territory of the country and are elaborated acco rding to the principles of International Plant 
Protection Convention of Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) from 6th December 1956 and 
also based on the Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the 
introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community . (Details about the monitoring plan and phytosanitary control 
procedures see response to Question 1). 
During customs control samples are taken for:  
a. Inspection (By using the loupe, binoculars and microscope For on-site inspection)  
b. Analysis (For laboratory researches) according to the Monitoring Plan or in case when 
during the plant health control showed that necessity of additional product inspection.  
Question 3: Please specify whether the pest-free quarantine zones were set up in Georgia. If yes, 
please indicate their quantity and locations on the territory of Georgia. 
Answer: 
According to the Article 12 of the Joint Orde r #2-7-#33 issued on January 25, 2010 on the 
Approval of Phytosanitary Protection Rules of Ge orgian Territory from Introduction and Spreading 
of Quarantine Pest and Other Dangerous Harmful Or ganisms, is determined the identification and 
preservation of areas free from dangerous harm ful organisms and areas with low spread of 
dangerous harmful organisms of the territory of the country.  
In accordance with 2015 plan of state control of plant protection the National Food Agency 
conducted the phytosinatary monitoring on identification of quarantine dangerous harmful 
organisms in regions known for production of fresh fruit and herbs with export potential. According 
to it the following has been determined: 
1.Free areas from quarantine product pests (Cerat itis capitata, Rhagoletis pomonella, Bactrocera 
cucurbitae, Bactrocera dorsalis, Carposina sasakii) 
a) Regions of Citrus Production (Samegrelo, Guria, Adjara)  
b) Regions of Fruit Production (whole territory of Georgia) 
2. Free areas from Francliniella occidentalis in the regions of herbs production  
(Imereti Region – Samtredia, Tskaltubo, Baghdati). 
3.144 p.65  
In March 2015, Georgia notified its Law on Live GMOs, which was adopted in September 2014. The notification makes reference to the Constitution of Georgia, and to the Cartagena Protocol on 
LMOs. The Law was prepared according to EU practices. The authorities indicated that Georgia is in 
the process of notifying its SPS enquiry point to the WTO.  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 26 - 
 
  Question: Please clarify the EU legal acts, which have formed the basis for the Georgian Law on 
Live GMOs?  
Answer: 
The law of Georgia on Living Modified Organisms wa s elaborated taking into account the legal acts 
of the European Union: 
 Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Par liament and the Council of 12 March 2001 “On 
the Deliberate Release into the Environment of Genetically Modified Organisms and 
Repealing Council Directive 90/2000/EEC – Commission Declaration” 
 Regulation (EC) No. 1829/2003 of the Euro pean Parliament and the Council of 22 
September 2003 “On Genetically Modified Food and Feed” 
 Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 
September 2003 “Concerning the Traceability an d Labelling of Genetically Modified 
Organisms and the Traceability of Food and Feed Products Produced from Genetically 
Modified Organisms and Amending Directive 2001/18/EC  
Questions:  Is there a state GMOs Register? If yes, what is the registration procedure? 
Answer: 
According to the Law of Georgia on Living Modifi ed Organisms and the Ordinance “A Procedure For 
Entry In The Unified Register of The LMOs Used In Contained Systems And Placed On The Market 
In The Territory Of Georgia”  registration of Living Modified Organisms for placing on the market is 
done via two regimes: a) national regime and b) recognition regime.  
Recognition regime  is used for the Living Modified Organisms, which are approved in the 
European Union, the list of these LMOs is appr oved by the Minister of Environment and Natural 
Resources Protection of Georgia.  
National regime  is used for LMOs, which do not belong to the type of LMOs approved on the 
territory of Georgia.  
According to the Law of Georgia on Living Modified Organisms the importer of LMOs, who intends the placing on the market of the LMOs that do not belong to the type of living modified organisms 
allowable on the territory of Georgia, shall, prior to initial entry of each such organism, apply to 
the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia in writing for their registration.  
The application shall be made in the special form approved by the Minister and shall be appended 
with the following information: 
a. Identification information of the import er of the Living Modified Organism; 
b. Name of Living Modified Or ganism and identification; 
c. Description of the features of LMOs an d methods used for genetic modification; 
d. Taxonomic status of recipient and parental organisms, common name and biosafety-
related features; 
e. Center of origin and center of genetic diversity, of recipient organism or parental 
organism, if known, and a description of the habitat where that recipient organism or parental organism may persist or proliferate; 
f. Taxonomic status of donor organism/organisms, place of collection or acquisition, 
common name and biosafety-related features; 
g. Description of the areas of use of LMOs and geographic boundaries of their spread;  
h. Full technical report of risk assessment;  
i. Special requirements for the handling, transportation and storage of LMOs as well as 
packaging and labeling;  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 27 - 
 
  j. Copies of research reports related to LMO (Results, supported by relevant information 
and data, which confirm that the characteristics of the food are not different from their conventional one); 
k. Conditions and terms of placing on the market of LMO or products derived from it, 
including special treatment and handling; 
l. Information on detection and identification methods of LMO;  
m. Other documents required according to the examination of the potential adverse effects 
of LMOs on the environment, biodiversity an d human health, a form of an expert report 
and its completion procedures 
The Ministry shall, within 90 days from receipt of the application, decide on registration of said 
living modified organisms and their entry in the register.  
The Ministry shall, within 10 days from receipt of the application, deliver the application and the 
appended information to the Commission for examination. The Commission shall examine the potential adverse effects of living modified organisms on the 
environment, biodiversity and human health and make a respective expert’s opinion concerning 
expediency of performing the activity associat ed with the use of LMOs and assigns a safety 
level/risk class thereto.  
The Commission shall prepare the respective opinion and submit it to the Ministry within 30 
working days from receipt of the task.  
3.151 p.66  
Georgia signed several RTAs covering SPS-relate d issues. In accordance with Chapter 4 of the 
DCFTA, both the EU and Georgia are committed to: ensuring full transparency of SPS measures; 
approximating the Georgian regulatory system to that of the EU; further implementing the principles of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of the 
WTO; and conducting other actions related to trade and to the protection of public, animal and 
plant health. In accordance with the FTA with Turkey, both parties agree: not to apply their SPS regulations as an arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade 
between them; apply their SPS measures within  the rules and procedures of the GATT 1994 and 
the other relevant WTO agreements.  
Question 1:  Please clarify the import conditions for agricultural goods under the FTA with Turkey?  
Answer: 
There are no different import conditions for ag ricultural goods under the FTA with Turkey.  
Question 2:  Please explain in details how the traceability for agricultural products is provided in 
Georgia? 
Answer: 
Traceability for agricultural products is prov ided in Georgia by the following regulations: 
Governmental Resolution: Resolution of the Government of Georgia 2015 10 November N577 on 
the traceability requirements. Based on: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 931/2011 
of 19 September 2011 on the traceability requiremen ts set by Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council; Go vernmental Resolution #441 on Additional 
Requirements for Food Labelling. 
Phytosanitary border control includes electronic common entry phytosanitary document. 
The electronic pre-notification acts of phytosanitary (common entry phytosanitary document) control have been developed, which consists of two parts: 
 The first part – “pre-notification” is filled by the owner of goods; 
  The second part – “The decision on cons ignment” is filled by authorized person 
The data received from electronic pre-notification acts are accessible also for NFA. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 28 - 
 
  QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GOVERN MENT REPORT (WT/TPR/G/328) 
 2 RECENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS AND REFORMS 2.2 Agriculture 
2.16. p.5 
 Pursuant to the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), Georgia has enacted, with the 
intent of approximation with EU legislation, numerous legislative amendments in the Food/Feed 
Safety, Veterinary and Plant Protection Code of Georgia as well as enacted crucial new legislature in order to improve food/feed safety and consum er protection, including mandatory labeling of 
genetically modified products (GMO), identificati on and registration systems for cattle, ovine and 
caprine animals as well as their habitats, new rules regarding the official control over the 
production/processing of products of animal origin, etc. 
Question 1: Please clarify what new legal acts were ad opted in order to ensure food and feed 
safety and consumers’ protection? 
Answer: 
In 2015 following Legal acts were adopted: 
In veterinary field  
 Governmental Decree No. 348, on “implementing of preventive-quarantine measures on 
Animal transmitted deceases “which establishes rules on fighting against animal decease (Newcastle decease, swine African and classical plague). (Adopted on: 14th of July, 2015). 
Based on following EU legal acts – 1. Council Directive 2001/89/EC of 23 October 2001 on 
Community measures for the control of classical swine fever. 2. Council Directive 92/66/EEC of 14 July 1992 introducing Community measures for the control of Newcastle disease. 3. 
Council Directive 2002/60/EC of 27 June 2002 laying down specific provisions for the control 
of African swine fever and amending Directive 92/119/EEC as regards Teschen disease and African swine fever. 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N 228 of 27 may 2015 on ovine and caprine Animal 
Identification/Registration and Registration of Their Holdings/Temporary Holdings Rule.  
 Based on following EU legal acts – 1. Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 of 17 December 
2003 establishing a system for the identifica tion and registration of ovine and caprine 
animals and amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Directives 92/102/EEC and 
64/432/EEC; 2. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1505/2006 of 11 October 2006 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 21/ 2004 as regards the minimum level of checks 
to be carried out in relation to the identifi cation and registration of ovine and caprine 
animals. 3.  
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N764 of 31 December 2014 on Bovine Animal 
Identification/Registration and Registration of Their Holdings/Temporary Holdings Rule. 
Based on following EU legal acts – 1. Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and 
repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97. 2. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1082/2003 
of 23 June 2003 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 
1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the minimum level of 
controls to be carried out in the framewor k of the system for the identification and 
registration of bovine animals. 3. Commission  Regulation (EC) No 911/2004 of 29 April 2004 
implementing Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
as regards eartags, passports and holding re gisters; 4. Commission Regulation (EC) No 
494/98 of 27 February 1998 laying down detaile d rules for the implementation of Council 
Regulation (EC) No 820/97 as regards the application of minimum administrative sanctions in the framework of the system for the identifi cation and registration of bovine animals. 
In Food Safety Field 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N55 of 12 February 2015 on Approval Special 
Official Control Rule of Animal Origin Food . Based on Regulation (EC) No. 854/2004 of the WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 29 - 
 
