WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
17 September 2012 
 (12-4957) 
Working Party on the 
Accession of Kazakhstan Original:   English 
 
 
 
ACCESSION OF KAZAKHSTAN 
 
Additional Questions and Replies 
 
Addendum 
 
 
 The following submission, dated 14 September 2012, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
 
  
_______________ 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 2  
 
  Question 1 
As was expressed during the plurilateral meeting on 19 July 2012, we continue to have concerns 
with the significant flexibilities Kazakhstan is seeking with respect to domestic support and 
export subsidies.  These flexibilities include: design ation as a developing country (i.e. 10 per cent 
de minimis  and the ability to exempt certain de velopment programmes from reduction 
commitments under Article 6.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture (AOA)); a large Base Total 
Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) based on a non-equential base period of 2007, 2010 
and 2011; and, the ability to use export subsidies. 
We note the current agriculture supporting tabl es continue to have special and differential 
treatment that pertain to developing countries (ie. 10 per cent de minimis and access to Article 
6.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture).  Kazakhstan should abide by the self-selection it has made 
of its development status in relation to the whole WTO Agreement, which is as a developed 
country. 
The latest version of the agriculture supportin g tables (WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6) have as 
the base years 2007, 2010, 2011.  Guidance provided in WT/ACC/4 notes that information 
provided should be based on "monetary values and any revenue foregone involved in each 
measure, normally using the average of the most recent 3 year period.  Could Kazakhstan 
please clarify why it has used non-consecutive years? 
We note with disappointment that Kazakhstan has included export subsidies in its draft 
schedule.  According to the latest OECD figures,  Kazakhstan was the world's 6th largest wheat 
exporter in 2011.  Export subsidies, in additi on to the domestic support provided to wheat 
producers, creates the potential for export subs idies to be potentially trade distorting, 
particularly in light of Kazakhstan's significan ce as an international supplier of wheat.  We 
continue to seek a commitment that Kazakhstan binds its agricultural export subsidies at zero upon accession. 
We would like to highlight our concern related to the export subsidies specified in Supporting 
Table ES:1.  Considering the high degree of di stortion that such support could cause to 
international trade, we would like to have a clear commitment that Kazakhstan will bind its 
agricultural export subsidies at zero upon accession. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan requests the following flexibilities in re lation to domestic support and export subsidies: 
(i) "Special and Differential Treatment": 
While the Government of Kazakhstan had starte d to implement market economy reforms in the 
agricultural sector after becoming a sovereign state, the development level of this sector still remains 
below the pre-reform stage and larg ely is dependent on state support. 
According to statistics, nearly 50 per cent of Kazakhstan's population resides in rural areas.  
Agriculture employs almost one third (28.3 per cent) of the working population and is critical to 
addressing poverty and food security, as well as providi ng an important opportunity for diversification 
of the economy.  Over 93 per cent  of agricultural producers are sma ll farms and households, who face 
lack of financial and technical resources.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
  As of today, the absolute number of cattle is by 40  per cent lower than in 1991.  This reduction is 
mostly caused due to the reason that over 90 per cent of cattle is kept by households which use 
manual works and low quality cattle breeds.  
Over the past few years, dry lands  accounted for about 86 per cent of the country's total area.  Nearly 
800 thousands hectares are not used due to the shorta ge of water resources.  Nearly 87 per cent of 
agricultural machinery and equipment are outdated. All these factors led to deterioration of the soil 
quality.  Arable lands for the last 20 years decreased from 35.2 million hectares to 21.2 million hectares. Apart from this, areas usable for agricultu re are being destroyed by one of the major global 
environmental disasters - Aral Sea.  Disappearan ce of Aral Sea resulted in rapid salinization, 
degradation and desertification of the neighbouring areas, the major population of which are engaged 
in agricultural sector. In such conditions agricultu ral producers are facing challenges due to the lack 
of income from their farming activities.  
Furthermore, the experience of recently-acceded WTO Members shows that certain preferences of the 
developing country status were granted to a numbe r of countries with economy structure similar to 
Kazakhstan's. 
Moreover, taking into account per capita income of  rural citizens in 2011 – US$246, all agricultural 
producers of Kazakhstan shall be considered as a low income or resource poor producers.  
In addition, according to the United Nations classification, Kazakhstan belongs to a " landlocked 
developing country ".  
(ii) "A base period of  2007, 2010 and 2011": 
Kazakhstan is seeking the right to use data for 2007, 2010, 2011 as a base period for its domestic 
support commitments.  The data for 2008 and 2009 was not included into domestic support 
calculations. Kazakhstan considers that these years are not "representative" for the purposes of its 
domestic support commitments for the reason that  during these years Kazakhstan's economy was hit 
by global financial crisis. 
During the crisis, Kazakhstan's GDP growth dropped to 3.3 per cent in 2008 and 1.2 per cent in 2009 
in comparison to 8.9 per cent in 2007, 7.3 per cent in 2010 and 7.5 per cent in 2011.  
According to the World Bank, Kazakhstan faced ec onomic crisis due to the sharp fall of oil and 
commodity prices in the world market.  With oil pr ices falling, Kazakhstan faced a drop in the value 
of its exports from 71 billion US$ in 2008 to 43 billion US$ in 2009. 
In the beginning of 2009, large external debt repayments in the banking sector put the currency 
exchange stability in Kazakhstan un der the pressure forcing the Government to devaluate the national 
currency, tenge, by 25 per cent against the US do llar.  As a result of devaluation, agricultural 
producers' foreign currency debts increased by 25 per cent.  
(iii) Export subsidies: With regard to export subsidies, Kazakhstan requ ests the right to use such  subsidies due to its 
landlocked geographical location, the vastness of it s territory, remoteness from major agricultural 
markets and high transportation costs by among other things insufficient transport infrastructure and  
long border delays  (Kazakhstan is the largest landlocked country in the world) .  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 4  
 