  European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules for the 
organization of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia No. 578 of 10 November 2015 on implementing 
measures for the Rapid alert system for food  and feed. Based on: Commission Regulation 
(EU) No. 16/2011 of 10 January 2011 laying down implementing measures for the Rapid 
alert system for food and feed; 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia N419 December 29, 2010 on the Approval of the 
General Plan For Crisis Management in the field of the Safety of Food and Feed (amended in 2015); 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia 2015 10  November N581 on microbiological criteria 
for foodstuffs; based on: Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 
on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs; 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia 2015 10 November No. 577 on the traceability 
requirements. Based on: Commission Implemen ting Regulation (EU) No. 931/2011 of 19 
September 2011 on the traceab ility requirements set by Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 of 
the European Parliament and of the Council; 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia 2015 9 November N567 on maximum levels for 
certain contaminants in foodstuffs. Based on: 1. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 of 19 December 2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs. 2. Council Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 of 8 Febr uary 1993 laying down Community procedures 
for contaminants in food 
 In phytosanitary field 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia No. 8 of 26 January 2015 on Approval Rules for the 
Notification of Incompliance of Consignments to the Phytosanitary Requirements During the 
International Shipments. Based on: Commission Directive 94/3/EC of 21 January 1994 establishing a procedure for the notification of interception of a consignment or a harmful 
organism from third countries and presenting an imminent phytosanitary danger. 
 Resolution of the Government of Georgia No. 90 of 27 April 2015 on Approval the Conditions 
Under Which Certain Harmful Organisms, Plants, Plant Products and Other Objects May be Introduced into Georgia for Trial or Scientific Purposes and for Work on Varietal Selections. 
Based on: Commission Directive 2008/61/EC of 17 June 2008 establishing the conditions 
under which certain harmful organisms, plants, plant products and other objects listed in Annexes I to V to Council Directive 2000/29/EC may be introduced into or moved within the 
Community or certain protected zones thereof, for trial or scientific purposes and for work 
on varietal selections.  
Question 2:  Please indicate the labelling threshold for food and feed with adventitious presence of 
GM material (in %), if any? 
Answer: 
According to the Law of Georgia on Labeling of  Live GMO and products derived from live GMO 
intended for human consumption or for feed purposes, labelling threshold for food and feed with 
adventitious presence of GM material in % is equal to 0.9%. 
Question 3:  Please elaborate on new rules regarding the official control over the 
production/processing of products of animal origin . To what extent are they consistent with the 
relevant EU legislation?  
Answer: 
Resolution of the Government of Georgia N55 of 12  February 2015 on Approval of Special Official 
Control Rule of Animal Origin Food is mainly approximated to the relevant EU legal act (Regulation 
(EC) No 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 30 - 
 
  specific rules for the organization of official controls on products of animal origin intended for 
human consumption).  
 
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 31 - 
 
  TURKEY 
THE SECRETARIAT REPORT  
 
2.3.1 Trade and Investment Regime – Economic and Trade Policy Objectives – Trade 
Aspects of Georgia 2020 , pp. 27, para. 2.12. 
It is highlighted in the Secretariat Report that “ Government can protect the interests of national 
exporters in international markets, develop national quality infrastructure in accordance with 
international requirements and seek to reduce technical barriers to international trade. ” 
 Considering the fact that same statement takes part on page 29 of “ Social-economic Development 
Strategy of Georgia – GEORGIA 2020 ” document, could Georgia kindly elaborate on the 
anticipated steps that will be taken by the Georgian Government for protecting the interests of 
national exporters? 
Answer: 
Ultimately, export expansion and diversification is up to the private sector. Government can be an 
effective partner for businesses seeking to identify export markets and evaluate existing requirements. Government can deepen and develop international trade relations with existing and 
potential trade partners, protect the interests of national exporters in international markets, 
develop national quality infrastructure in accordance with international requirements and seek to reduce technical barriers to international trade. Government can also provide exporters with information on export markets and support the development of transport and logistical 
infrastructure. 
3.2.1 Customs procedures, customs valuation, and rules of origin, pp. 37, para. 3.14. 
It is mentioned in the Secretariat Report that “Simplified customs procedures are available for 
goods of "Golden List" members. These goods may be released directly at the border, or may be 
transported to the warehouse of this importer. Payment of customs duty, VAT and excise may be 
deferred for 30 days for the importation of these goods, and the supporting documents to the 
customs declaration may be presented in electronic version when all the paper documents are kept 
at the declarer's premises.”  
 Considering Georgia’s efforts regarding the facilitation of custom procedures, it is understood that 
the “Golden List” members are also credible traders encountering custom procedures at the 
minimum level. In this context, could Georgia kindly give information if there is an inspection mechanism applicable for “Golden List” members?  
Answer: 
Customs Risk Division of the Customs Department of Revenue Service (RS) is responsible for 
evaluation of potential “Golden List” candidates. Any trader applying to become a “Golden List” 
member should be in good standing with the Revenue Service and have history of compliance. The 
Risk Division Unit evaluates candidate’s activities for the previous calendar year prior to membership application, taking into account Customs violations (specifically customs violations under Article 289 of the Tax Code of Georgia) an d financial solvency (including the absence of 
ongoing tax arrears). Specifically, “Golden List” candidate should comply with following criteria: 
a. Previous continuous 12 months period from the first date of the month when the 
membershi application is made: 
 Customs value of goods declared in import an d/or export – not less than 5,0 million GEL 
 Amount of customs duties – not less than  900 000 GEL, or high number of customs 
declarations for import and/or export customs procedures – not less than 100 
b. As of the first date of a month from when th e application to the Revenue Service is made 
by a candidate: 
 For the provisions set by 4, 5, 10, 11, 19- 21 paragraphs of the article 289 of the Tax 
code of Georgia: WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 32 - 
 
   Absence of enforced court decision on imposing of liability, or 
 12 months period has lapsed after the detection of the offence 
 Registration as an VAT payer 
 Absence of tax debt 
“Golden List” members benefit from an option to  have goods cleared directly at the Customs 
Crossing Point or have them transported to a warehouse (belonging or leased out exclusively to the “Golden List” member). 
Payment of customs duty, VAT and excise may be deferred for up to 30 days, and the supporting 
documents to the declaration can be presented in electronic version when all the paper documents kept at the declarer's premises. Customs legislation of Georgia currently does not provide for additional simplifications in control 
procedures towards “Golden List” members, although as of September 1 2014 GRS is actively 
engaged in the implementation of Authorized Econ omic Operator institution as foreseen under the 
Annex XIII of the Association Agreement between EU and Georgia. Implementation of AEO is 
intended to enter into force by the end of 2018 bringing with itself all relevant simplifications 
applicable to the status. 
3.2.2.3 Trade Policies and Practices by Measur e – Measures Directly Affecting Imports – 
Tariffs – Tariff Exemptions and Reductions, pp. 43, para. 3.32. 
It is underlined in the Secretariat Report that “ Customs tariff is exempted on, inter alia: 
…imports of appliances and equipment, means of transport, spare parts and materials designated 
for oil and gas transactions under the Law of Georgia on Oil and Gas; ” 
 
Given the provision on Article 13(5)(g)(f) of th e Law of Georgia on Oil and Gas, could Georgia 
kindly provide a list indicating the products in HS Code which are exempt from customs tariff? 
Answer: 
Georgian legislation does not provide the list of specific products exempt from customs duties for 
the purposes of Article 13(5)(g)(f) of the Law of  Georgia on Oil and Gas. Any goods that are 
required for the implementation of activates fore seen in the aforementioned Law are exempt from 
duties. 
3.2.6.2.3 Administration of banned or qualified suppliers, pp. 51 para. 3.69. 
It is mentioned in the Secretariat Report that “The SPA also maintains and publishes on its official 
website a list of qualified suppliers – a "white list". These suppliers must meet the following 
technical, financial, and qualification requirements: 
 no registration in the black list during the one year prior to the date of requesting white 
list registration; 
 no insolvency proceedings; 
 at least one positive reference from a procuring organization on the supplier's 
performance of contractual obligations over the past three years. The value of such 
contract has to be at least GEL 50,000; 
 no criminal proceedings: all individuals having the authority to represent or manage the 
supplier have no criminal record, or have had the criminal record lifted or cleared; 
 at least GEL 1 million total turnover for the 3 years prior to the date of requesting white 
list registration; 
 no debt to the State Budget as of the time of requesting white list registration, and an 
updated extract from the Registry of Entrep reneurs and Non-Commercial Legal Entities.” 
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 33 - 
 