  When delivering wheat to external  markets, the wheat is transited through Russian Federation via 
railways.  The distance to the closest Russian port is equal to 1200 km; transportation cost of wheat to 
this distance is equal to US$136/tonne at price level of US$260/tonne.  
For example, transportation cost of wheat from Kazakhstan to Egypt is 150 US$/tonne, while from 
Australia – US$33/tonne, Argentina – US$36/tonne, Canada – US$29/tonne and the US – 
US$30-35/tonne.  
Transportation cost of wheat from Kazakhstan to  Jordan accounts for US$160/tonne, while from 
Australia US$33/tonne, Canada – US$38/tonne, the EU – US$33/tonne. 
Transportation cost of wheat from Kazakhstan to China is US$70/tonne, from Australia – 
US$17/tonne, Canada – US$48/tonne, the US – US$45/tonne.  
Accordingly, Kazakhstan's exporters pay significan tly higher costs of cargo transportation compared 
to other major exporters of wheat. 
Furthermore, taking into account that Australia, Ca nada, EU, Brazil and etc. are entitled to use export 
subsidies, although they have the access to the sea, Kazakhstan believes it is not fair not to grant the 
same entitlement to Kazakhstan, which faces much gr eater challenges due to high transportation costs 
by landlocked geographical position and remoteness from major agricultural markets. 
For the last 4 years Kazakhstan has been annually al locating funds for exports refund.  For instance, 
in 2011 Kazakhstan's expenditures for reimbursement of transportation cost of wheat by railway via 
Russian Federation accounted for 5 billion KZT (34 million US$). 
Currently, in 2012 Kazakhstan is planning to a llocate 20 billion KZT (100 million US$) for this 
purpose.  
It is highly important for the Government of K azakhstan to support agricultural producers by reducing 
high transportation costs to world markets.  
Taking the above into account, Kazakhs tan looks forward to a constructive approach from the part of 
the WTO members in its negotiations on export subsid ies.  Additionally, Kazakhstan believes that a 
special approach should be used in accession ne gotiations by WTO Members towards landlocked 
acceding countries, which do not have the access to the sea. 
Question 2 
We appreciate Kazakhstan's verbal commitment  during the plurilateral meeting to provide 
domestic support data for 2009.  We look forwar d to the opportunity to review this data, which 
will help to better inform discussion on an appropriate base period. 
Related to the agriculture supporting tables provided in document 
WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6, this Member no ted that there is no information available 
concerning the year 2009.  Could Kazakhstan please provide the information on domestic support in the agricultural sector regarding the 2009 calendar year?  
Answer: 
Domestic Support Table for 2009 is attached to this document (Annex 1).  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
 Page 5 
 
 
  Question 3 
We appreciate Kazakhstan's verbal commitment  during the plurilateral meeting to provide 
supporting tables using a 5 per cent de minimis .  We look forward to the opportunity to review 
this data. 
Answer: 
The total AMS amount at de minimis  5 per cent is the same as at 10 per cent, because there is no 
neither product-specific AMS, nor non-product-specific AMS, which is equal to or higher than 5 per 
cent and lower, than 10 per cent.  The data  on domestic support calculations at 5 per cent de minimis  
is attached to this document (Annex 2). 
Question 4 
We thank Kazakhstan for providing informatio n on the Customs Union Framework Agreement 
on Agriculture Policies.  Could Kazakhstan please provide an English version of this document? 
Since the last version of Kazakhstan's agriculture supporting tables was submitted 
(WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.5) until the current v ersion, a new Federal Law No. 177-FZ came 
into force on 25 July 2011.  We understand th at the purpose of this law was to establish 
Common Rules on State Support of Agriculture in the Customs Union. 
Could Kazakhstan please provide further information on what this new legislation means in 
terms of any possible changes in  future support arrangements? 
Answer: 
The Single Economic Space (SES) Agreement on Comm on Rules of State Support of Agriculture is a 
framework agreement, which establishes uniform ru les for the state support measures that affect 
mutual trade of the CU member states.  Therefor e, there will be no any fundamental changes in the 
future support measures.  
In general, SES Agreement on Agriculture was adopted by the Decision of the CU Commission 
No. 482 on 8 December 2010.  The Agreement incorporates some of the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  In particular, th e Agreement classifies state support measures in 
three categories: 
- Measures that do not distort agricultu ral trade between CU member states (" Green Box "); 
- Measures that distort trade to a larger extent ( export subsidies ); and, 
- Trade-distorting measures (" Amber Box "). 
The Agreement also stipulates the requirements of  the CU members for each of these categories. 
Measures under the first category are allo wed to apply without any restrictions. 
Those measures, which fall into the second category is prohibited to apply in mutual trade.  
The amount of state support in the CU member states covered by the third category shall not exceed 
10 per cent of the gross value of agricultural products produced by each of the CU country.  
The Agreement also states that  when any CU member joins th e WTO, its commitment under the 
WTO membership will prevail. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 6  
 
  English version of the Agreement is av ailable through document WT/ACC/KAZ/69. 
Question 5 
Without prejudice to this Member's negotiating position on Kazakhstan's self-designation as a 
developing country, in reference to Supportin g Table DS:2, could Kazakhstan please explain 
how certain seemingly product-specific input subsidy programmes (i.e. "pedigree livestock 
subsidies" and "elite seed subsidies") would qualif y as "generally available to low-income or 
resource-poor producers" in accordance with the criteria of Article 6.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture. 
We note there are several programmes in Support ing Table DS:2, including pedigree livestock 
subsidies and elite seeds subsidies. 
Could Kazakhstan please explain how these are cons istent with Article 6.2 of the Agreement on 
Agriculture, which indicates that these government measures of assistance need to be generally 
available to agriculture in developing countries? 
Answer: 
As was stated above, in Kazakhstan about half of country's population resides in rural areas.  Over 
93 per cent of those engaged in agricultural produc tion are small farms and households.  Lack of 
access to major production inputs is a main problem of agriculture in Kazakhstan. 
With regard to the elite seed subsidies and pedi gree livestock subsidies, one of the main challenges 
that the farmers are facing is lack of access to hi gh quality seeds and pedigree livestock.  Competitive 
production depends on the quality of seed or livestoc k a farmer selects.  Kazakhstan's agricultural 
producers are not able to purchase high quality seed s and livestock due to their high prices.  
Therefore, the Government compensates to pr oducers of elite seeds and pedigree livestock the 
reduced prices of the goods sold to farmers. 
Income of agricultural producers is US$246 per cap ita.  Taking into account income per capita of 
rural citizens, all agricultural producers of Kazakhs tan shall be considered as a "low income" or 
"resource poor producers". 
It should be noted that the Ministry of Agriculture  does not keep a record of cattle disaggregated by 
species or crops by cultivator types under the two programmes.  Therefore, it is impossible to disaggregate data by types of products and record it in the product-specific tables.  
Question 6 
Supporting Table DS:4 shows negative product-speci fic calculated AMS for Barley in 2011 and 
for fatless cheese in 2007.  While calculated as ne gative in Supporting Table DS:7, such negative 
AMSs should be recorded as "0" in Supporting Table DS:4. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan took account of this comment and made  the necessary amendments in the table.  
Amended domestic support tables for 2007, 2 010 and 2011 are presented in document 
WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.7.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
 Page 7 
 
 
  Question 7 
Supporting Table DS:5 shows market price suppo rt for horses. Could Kazakhstan elaborate on 
the structure of this industry, including the tr ade patterns that underlie using import values to 
determine the external reference price? 
Answer: 
National Holding "KazAgroProduct" acts on behalf of  the Government of Kazakhstan as an agent for 
procurement of livestock products and purchases hor ses for meat production purposes directly from 
agricultural producers. 
The "external reference price" for purchased goods  was based on data provided by Kazakhstan's 
Customs Statistics on Foreign Trade.  Since Kazakhstan is a net importer of horses, the data for 
external reference price was based on import prices.   
The calculation of "external reference price" for horses looks as follows: 
HS code  Country  Year  Export 
volume,  
tonne Export  
value,  
US$ Export 
price,  
US$/tonne Export 
 price, 
(KZT/tonne) 
1 2 3 4 5 6 (5/4) 7 
 