  Could Georgia kindly give information whether there is any different treatment to the tenders on 
the White List? 
Answer: 
Whitelisted registered supplier:  
a. is exempted from the obligation of submitting qualification data certifying 
documentation, in simplified electronic tender, electronic tender and design contest, in spite whether tender/design contest documentation foresees submission of qualification 
certifying documentation or not; 
b. In case of advance payment, it will submit to the procuring entity the guarantee for the 
half of the amount of advance payment amount, pursuant to the contract terms; 
c. In case of demand of contract performance guarantee, it will submit to the procuring 
entity the half amount of contract guarantee; 
 
White List registered supplier may be fully exempted from the obligation to submit contract 
performance guarantee.  
3.4.1 Legal framework and support for businesses, pp. 55 para. 3.96. 
It is mentioned in the Secretariat Report that “A Research and Innovation Council was created, 
and is chaired by the prime minister. It consists of all line ministers, scientists and private sector 
representatives. The GITA functions as the secretary of the Council. Currently the Council is drafting a law on innovation and is amending the existing laws related to, inter alia, innovation, creation of businesses, and supporting SMEs.”  
 
Could Georgia kindly give information about the role of Research and Innovation Council for creation of business and supporting SMEs? 
Answer: 
R e s e a r c h  a n d  I n n o v a t i o n  C o u n c i l  w a s  c r e a t e d  i n  F e b r u a r y  2 0 1 5 ,  a s  a  p a r t  o f  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  
vision to create knowledge-based economy. The Council is main coordinating and strategic 
developing body of Government Science and Inno vation Policy. The Council is chaired by Prime 
Minister and consists of all economic block Ministers, Scientists and Private Sector Representatives. Georgia’s Innovation and Technology Agency represents secretary of the Council. The Council is defining Government policy towards innovation, start-up and creative economy development, as 
well as creating supportive tools for innovative SMEs. The Council is now preparing National 
Innovation Strategy and Regulatory Framework Package for Innovation, which will be submitted to the Parliament by the end of February 2016 for further adoption and implementation.  
The Council has four working groups: 1) Regulatory Framework – to incentivize innovative 
businesses and provide access to finance for them; 2) Innovation Infrastructure Development – to support entrepreneurship, research commercialization and innovation; 3) Education, Skills and 
Science working group; 4) Information Society Development and Innovation Awareness Raising 
working group.  
3.1 Introduction, pp. 35, para. 20 
1.2.  It is expressed in the report that “The  G ove rnme nt i s  aware that i n ord er to i nc re as e the 
Export potential of agriculture, SPS systems need to be developed in accordance with 
international/European norms.”  
4.1.1.3.1 Border Measures, pp. 82, para. 4.19 and 4.23. 
It is mentioned under paragraph 4.19 that  “Imports of agricultural products are subject only to 
tariffs and SPS measures”  and under paragraph 4.23 that “The authorities stated that the 
Government is implementing programmes to approximate its legislation with that of the EU over 
the next 10-15 years.”  
 Apart from SPS measures, could Georgia elaborat e whether it conducts “commercial/marketing 
quality” measures for imported and/or exported agricultural products; it plans to approximate its 
legislation with that of the EU, including the legislation that govern commercial/marketing quality 
controls for agricultural produce at import/export stage; and it plans to completely or partially WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 34 - 
 
  harmonize the Commission Regulation (EU) 1308/ 2013 and Commission Implementing Regulation 
(EU) No 532/2011 in respect to fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors? 
Answer: 
The approximation program does not cover the mentioned regulations. Marketing standards are 
being developed in accordance with the requirem ents of the international and EU standards.  
THE GOVERNMENT REPORT 
 
2.9 Tax and Customs, pp. 10, para. 2.53. 
It is stated in the Government Report that, “Since the last trade policy review of 2009 there were a 
number of fundamental changes in the regulatory  framework governing customs and taxes. In 
2011 a new Tax Code entered into force, unifying for the first time both the Tax and the Customs 
legislation into a single legal act. This new legislation was envisioned with a strong emphasis on 
transparency, coherence, trade facilitation and ease of understanding.”  
Could Georgia kindly give further information about the enforcement of the Tax Code on custom 
issues considering the coordination of autonomous republics and central government? 
Answer: 
Georgia Revenue Service (GRS) is a Legal Entity of  Public Law under the Ministry of Finance of 
Georgia exercising customs jurisdiction on the entire territory of Georgia including the autonomous republics. Customs Department is a structural unit of GRS tasked with the performance of customs supervision and control. Department has no regional  sub-division and is represented at respective 
Customs Crossing Points and Customs Clearance Zones in the Autonomous Republic of Adjara, 
Georgia. Centralised nature of the Department does not require a separate coordination scheme and is carried out seamlessly within the body. Please note that currently there are no Customs 
Crossing Points or Customs Clearance Zones in Georgia's regions of Abkhazia (Autonomous 
Republic) and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia (former Autonomous District) over which the Government of Georgia does not exercise effective control. Economic activity taking place in the 
occupied territories are subject to “Law of  Georgia on Occupied Territories” (please 
see: https://matsne.gov.ge/en/document/view/19132 ).  
2.13 Main Trade Agreements, pp. 12, para. 2.73 and 2.74. 
It is stated in the Government Report that, (pg. 12, para. 2.73) “In November 2014, EFTA 
(Switzerland, Norway, Island and Lichtenstein) expr essed its intention to start negotiations on a 
free trade agreement with Georgia. The first round of negotiations was held in September 2015, the whole process of negotiations will last approximately one year.” 
 
It is further stated in the Government Report that (pg. 12, para. 2.73) “It is envisaged to start free 
trade negotiations with China in the beginning of 2016.The Joint Feasibility Study on Georgia-
China possible free trade agreement was finalized in August 2015. The study concludes that FTA 
will result in intensification of bilateral trad e and will benefit and promote the development of 
industries in both countries.”  
Firstly, could Georgia kindly provide further in formation about the abovementioned negotiations? 
How deep and comprehensive will they be and whic h areas are expected to be covered in these 
agreements?  
Answer: 
The second round of free trade agreement negoti ations between EFTA and Georgia was held in 
December 2015. The whole process of negotiations is planned to be concluded in the first half of 
2016. Free trade agreement will cover following areas: trade in goods and services, 
investment/establishment, trade remedies, comp etition, trade and sustainable development, 
government procurement, rules of origin, trade facilitation, intellectual property rights, SPS, TBT and dispute settlement.  
 
Regarding agreement between China and Georgia, the actual negotiations on the FTA has not 
started yet. FTA will definitely cover trade in good s and services, other areas of coverage will be 
defined during negotiations. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 35 - 
 
  Secondly, it is known that Georgia has recently re quested for accession to the Regional Convention 
on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of or igin (PEM Convention) that includes Participants 
in the Barcelona Process (MEDs) and Participants in the EUs Stabilisation and Association Process (Western Balkans) along with the EU and EFTA states. According to the Convention, the Parties 
shall make linkages to the Convention in rules of origin Protocols of their FTAs between each other 
in order to enable the Convention to be implemen ted. Within this framework, could Georgia kindly 
provide information about any prospects for signing FTAs with the other Parties of the Convention? 
Answer: 
At this stage, the issue of starting negotiations on Free Trade Agreements with the other Parties of 
the Convention is not considered by the Government of Georgia.  
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 36 - 
 
  CHINA 
Part I. Questions based on Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/328) 
Page 30, Para 2.31-2.32 
2.31 After six rounds of negotiations as part of the EU-Georgia Association Agreement, Georgia 
concluded negotiations with the EU on the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement 
(DCFTA) in July 2013. In June 2014, Georgia signed the Association Agreement with the European Union, reaching an important milestone under the EU Eastern Partnership programme. The 
Agreement marks years of cooperation between Tbilisi and Brussels under the Eastern Partnership 
program. It envisages the gradual improvements needed in areas such as trade, environment, 
agriculture, tourism, energy, transport, and education to bring Georgia in line with EU standards. 
Overall, the process is focused on democracy and the rule of law, human rights, good governance 
and economic development.  
2.32 The DCFTA provisionally came into force on  1 September 2014, enabling Georgia to export 
duty-free to the EU. Under the Generalized Sy stem of Preferences (GSP+), Georgia already 
enjoyed low or zero tariffs for two-thirds of its exports to the EU. However, certain regulations on 
Georgian products will remain; one agricultural pr oduct, garlic, will be duty-free but subject to a 
quota.  
Question 1: 
Please provide more details of the DCFTA. For example for the two sides respectively, how many 
phasing out stages are provided? How long will it take to fully realize tariff elimination? And what’s 
the percentage of tariff headings covered by each of the above phasing out stages? 
Besides DCFTA, what other contents does the A ssociation Agreement between Georgia and the EU 
cover? 
What economic benefits has DCFTA generated for Georgia since its provisional implementation on 
1 September 2014? 
Answer: 
No phasing out stages are envisaged by the DCFTA. After DCFTA came into force on 1 September 
2014 from EU side tariffs were eliminated for al l products except garlic, for which a duty-free 
tariff-rate quota is established. Also, several products are subject to Entry price (28 categories of products; 0.3% of total products) and anti-circu mvention mechanism (277 categories of products; 
3% of total products). Georgia has fully liberalized import tariffs since the entry into force of the 
agreement. Besides the DCFTA, AA covers Democratic principl es, human rights, political dialogue and reform, 
cooperation in the field of foreign and security policy, economic cooperation, other cooperation 
policies (transport, energy, environment, climate action, company law, accounting and auditing 
and corporate governance, financial service), financial assistance, anti-fraud and control 
provisions. 
Regardless the fact that in January- November 2015  Georgian total export decreased thanks to the 
DCFTA Georgia’s export to EU increased by 6%.  
Page 31, Para 2.33-2.34 
2.33 The DCFTA promises to enhance Georgia's trad e prospects and to boost economic growth by 
bringing its legislation closer to that of the EU. It will also remove the existing barriers to trade of goods and services with the EU. The DCFTA covers trade in goods, including tariff elimination, provides for further opening of the services mark et and improvement of establishment conditions 
for investors. It contains provisions on the facilitation of customs procedures, on anti-fraud 
measures and trade defence instruments. A bilateral dispute settlement procedure is envisaged to solve issues in an expeditious manner. The DCFTA also sets a path for further reforms in trade-
related policies, such as hygiene standards for agriculture products, the approximation of 
regulations for industrial products, enforcement of intellectual property rights at the border, rules on public procurement and approximation to EU rules in the services area.  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 37 - 
 
 2.34. Moreover, Georgian products will have to meet certain EU requirements not only for export, 
but also when consumed within the country. This marks the beginning of a lengthy process to improve sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards, inte llectual property rights protection, competition, 
technical regulations on industrial products, and customs and trade facilitation; this process will 
involve short- to medium-term costs. The Government has elaborated a DCFTA implementation 
action plan for 2014-17. 
Question 2: 
Compared with its WTO commitments, what ne w liberalizing measures for services and 
establishment of foreign investment presence has Georgia committed in the DCFTA? 
Please elaborate on the EU requirements needed to be met when Georgian products are consumed 
within the country. 
Answer: 
Regarding the establishment, compared with  its WTO commitments, Georgia additionally 
committed in several subsectors under Business Se rvices, Communication Services, Environmental 
Services and under Transport Services. See more details at: 
http://www.economy.ge/uploads/dcf ta/teqsti_danarti/ENG__XIV_1.pdf .  
Please elaborate on the EU requirements needed to be met when Georgian products are consumed 
within the country. 
Answer: 
DCFTA envisages gradual legal approximation with relevant EU legislation. Legal approximation 
implies that new requirements in approximated nati onal laws will apply to the products produced 
for domestic consumption as well as to the products for export. 
Page 31, Para 2.37 
2.37 Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS): In  2009, Georgia terminated its membership of 
the CIS organization, while maintaining its right to remain a party to the CIS free trade area 
arrangements and the bilateral agreements. Georgia has eight bilateral FTAs with: Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, the Republic of Moldova, Uzbekistan and the 
Russian Federation (though trade has occasionally been restricted by the Russian Government). 
The bilateral agreements provide for duty-free trade in industrial and agricultural goods but do not 
cover trade in services, investment or government procurement. In 2014, the CIS countries accounted for just over half of Georgia's exports and a quarter of imports.  
Question 3: 
How well are the eight bilateral FTAs with CIS states functioning? Does Georgia have any plans to 
expand the coverage of these FTAs to services or investment? 
Answer: 
All FTAs with CIS countries are functioning and implemented in accordance with the established 
legal bases. CIS countries have a significant share in Georgia’s total trade turnover, which in 2014 
amounted to 31% of total trade turnover. At this stage the coverage of services or investment in 
these FTAs is not under consideration.  
Page 32, Para 2.45 
2.45. National treatment is applied to all invest ors and all sectors of the Georgian economy are 
open for foreign investment. The legislation lists a number of exceptions concerning the ban on 
investment in nuclear and chemical weapons…and import narcotics or psychoactive drugs for medical purposes. 
Question 4 : 
Please specify the definition of national treatment mentioned above, namely, whether there are 
any special treatments for foreign investors different from domestic investors in establishment, 
obtaining, expansion, management, operation, sale or other investment disposal, whether 
examination and approval is needed when foreign investors setup enterprises in all non-prohibited sectors, whether foreign-invested enterprises ar e subject to any equity limit, or subject to a 
system of regular reporting during their operation. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 38 - 
 
  Answer: 
At this stage, there are two main active legal acts, which determine ground for the implementation 
of both foreign and local investments in the territory of Georgia: Law of Georgia on Promotion and Guarantees of Investment Activity and Law of Georgia on State Support for Investments. 
According to the Georgian legislation, including both mentioned legal acts, foreign investors are 
treated same way as Georgian investors. Therefore, Georgian legislation does not define any special treatment, limits or requirements for fore ign investors different from domestic investors.  
Page 34, Para 2.53 
2.53 Georgian investment law allows disputes between a foreign investor and a governmental 
body to be resolved in Georgian courts or at the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), unless a different method of dispute settlement is agreed upon 
between the parties. The Georgian Government in principle agrees to accept binding international 
arbitration of investment disputes between foreign investors and the State. The Ministry of Justice 
oversees the Government’s interests in arbitratio ns between the State and private investors. Apart 
from this, Georgia tries to promote alternative means of dispute resolution, especially international 
commercial arbitration, mediation and court-ordered mediation. Georgia has recently adopted the changes to the Law on Arbitration, which make the law more consistent with the internationally 
recognized standards.  
Question 5 ： 
Please elaborate on the changes made to the Law on Arbitration to be consistent with the 
internationally recognized standards, and how the function of dispute settlement has been 
improved. 
Answer: 
For the purpose of increasing the credibility and pr omoting the use of arbitration as an alternative 
mechanism for dispute resolution, as well as for creating a favorable environment for the development of this institution through the adoption of legal framework consistent with 
internationally recognized standards, several amendments have been made to the Law on 
Arbitration. According to the latest changes to the Arbitration Law, parties can apply to both 
institutional and ad hoc arbitration for the settlement of their disputes. Before the amendments, although nothing would prevent parties from referri ng the case to ad hoc arbitration, the law did 
not explicitly recognized such possibility and only referred to the permanent arbitration 
institutions. This way, Georgian arbitration law now permits and recognizes ad hoc  arbitration, and 
thus aligns with the Model Law. This amendment gives the parties the flexibility to resolve their 
disputes through any possible type of arbitration. 
 The Bill of Amendments abolished strict requiremen ts with respect to the form of the arbitration 
agreement. The law no longer requires natural persons to certify the arbitration agreement with 
signatures of their lawyers or a notary. Consequently, individuals will avoid legal or notarial service expenses and make it less burdensome for the natural persons to conclude arbitration agreements. The new amendments have also streng thened the obligation of the court to enforce 
arbitral agreements; in particular, in case of existence of valid arbitration agreement court will 
terminate proceedings and direct parties to arbitr ation in all cases, while before the amendments 
this would only be possible if the arbitral proc eedings had already been commenced on the same 
matter. In addition, the grounds for the annulment and refusal to enforce final arbitral award have 
been specified to bring them more into compliance with the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. 
 
The decision of the government to create strong  and modern legislative framework is clearly an 
encouraging progress in shaping Georgia as a pro-arbitration jurisdiction. 
Please provide details on the investor-state disp ute settlement mechanism in Georgian courts and 
the members of arbitral tribunal. 
Answer: 
Law of Georgia on Promotion and Guarantees of Investment Activity provides for the Georgian 
courts as an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism, unless the parties to the dispute agree WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 39 - 
 