0101901100 
horses  All countries 2007 112 179 1,608 197,020 
2010 23 21 913 134,508 
2011 42 60 1,435 210,470 
Taking into account the existing WTO practices, th e fixed external reference price for horses for 
future notifications would be three-year average of  external reference price in 2007, 2010 and 2011, in 
particular – US$1,319/tonne (KZT 180,666/tonne). 
Question 8 
Supporting Table DS:5 should show the three-year average of the external reference prices.  
This average is the fixed external reference  price that Kazakhstan will use in future 
notifications as a Member.  
Answer: 
Kazakhstan took account of this comment and ma de the necessary amendments in the table. 
Question 9 
Kazakhstan shows annual MPS figures for wheat in  2007 and 2010 in Supporting Table DS:7 as 
derived by carrying over only the positive M PSs under two different programmes from column 
8 in Supporting Table DS:5.  In our view, the annual MPS for wheat in column 8 of 
Supporting Table DS:7 should be the sum of MPSs under the two programmes for wheat.  The MPS in favour of producers of wheat is effectively the sum of the two MPS amounts, one of which is negative in this case.  The Agreeme nt on Agriculture does not provide for any 
de minimis  type exemption of MPS components, only for the whole AMS.  
Answer: 
Kazakhstan assumed that the negative MPS amount e quals to "zero", and therefore took into account 
only the positive MPS amount into the Supporting Table DS:7. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 8  
 
  At the same time, Kazakhstan unders tands that the MPS of wheat produ cers is effectively the sum of 
the two MPS amounts, one of which is negative.  In this case, negative MPS should be subtracted 
from the positive one.  Kazakhstan took account of this comment and made the necessary 
amendments in the table.  
Question 10 
Supporting Table DS:9 shows one programme that is not described in the consolidated 
document JOB/ACC/12/Rev.1:  "Subsidies for livestock breeding".  A description of this programme is needed so that:  (a) the progra mme can be classified properly, such as non-
product-specific or not, and; (b) for th is support to be measured correctly. 
- Could Kazakhstan please provide further information on programmes covered in 
Supporting Table DS:9, which would appear to be more product specific rather than 
non-product specific (for example, subsidies for livestock breeding)? 
Answer: 
The description of the programme "Subsidies for livestock breeding" was provided on pages 37 and 
38 of the previous consolidated document JOB/ACC/12 for 2006-2008.  
The full name of the programme is - "Support of Production, Processing and Marketing of Livestock 
Products".  
The programme is implemented by direct financ ial support from the republican budget.  Expenditures 
under this programme were aimed to cover the cost of procurement and operating cost of:  
- advanced processing plants of meat, milk, raw skin and wool; 
- equipped with modern technology slaughterhouses; 
- equipped with modern technology dry milk processing plants; 
- manufacturing bases for storage of wool; and, - manufacturing bases for storage of hides; 
Please be advised that the Ministry of Agriculture does not keep a record of cattle disaggregated by 
species under this programme.  Therefore, it is impos sible to disaggregate data by animal species and 
record it in the product-specific tables.  
Question 11 
We note that Supporting Table DS:1 depicts a scenario where Kazakhstan is not fully utilising 
"green box" programmes, particularly envi ronmental programmes and regional assistance 
which are identified as agricultural policy priorities. 
Could Kazakhstan please explain how future programme and policy orientation would be 
consistent with the move to less distorting means of support? 
Answer: 
We would like to clarify that Kazakhstan is seeking the right to fix the amount of current total AMS at 
requested level for the reason that  in accordance with the new Agriculture Development Program, the 
Government of Kazakhstan is planning to increase i nvestments into agriculture, in particular into 
livestock sector development by 2020.  Although, ther e will be no any dramatic shift in policy balance 
under the Program, Kazakhstan is planning to re -orient market price support to investments.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
 Page 9 
 