 to resolve their dispute via arbitration. Hence, Georgian legislation recognizes the primacy of 
parties’ agreement and encourages them to apply arbitration as a mean of dispute resolution.   Georgia continues to conclude new Bilateral Investme nt Treaties with its trading partners. Recently 
the Bilateral Investment Treaty was concluded with Swiss Confederation. Also, the Bilateral 
Investment Treaty with the Republic of Turkey has been substantively revised. Currently Georgia 
is involved in the negotiation of new Bilateral Investment Treaties with several countries. 
Page 68, Para 3.155-3.158 
3.155 Two by-laws of the Law on Competition were adopted before 1 September 2014: the Small 
Amounts of Individual State Aid and General Proced ure for Granting State Aid, which, inter alia, 
ensures non-discrimination and transparency of the procedures for granting state aid; and the 
Exceptions from Prohibition of Competition Restrictive Agreements, which defines exemptions from 
the agreements that restrict competition in the relevant markets.  
3.158. The Competition Agency has become a memb er of the International Competition Network 
(ICN) since 29 October 2014. According to the authorities, Georgia has become a member of the 
Sofia Competition Forum (SCF), whose members are: Albania; Bosnia-Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Kosovo; Montenegro; the Former Yugosl av Republic of Macedonia; Serbia; and the 
UNCTAD. 
Question 6 ： 
Please introduce the legal system relating to M&A review in Georgia. 
Answer: 
Georgian Law on Competition and Order №30/09-4 of the Chairman of Competition Agency “On 
approval the procedure on submission and consideration of notification about concentration” of 
September 30, 2014.  
Please introduce the international cooperation of Georgia’s Competition Agency in the review of 
M&A cases. 
Answer:  
Georgian Competition Agency actively cooperates with international organizations and foreign 
competition authorities in order to share their best practice.  
Agency is involved in ICN’s Merger Working Group and is participating in all teleconferences 
concerning the M&A issues.  
Page 69, Para 3.159 
3.159. The Competition Agency completed investigations of the following five cases. 
Question 7 ： 
Since the last trade policy review, how many M&A cases has Georgia reviewed? 
Answer: 
Since last review the Competition Agency concluded 2 Merger Cases. Page 94, Para 4.91 
4.91 As noted in the previous review, Georgia t ook GATS commitments in 119 out of 160 services 
sectors. It scheduled commitments in a large number of sectors, making full commitments in most 
of them, though mode 4 remains largely "unb ound". Under the GATS, Georgia has scheduled 
horizontal market access exemptions in relation to privatization and mode 4 for persons 
responsible for establishment of a commercial presence, salespersons and intra- corporate 
transferees. Under national treatment, Georgia has horizontal reservations on subsidies (modes 1, 
2 and 3), and real estate (mode 3). The other hori zontal reservation listed by Georgia under the 
GATS refers to movement of natural persons (mode 4).  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 40 - 
 
  Question 8 ： 
What specific commitments has Georgia made regarding trade in services in the modes of 
commercial presence and movement of natural persons in the sector of traditional Chinese 
medicine in Georgia? If not, is there a timetable for promotion? 
Answer: 
For Health Related and Social Services Georgia has undertaken full commitments under 
Management and operation by contract of hospital and healthcare facilities on a "for fee “basis" 
(CPC 931),Other Human Health Services (CPC 931 9, other than 93191) and Social Services (CPC 
933). There is no timetable for promotion. 
Part II. Questions based on Policy Statement by Georgia (WT/TPR/G/328) 
Page 3, Para 1.1 
1.1. Trade liberalization continues to be one of the key objectives on Georgia’s economic policy 
agenda. In the reporting period Georgia undertook  a number of reform initiatives targeted at 
streamlining, liberalization and simplification of trade regulations and their implementation. 
Chart 3.2 Average applied MFN and bound tariff rates, by HS section, 2009 and 2015 
From Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/328) 
0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%16%
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2101   Live animals & products        
02   Vegetable products03   Fats & oils      
04   Prepared food, etc.
05   Mineral products06   Chemicals & products07   Plastic & rubber
08   Hides & skins09   Wood & articles
10   Pulp, paper, etc.
11   Textiles & articles12   Footwear, headgear13   Articles of stone
14   Precious stones, etc.15   Base metals and products
16   Machinery
17   Transport equipment18   Precision instruments19   Arms & ammunition
20   Miscellaneous manuf.21   Works of art, etc.MFN 2009 Bound
Average applied rate
2009 (1.6%)
2015 (2.0%)Average bound rate
(7.6%)MFN 2015
 
Note: Calculations include AVEs for non-ad valorem rates, as available.  
Source: WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data provided by the authorities. 
Question 9 ： 
In paragraph 1.1, the Georgian government claims that trade liberalization continues to be one of 
the key objectives on its economic policy agenda. However, chart 3.2 on page 42 of Report by the 
Secretariat shows that the average applied MFN an d bound tariff rates grew from 1.6% in 2009 to 
2.0% in 2015. Such change seems inconsistent with the trade liberalization direction outlined in the policy statement, please explain on this. 
As chart 3.2 on page 42 of Report by the Secret ariat shows, from 2009 to 2015, Georgia adjusted 
the tariff rates of section 7 (rubber, plastic products), section 15 (basic metals and related products) and section 17 (transportation equipment) in the HS commodity group from 0% to 1%-
2.5%, witnessing the largest growth margin of tari ff rates in due course. And these 3 sections are 
where Chinese goods enjoy relatively big growth po tential in exporting to Georgia. Please explain 
the reason for increasing the tariff rates of the three commodities sections.  
Answer: 
From 2009 to 2015, Georgia adjusted the tariff rates of the section 7 (rubber, plastic products), 
the section 15 (basic metals and related products) but not for the section 17 (transportation WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 41 - 
 
 equipment). According to the Tax Code there is customs tariff only regarding Group 87 which had 
not been changed in the period 2009-2015. 
Page 3, Para 1.6 
1.6. The objectives of trade and investment policies are well reflected in the socio-economic 
development strategy "Georgia 2020", which ou tlines the social and economic development 
priorities and targets over the period 2014-2020. 
Question 10 ： 
Please introduce the main contents on attracting foreign investment in "Georgia 2020".  
Answer: 
The Government of Georgia will ensure the transp arency of public administration and guarantee 
equal opportunities in terms of starting and doing business for all; it is the main guarantor of 
property rights. The Government of Georgia will also ensure the effective implementation of reforms through the 
formulation and adoption of relevant legislative initiatives and administrative improvements, 
which, in its turn, will support efforts to increase private sector’s competitiveness and support inclusive economic growth. 
The Government’s tax policy will further ensure the creation of an attractive and stable tax 
environment for the private sector and foreign investments as well as for launching and developing businesses. As it is introduced in the Strategy 2020, Government of Georgia will work in the following key 
directions: 
 Strengthening the protection of property rights 
 Government support for development of entrepreneurship 
 Strengthening mechanisms for the efficient resolution of commercial disputes 
 Improving investment legislation 
 Improving legislative and institutional mechanisms for free market competition 
 Improving mechanisms for the regulation of  bankruptcy and the closing of businesses 
 Improving public services and enhancing th e transparency of public administration 
 Ensuring flexible regulations 
Page 10, Para 2.55 
2.55 Institutional reforms saw further streamlining of customs procedures with a decrease in the 
number of government agencies directly responsibl e for the control of goods at the border from 8 
to 2. While the number of mandatory documents requ ired at the border decreased from 4 to 2 (not 
including license and/or permits required for certain types of goods). 
Question 11 ： 
Please introduce the government agencies before and after the streamlining of customs 
procedures, and how their functions have integrated. 
Answer: 
Institutional arrangement related to customs proc edures used to be distributed and very often 
overlapped among the following institutions:  
 Customs Department of the Ministry of Finance of Georgia – used to conduct standard 
customs procedures; 
 Border Police of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia – used to conduct the passport 
control and migration issues; WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 42 - 
 
   Phyto-sanitary Service of the Ministry of Ag riculture of Georgia – used to conduct phyto-
sanitary control and used to provide with import and transit phyto-sanitary permits; 
 Veterinary Service of the Ministry of Agriculture of Georgia - used to conduct veterinary 
control and used to provide with import and transit veterinary permits; 
 Transport Administration of the Ministry of Tr ansport – used to conduct the prevention of 
entrance of outsized cargo or overweighed goods; used to provide with the international conveyance permits; 
 Customs Broker – used to fill in and provide with the summary declaration; 
 Customs Carrier – used to conduct the cargo transportation after the customs control 
procedures; 
 Insurance Company – used to provide with the transportation insurance; 
Currently the border crossing related control is under the supervision of Georgia Revenue Service 
(united tax and Customs Administration of Georgia – Sanitary Phyto-Sanitary Border Control Agency) of the Ministry of Finance of Georgia an d the Patrol Police of the Ministry of Internal 
Affairs of Georgia while Georgia Revenue Service conducts the whole customs procedures including 
sanitary-phyto-sanitary control on the border. 
What mandatory documents are required at the border now? Compared with before, what 
documents are no longer required? 
Answer: 
Since 2010 There are two main mandatory documents required at the border, these are: transport 
document and a commercial invoice. This is a decrease from 54 documents in 2005 and 4 
documents in 2009. Depending on the type of go ods, and when such circumstances arise customs 
are authorized to request presentation of other documents including license and permits, SPS and 
veterinary certificates.  
Page 10, Para 2.56 
2.56. The period saw the introduction of Customs Clearance Zones (CCZ) – centers for customs 
clearance of goods. CCZ procedures cover the whole chain of customs clearance: filling-in 
procedures of customs declaration, issuance of  permits and certificates, clearance of goods, 
commodity expertise, documentary and physical in spection. Moreover, the following services are 
available at CCZ: parking zone, consultation on customs matters, computers with free internet for economic operators, bank services and cafeteria.  Aforementioned procedures are available for 24 
hours a day, 7 days a week. Clearance procedure covers all the goods transported by sea way, 
railway, air way or road way means of transport and commodity operations set by the Georgian legislation: import, export, re-export, transit, temporary import, warehouse, inward processing 
and out-ward processing. 
Question 12 ： 
What’s the proportion of goods cleared in Customs Clearance Zones (CCZ) in national total goods’ 
clearance, and how much time is saved on average for import and export respectively than under normal conditions? 
Answer: 
CCZ-s are owned and operated by state and repres ent the default “normal” procedure of customs 
clearance of goods. It is possible to declare th e goods without the presentation of goods in the 
CCZs. Customs declaration may be filled out using the ASYCUDA or/and ORACLE software, 
customs clearance procedures are carried out at  the border and the goods are released for 
circulation. Customs clearance can also be carried out at a pre-agreed location – goods are transported to a pre-agreed (bet ween Customs and the importer) location while the declaration is 
carried out in the CCZ or through electronic mean s. In case when goods are placed in the “red 
channel” customs examination will be carried out at the pre-agreed location. The average time for WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 43 - 
 
 clearance procedures at CCZ-s is approximately 20 minutes, while before establishing the CCZ-s 
clearance procedures used to take a couple of days and even weeks.  
 
Which agency is responsible for the establis hment, operation and management of CCZ? 
Answer: 
Georgia Revenue Service is the agency responsibl e for establishment, operation and management 
of CCZs in line with the national regulations. 
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 44 - 
 
  BRAZIL 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW - RE PORT BY THE SECRETARIAT 
Summary 
 
« 20. Georgia has continued to develop its national quality infrastructure in accordance with 
international and EU practices. […] The Ministry  of Agriculture is preparing to approximate 
Georgia's regulatory framework to about 350 EU directives/regulations. » 
Question 1: 
Could Georgia please indicate the timeframe envisaged for approximating its regulatory framework to the EU’s SPS directives and regulations? 
Answer: 
Development of Georgian Legislation will be carried out according to EU relevant SPS Legislation in 
timeframe provided for in the draft Legislation Approximation Programme for 2015-2027. More precise information is available on the following website: 
http://www.moa.gov.ge/?menui d=37&lang=1#.VovC44scSUk   
Question 2: 
With respect to regulatory convergence with the EU, could Georgia please elaborate on possible 
changes to SPS measures related to beef, poultry, pork, sugar and coffee? 
Answer: 
Development of Georgian Legislation will be carried out according to EU relevant SPS Legislation in 
timeframe provided for in the draft Legislation Approximation Programme for 2015-2027. More 
precise information is available on the following website: 
http://www.moa.gov.ge/?menui d=37&lang=1#.VovC44scSUk   
« 3.4.2.2 Incentives 
 
3.110. The Government continues to provide incentives, through special taxation regimes, to international financial companies, international companies operating in free industrial zones, and 
to free warehouse companies (Table 3.12). These companies may be exempted from VAT, 
property tax, customs duties, or corporate income tax. »  Question 3: 
Could the Georgian government please indicate the total amount of revenue already foregone or 
not collected concerning such special taxation regimes? 
Answer: 
We do not produce official statistics with that regard. 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW - REPORT BY GEORGIA 
« 2.31. Considering the importance of the tourism sector for Georgia, in 2014 the country started 
preparation of the new Tourism Development Strategy, which outlines the vision of the tourism 
industry until 2025; the document will be finalized in 2015. » 
Question 4: 
Could Georgia please provide further details on it s new Tourism Development Strategy, particularly 
on quantitative and qualitative goals, if available? WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 45 - 
 
 Answer: 
Georgian Tourism Strategy : 
Vision 
By 2025, Georgia will be well known as a premier, year-round, high quality tourism destination, 
centered on its unique cultural and natural heritage, world-class customer service, and timeless 
tradition of hospitality.  Georgia will be at the forefront of tourism competitiveness, through strategic investments in 
infrastructure, education, marketing, and the de velopment of unique Georgian visitor experiences 
that appeal to high-value markets around the globe.  
Tourism will significantly increase its contribution  to Georgian economic growth and development, 
through increases in visitor spending. The focus will be on the quality and diversity of visitor 
arrivals, not total number of visitors.  
Strategic Objectives 
1. Respect, enhance, and protect Georgia’s natural and cultural heritage; 
2. Create unique and authentic visitor experiences centered on those natural and cultural 
assets; 
3. Enhance competitiveness, through delivery of world-class visitor services; 
4. Attract higher spending markets, through increased and more effective marketing and 
promotion; 
5. Expand and enhance Georgia’s ability to collect and analyze tourism data and measure 
industry performance; 
6. Enhance the business environment, to facilitate increased foreign and domestic investment; 
7. Expand public and private sector investment in the tourism sector; 
8. Build partnerships between government, industry, non-governmental organizations, and 
communities that will be needed to achieve all of the above. 
 
Quantitative and qualitative goals 
Component 2015 Forecast 2015 Forecast 
International visitor arrivals 5.8 million 11 million 
International tourism receipts US$1.8 billion US$5.5 billion 
 
Tourism contribution to 
GDP 6% 6.7% 
Average annual number of 
people employed in tourism 180,000 333,564 
Average spending per visitor US$320 US$500 
Average length of stay 4.3 days 5.3 days 
Foreign Direct Investment in 
Tourism US$383 million US$575 
% arrivals from neighboring 
countries 88% 80% 
Ranking in WEF tourism 
competitiveness index 66th 35th 
 
  
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 46 - 
 
  THAILAND 
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT 
 1. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 
 Page 19 - 20 (paragraph 1.31; also on Page 104 paragraph 4.146) 
Question 1: Georgia imported used cars mainly from Japan, USA, and Germany for reconditioning 
and refurbishment, and re-exported to neighbor ing countries (mostly Azerbaijan, Armenia, and 
Kazakhstan). This accounted for the rising share of manufacturing exports from 42% to over 55% and more than doubling exports of motor vehicle from 7% to 18 % of exports. Thailand is a hub of automobiles production and a key exporter in the region. Please give details on Georgia’s import 
regulations for used cars as Thailand has potential to export used cars similar to the case of Japan.  
Answer: 
1.3.  Customs clearance of motor vehicles is carried out by the Service Agency  of the Ministry of 
Internal Affairs of Georgia using a one stop sh op principle. Customs duty rates for passenger 
vehicle referred to in the commodity code 8703 of the Foreign Economic Activity National Commodity Nomenclature is 0.05 GEL for each cubic centimetre of the volume of the vehicles 
engine, plus 5 percent for each year since the production of the said vehicle. Furthermore, 
additional excise tax on passenger vehicle is also calculated according to the table below, factoring in the age (time from the production) of the vehicle as well as engine displa cement of the vehicle: 
 
a) up to 1 year  1 cm³ 1.5 
b) 1 year  1 cm³ 1.5 
c) 2 years  1 cm³ 1.4 
d) 3 years  1 cm³ 1.3 
e) 4 years  1 cm³ 1.2 
f) 5 years  1 cm³ 1 
g) 6 years  1 cm³ 0.7 
h) 7 years  1 cm³ 0.5 
i) 8 years  1 cm³ 0.5 
j) 9 years  1 cm³ 0.5 
k) 10 years  1 cm³ 0.5 
l) 11 years  1 cm³ 0.5 
m) 12 years  1 cm³ 0.5 
n) 13 years  1 cm³ 0.6 
o) 14 years  1 cm³ 0.7 
p) over 14 years  1 cm³ 0.8 
 
 3. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
 
Page 55 (paragraph 3.3.5)  
Question 2.1:  How long can international companies benefit from special taxation regimes? 
Answer: 
Benefits from special taxation regimes are available for the beneficiaries, who fulfil appropriate 
requirements. 
Question 2.2:  Do you have any other non-tax incentives such as work permit, permit to own land 
for international company operating in FIZs? 
Answer: 
Georgian Legislation on Free Industrial Zone stipul ates simplified approach of the License / Permit 
State Regulation: WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 47 - 
 
  According to the resolution of the Government of Georgia , the obligation of licensing and 
permission, on specific activities conducted in FIZ, can be abolished. 
 Simplified procedure for obtaining licenses/permits in the FIZ can be established according 
to the Georgian Law on “Licenses and Permits". 
 According to the government’s relevant regulations, simplified rules are applied for the 
issuance of a construction permit: 
 
 The construction permit for all three stages is issued by the zone administrator authority 
(such as an authority implementing public administration procedures); 
 The Site Development Plan is developed by the FIZ Administrator and is approved in 
accordance with the arrangement with the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable 
Development of Georgia. So, there is no necessity for  introducing the application for 
getting conditions for urban construction. 
 The applicant has the right to develop the complete set of project documents in 
accordance with the Site Development Plan options, and to present them to the 
administrator in order to receive a permit for one phase. Administrative proceedings in this case are operating by the public administrative proceedings. 
 If the applicant can’t find the conditions for urban construction, he/she should apply to 
the Administrator for receiving urban conditions. In this case, the procedure for issuing construction permits is held by the general rule - three stages of permitting the construction. 
Page 66 and 67 (table 3.16 and table 3.17) 
Question 3.1: Georgia’s Law of Competition prescribes the de minimis agreements (of minor 
importance) which are exempted from the application of the law. Please  provide the rationale 
behind this exemption.  
Answer: 
Provisions on Competition restrictive agreements of minor importance (Article 8 of Georgian Law 
on Competition) are formulated in accordance with the relevant EU legislation and judicial practice. 
In particular, it’s based on 2014 communication of the European Commission on competition restrictive agreements of minor importance (COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION - Notice on agreements of minor importance which do not appreciably restrict competition under Article 
101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of th e European Union (De Minimis Notice) and on 
European Court of Justice judgment on Expedia case (C-226/11 – Expedia).  
Question 3.2: The exemption is for three types of agr eements: 1) where aggregate market share 
of the parties to a horizontal agreement does not exceed 10%; 2) where market share of each 
party to a vertical agreement does not exceed 15%; or 3) where it is difficult to classify it as a horizontal or a vertical agreement, and the market share of each party does not exceed 10%. 
Could you explain briefly how Georgia defines scope of a market? That is, when the law indicates 
10% and 15% market shares, how do you determine a market for those numbers? Could you please share with us the methodology of market analysis?  
Answer: 
Georgian Competition Agency similar to EU or US practice defines the relevant market. For the 
detailed information please see the Order № 30/09-3 of the Chairman of  LEPL Competition Agency 
on approval methodological guidelines of market analysis on the following link: 
http://competition.ge/en/page2.php?p=4&m=138.   
Page 69 (paragraph 3.159)  
 
Question 4:  It is indicated that the Competition Authority has completed investigations in five 
cases, where three recommendations were issued. What is the legal status of such 
“recommendations”? Are they considered administrative decrees? Are they legal binding and how WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 48 - 
 
  does the Competition Authority enforce those recommendations? Furthermore, are the 
punishments under the law criminal  or administrative punishment? 
Answer: 
In accordance with the Article 18 of the Georgian Law on Competition in case of competition 
restriction by the state government, government of the autonomous republic or local self-
government authorities, Competition Agency is entitled to submit the justified written conclusion to the relevant authority and recommendations on decisions undertaken by the mentioned authority, 
which is in breach of the law. The authority in question can revoke the unlawful decision and in 
case of non-fulfillment of such demand, submit th e issue to the relevant superior authority or the 
officials. The Competition Agency is entitled to submit to any state and/or local authorities the obligatory proposals and/or recommendations for consideration, to improve competitive 
environment of commodity and service markets of Georgia.  
As for the responsibility, there is no sanction for non fulfilment of the recommendations of the Agency (The only mechanism for enforcement is the appeal to superior authority). In general, in 
case of competition restriction, Georgian legislation provides administrative liability.  
Page 70 (paragraph 3.161)  
Question 5:  The paragraph indicates that the Competitive Authority conducted a survey in 
different areas. Could you please share with us how you conducted those surveys as well as brief 
results of them? Have you used or applied survey outcomes in your consideration of cases? 
Answer: 
Based on the letters of the economic agents, as well as from the Georgian Government, submitted 
to the Competition Agency, the compliance with the competition legislation of the case under 
consideration in relevant service or product markets are studies. Within the mentioned study, there was not found the possible infringement of competition law by concrete economic agents. 
The case concerned the compliance of current legislation with the principles of the competition 
legislation in the listed areas. Agency presented its recommendations in order to improve the competitive environment on the market, which mainly related to the changes in sectoral 
legislation.  
Based on one of the recommendations the Parliament of Georgia has already carried out the relevant changes in accounting regulatory legislation.  
Page 73 (paragraph 3.176)  
Question 6:  Does the Georgian IPR-related policy cover intellectual property commercialization 
and evaluation? (If so, please provide further clarification) 
Answer: 
Georgian IPR-related policy doesn’t cover intellectual property commercialization and evaluation; 
however it is part of the policy being elaborated by the Georgia’s Innovation and Technology Agency . 
The Agency is preparing the package of the re gulatory framework, which includes law on 
Innovation and amendments to the existing laws such as law on grants, law on IPR, Tax Code, etc. with the aim to ease of doing innovation in Geor gia. Amendment strengthens protection of IPR and 
provides legal guarantees to the inventors that income from the commercialization will be 
adequately distributed between all stakeholders and inventors. Amendments also regulate march-
in-rights in order to provide all the support from the state to commercialize innovation for the economic development of country. Package also includes amendment of the law on grant and 
authorizes to issue grants to the commercial companies for innovation activities to support process 
of commercialization. 
4. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
 
Page 97 (paragraph 4.4.1.1) 
Question 7: How have the Georgian authorities promote the use of the lari instead of 
dollarization? Please provide specific details and policies, and whether any Acts, regulations, or 
agreements have been amended to do so. WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 49 - 
 
 Answer: 
Measures carried out to foster the process of larization: 
 In March 2009 National Bank of Georgia (N BG) introduced new instrument – foreign 
exchange auctions that replaced existing Tbilisi Interbank Foreign Exchange. As a result, 
NBG interventions decreased; the exchange rate became more flexible and short-term 
fluctuations became unpredictable that decreased speculative pressures on FX market.  
 In 2010 NBG activated overnight loans and deposits instrument, with the interest rate linked 
to monetary policy rate (+/– 1.5pp). Consequent ly, interest rate fluctuations on interbank 
market decreased that contributes to the development of interbank money market.  
 In 2010 NBG introduced new instrument – one week guaranteed refinancing loans. As a 
result, refinancing risk decreased for commercial banks, confidence increased in refinancing 
loans and commercial banks started using this instrument more actively. To some extent, 
this measure encouraged GEL loans. 
 In 2010 NBG introduced updated payment an d settlement systems: Central Securities 
Depositary System (CSD); Real Time Gross Settlement System (RTGS) that will promote 
financial market development. 
 In January and February, 2011 NBG increa sed minimum reserve requirements on 
commercial banks’ resources borrowed in foreign currency, initially, from 5% to 10% and 
further to 15%. This measure was aimed at stimulating banks to disburse loans and acquire deposits in domestic currency. 
 The NBG imposes additional capital requirement of 75% for unhedged borrowers. This 
measure is intended to reduce FX risks and encourage lari loans. 
 In April, 2011 Government issued 5-year Treasury Bonds. In March 2012 the maturity of 
treasury securities was further lengthened to 10 years. Circulation of government securities 
with longer maturity encourages development of long-term interest rates and deepening of 
financial markets.  
 In 2012 NBG introduced new collateral standards for 1 week refinancing loans (main 
instrument for liquidity supply). Particularly, criteria were relaxed for loans issued by 
commercial banks (in national currency) that are accepted as collateral. Thus, collateral base increased and more GEL funds are available for commercial banks.  
 With the expansion of collateral base and ava ilability of GEL resources, NBG is trying to 
popularize the loans with variable interest rate that can be linked to the NBG policy rate. 
 In 2012 NBG approved the regulation encouraging the issuance of standard certificates of 
deposit of commercial banks that will further in crease the availability of GEL resources for 
commercial banks that can be used for local currency loans. 
 NBG started publishing FX Forward Rate Index on  its website. The Index is calculated based 
on commercial bank rates. This action is targeted to encourage FX hedging operations for 
economic agents facing FX risks. 
 NBG is working on improving communication channels (2012-2013): revised inflation report, 
renewed website for monetary policy, regular meetings with analysts, occasional lectures and presentations on various topics. 
 NBG held presentations and meetings with the representatives of different business sectors 
regarding FX risks, its hedging, and other popular topics. 
 In 2014 NBG applied changes to the collateral ba se accepted in monetary operations and 
added Lari-denominated securities issued by the international financial corporations. This 
measure is intended to promote the developmen t of Lari capital markets and encourage the 
issuance of corporate bonds. Starting from 2014, lari bonds have been issued by WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 50 - 
 
  international financial corporations, such as EBRD, IFC and ADB and is believed to 
encourage other corporations as well. 
Page 99 (paragraph 4.110) 
Question 8: Please provide more clarification on the detail of the requirement set out by the 
European Union regarding the telecommunication services regulator. 
Answer: 
General requirement set out by the European Union regarding the telecommunication services 
regulator is indicated in the Framework Directive: DIRECTIVE 2002/21/EC OF THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC and Regulation 544/2009. 
Georgian Legislation in telecommunication  field is mostly aligned with the requirements of EC 
directives.  
Page 101 (paragraph 4.121) 
Question 9: Please provide more information on the road transport services particularly on 
physical asset of the road network, whether it is possible for the private sector to invest and 
operate the specific road network such as expre ss way or any kind of private route or it is 
completely ineligible for the private sector to  invest in any road network infrastructure. 
Answer: 
Nowadays, international and secondary roads are not operated/financed by the private sector. 
However, the issue related to the private sector to invest and operate the specific road network is 
regulated by the Law of Georgia on the Roads, Article 14, which states the following: 
1. Private roads are allowed; 
2. It is allowed to charge fees for public roads or road sections in case parallel free road exists 
between the populated areas; 
3. The road fees are defined based on the Georgian Legislation and are used for the 
maintenance and development of the mentioned roads or the road sections. 
Page 106 (paragraph 4.153) 
Question 10: Please indicate which fields of tourism that are promoted and what kind of 
incentives that are offered in “Free Tourism Zones”. 
Answer: 
Georgia is a four-season destination offering numerous opportunities for travels, the main tourism 
products remain to be: Nature and Adventure, Cultural Heritage, Wine and Cuisine, Leisure, Health and Wellness, MICE and Gaming.  
Free Tourism Zones” are special zones located on the sea side resorts of Kobuleti and Anaklya. 
These zones attract investors by offering several incentives, including: free hotel master plan, land for a nominal price (1 GEL) and free casino lice nse for hotel capacity over 80 rooms. Herewith, 
Government of Georgia will provide engineering an d infrastructural networks to the territories and 
exempt investor from profit and property taxes for 15 years.  
Page 106 (paragraph 4.154) 
Question 11: With regard to the visa regime stated in the paragraph, are Thai citizens exempted 
from visa to enter Georgia?  
Answer: 
Citizens of the Kingdom of Thailand enjo y a visa free regime to enter Georgia. 
For further details please visit the web-site of the Consular Department of the Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs of Georgia:  https://www.geoconsul.gov.ge/Htm lPage/Html/View?id=25&lang=Eng . 
QUESTION REGARDING THE REPORT BY THE GOVERNMENT 
 2.  RECENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS AND REFORMS 
 
Page 4 (paragraph 2.4)  WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 51 - 
 
 Question 12:  Construction is one of the fastest growing sectors in Georgian economy. Thailand 
has companies who have expertise in this sector and supports collaboration with foreign countries 
in construction sector. Please provide information regarding your policies on liberalizing this sector for foreign companies to run this business in Georgia. 
Answer: 
The general policy in the construction field is liberalized since 2004 and the entire legislation is 
prepared in such a way that supports the investors. Foreign companies are very much welcome to 
do their business in this field. To run the constr uction business in Georgia, foreign company needs 
to establish a local branch and register the firm  at public registry agency (which is one day 
procedures, no certificates and/or licenses are required). Georgian legislation recognizes technical regulations and standards acting in OECD member states. 
Page 11 (paragraph 2.67)  
Question 13:  In order to manage IPR enforcement issues as well as raise knowledge of IP 
protection, how does Georgia operate their National Intellectual Property Center? 
Answer: 
In 2015 Sakpatenti, in cooperation with relevant governmental bodies, has created an IPR 
enforcement interagency coordination body, which will deal with IPR enforcement issues, 
including implementation of border measures. The members of the interagency coordination 
body are representatives from all governmental agencies which deal with protection and enforcement of IPR in Georgia (Prosecutor’s Office  of Georgia, Ministry of Internal Affairs of 
Georgia, Investigation Service of Georgia’s Minist ry of Finance, LEPL Revenue Service and LEPL 
National Intellectual Property Center of Georgi a – Sakpatenti). The representatives from United 
States Embassy and the European Union as obse rvers also participate in the work of the 
coordination body. 
Sakpatenti also established IP training Centre in order to raise knowledge of IP protection. 
 WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 52 - 
 
  ECUADOR 
1. According to page 62, paragraph 3.88 which indicates that the import, storage, production 
or sale of Tobacco or raw materials for tobacco production except for cases of use only (which is not considered as an export of goods), is prohibited in the free zones. 
Q: Could Georgia indicate the reasons for which import, storage, production or sale of Tobacco or 
raw materials for the production of Tobacco is prohibited in the free zones? 
Answer: 
Georgia as a member of WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control has declared its policy to 
take measures necessary to protect present and future generations from the devastating health, social, environmental and economic consequences of tobacco consumption and exposure to tobacco smoke in line with the Convention. This obligation, in addition with the obligation of 
harmonize policies in the field and of gradua l approximation of excise rates with EU on 
manufactured tobacco as far as possible, is also stipulated in Association agreement with EU. As a result during the last couple of years the excise rates on tobacco is gradually increasing in Georgia. 
At the same time production or sale of tobacco or raw materials for the production of Tobacco is 
allowed in the free zones in case of export. 
2. According to page 79, paragraph 3.163, refers  that “The Georgian National Communications 
Commission (GNCC), based on analysis of relevant  markets (subject to ex ante regulations), 
identifies significant market power operators”.  
Q: In this respect, could Georgia indicate the fact ors used to identify operators with significant 
market power? 
Answer: 
Pursuant to Law of Georgia “On Electronic Communications” Article 22 –Stages of market study 
and analysis, general provisions used to define authorized undertakings with significant market 
power. 
Paragraph 8: 
While carrying out analysis of competitiveness in  the relevant segment of the market, the main 
criteria for determination of significant market power shall be proportionate market share of an 
authorized undertaking or a group of interrelate d undertakings in the relevant segment of the 
market. Proportionate market share of an authorized undertaking acquired in the relevant segment of the market shall be defined by taking account of its income, number of end-users and 
subscribers, or the volume of services (traffic) provided in a defined period, also loaded and free 
capacities of the relevant elements of the networ k or reserve of functional resources owned by the 
authorized undertaking. In each case, guided by the principle of objectivity, the Commission, using 
objective principles and taking into account characteristics of the relevant market segment, shall 
decide to measure the share held by an authorized undertaking in the relevant segment of the market and apply relevant basic criteria.  
Note: Please find the link to the Law of Georgia “On Electronic Communications”: 
http://www.gncc.ge/uploads/other/1/1222.pdf.  
3. According to page 58, paragraph 3.68, “The SPA has discretion to register the company in 
the black list depending on, inter alia: competit iveness, proportionality of public and private 
interests, and damages caused due to its infringement behavior”.  
Q: In this regard, could Georgia tell if there is any kind of sanction for these companies, and if 
these have to do with its exclusion from the public recruitment process?  
Answer: 
After conducting the study and assessment of ex isting circumstances, the agency determines 
whether there is any ground for registering bidder/supplier in the Black List. In case if grounds for 
enlisting bidder/supplier in the Black List is lacking, the agency makes decision not to register 
bidder/supplier in the Black List. If grounds for enlisting bidder/supplier in the Black List exist, the WT/TPR/M/328/Add.1 
 
- 53 - 
 
 agency makes decision about enlisting bidder/supplier either in the list of warned suppliers or 
Black List.  When making decision about enlisting a bidder/supplier in the List of warned suppliers or Black List, the agency, in addition to other important circumstances, also takes into account the 
seriousness of breach, prior warning fact(s) of a bidder/supplier and activities conducted by it in 
scope of state procurement.  The decision about warning is made in case there is a real ground for enlisting bidder/supplier in 
the Black List but this action will breach principl e of proportionality. The warning is utilized only 
once and has one-year validity period.  The decision about registering in the Black List is made, if there is no ground for refusing registration in the Black List or list of warned suppliers.  
If determined that bidder/supplier conducted dishon est action due to obtaining contract awarding, 
it is subject to Blacklisting without any warnings.  Warned bidder/supplier is not limited to participate in state procurement, except for the case if it is 
enlisted in the Black List.  
Black Listed bidder/supplier is not entitled to pa rticipate in state procurement and award contract 
within the duration of one year after registration in the Black List.  
4. According to page 58, paragraph 3.69, which indicates that “The SPA also maintains and 
publishes on its official website a list of qualified suppliers – a "white list". 
Q: In this respect, could Georgia indicate if it is possible for a supplier, once described by the SPA, 
apply to two or more public procurement processes simultaneously? 
Answer: 
Yes, supplier is entitled to participate simultaneously in several public procurement processes.  
5. According to page 66, paragraph 3.110, “The Government continues to provide incentives, 
through special taxation regimes, to international financial companies, international companies 
operating in free industrial zones, and to fr ee warehouse companies (Table 3.12). These 
companies may be exempted from VAT, property tax, customs duties, or corporate income tax”. 
Q: In this regard, according Table 3.12 could Georgia tell how long the various tax exemptions are 
allowed? Where you can find more information on these incentives? 
Answer: 
Tax exemptions are issued indefinitely if the be neficiary complies with the requirements of such 
concessions. Information concerning the incentives can be found on the Revenue Service web 
page: http://rs.ge/Default.aspx?sec_id=5495&lang=2.  
6. According to what is described in paragraph 3. 3.1 the report of the Secretariat of the Trade 
Policy Review – Georgia, refers to the procedures and requirements regarding the export, which in 
relevant part, says the following thing: “applicat ions for permits and certificates required for 
exportation may be lodged electronically through the Revenue Service webpage based on a single 
window principle” ; It would be relevant to know the standard for electronic document used in the 
implementation of permits and certificates in questi on; as well as the specific certificates that are 
implemented in such a way, in order to anticipate future exchanges of information. 
Answer: 
Certificates available through the single window electronic system include: Permit for 
import/export of weaponry; permit for importatio n, exportation, re-exportation or transit of 
materials of limited circulation; export, import, re-export and introduction from sea of products 
subject to CITES convention; permit for import, export of nuclear materials, raw materials from 
which it is possible to derive nuclear materials, equipment containing radioactive materials; also permit for import, export, and transit of nuclear know-how and of radioactive waste; permit for 
import/transit of goods subject to veterinary control; permit for import of goods subject to SPS 
control; permit for import of ionic salt; permit for export, import, transit of Dual-use goods; permit for the brokering services on Dual-use goods; pe rmit for technical services on Dual-use goods; 
permit for import and export of medical products subject to special control; authorization for 
international road transport of goods. Standards of electronic documents are determined per file 
type basis.  
__________