 
  Question 12 
Could Kazakhstan please elaborate on the re lationship between measures recorded in 
Supporting Table DS:1 on the creation of public  stockholding for food security purposes and 
DS:5 market prices support for procurement to state reserves?  We note the external reference 
price calculated for the Supporting Table DS:5  again uses the years 2007, 2010, 2011 and would 
encourage Kazakhstan to review this in light of  the guidance provided to acceding members in 
WT/ACC/4. 
Answer: 
The state reserve of grain is annually renewed by the "Food Contract Corporation" (hereinafter - the 
FCC), which performs the function of the Govern ment agent responsible for the establishment, 
renewal and disposal of the state reserve for food security purposes.   
Budget outlays spent on storage of state reserves an d transporting grain from private elevators to the 
elevators managed by the FCC are recorded in the Supporting Table DS:1.  
The difference between the purchase price of wheat pr ocured for the state reserve and external price 
of wheat was calculated in the Supporting Table DS:5. 
Question 13 We note that the treatment of "negative" AMSs  differ between products (wheat and barley) in 
Supporting Table DS:7, we would be grateful if Kazakhstan would use a consistent approach for such AMSs. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan took account of this comment and made  the necessary amendments in the Table.  
Question 14 
Could Kazakhstan please elaborate on why there is  such variation in applied administered price 
between procurements for the state reserve versu s procurement to support domestic producers 
for products like wheat? 
Could Kazakhstan also confirm that 100 per cent of its wheat production is eligible for support 
either the procurement for the state r eserves or for the support to farmers? 
Answer: 
The reason for the price difference is that the G overnment used "advance funding schemes" for those 
producers, who sold wheat to the state reserves.  In particular, during spring-field works, the 
Government made advance payments for the future  harvest, which had to be delivered in August-
September.  Purchased price for the state reserv es was calculated on the basis of estimated grain 
prices which were made at the beginning of the calendar year.  These prices are fixed and not subject 
to change, while prices for the wheat purchased to support domestic producers are set depending on 
the basis of current market prices at harvesting period.  
Kazakhstan confirms that 100 per cent of its wheat production is eligible for support either under the 
procurement for the state reserves or for the suppor t of the domestic producers.  At the same time, 
procurement for the state reserves takes priority over the procurement to support domestic producers. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 10  
 
  Particularly, procurement of wheat to support domes tic producers is carried out once the procurement 
for the state reserves is completed.  
Furthermore, the volume of wheat procured for the state reserves is fixed and equal to 500,000 metric 
tonnes.  Taking into account that wheat is bei ng procured under both programmes, the data for 
"eligible production" of wheat under the procurem ent to support domestic producers is based on the 
gross value of wheat production minus the volume of wheat procured for the state reserves. 
Question 15 
Could Kazakhstan please provide further details on what guidance has been established on the 
use of export subsidies in the Custom Unions Co mmon Rules on State Support of Agriculture?   
Could Kazakhstan also confirm that Customs Union members have agreed among themselves 
not to use export contingent subs idies on trade to each other? 
Answer: 
The only party to the CU Agreement on Common Rul es of State Support of Agriculture that applied 
export subsidies is Kazakhstan.  The only pro duct, towards which Kazakhstan applies export 
subsidies, is wheat. Since there are no exports of  wheat to the Russian Federation and Republic of 
Belarus from Kazakhstan, Kazakhstan agreed not to u se export subsidies on intra-CU trade.  It should 
also be noted that 50 per cent of wheat exports fro m Kazakhstan go to overseas, while the other half 
go to the other CIS countries (including, Azerbaijan - 25 per cent, Tajikistan - 20 per cent). 
Kazakhstan would like to highlight that taking into  account that the CU Parties have never used 
export contingent subsidies in mutual trade, it wa s agreed to make this practice mandatory under the 
Agreement indicated above. 
 
_______________ 
   
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 11ANNEX 1 
 Supporting Table DS:1 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Measures exempt from the reduction commitment - "Green Box"  
Measure type Description of measure with reference to criteria in Annex 2 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture 2009 Data sources 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 
1 2 3 4 
Para 2. General services 
(a)  Research, including general 
research Agricultural science. Budgetary outlays to applied scientific 
researches, development of technical documentations, construction of 
a national repository of genetic resources.      Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 5,785,767  39,226 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 5,785,767 39,226 
(b) Pest and disease control Measures on pest  and disease control of agricultural crops. 
Budgetary outlays for maintaining of favourable phytosanitary 
conditions in the country, including protection against entry or spread 
of quarantine objects from foreign countries or quarantine zones.      Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 4,470,362  30,308 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 4,470,362 30,308 
(b) Pest and disease control  Measures on pest and animal disease control.  Budget allocations to 
maintain favourable epizootic situation for agricultural animals.      Ministry of Agriculture, 
Ministry of Finance Republican budget 13,068,609  88,601 
Local budgets 0  0 
Sub-total 13,068,609 88,601 
(c) Training services  Trainings for government officers.  Funds were allocated for 
conducting of training to improve professional skills of government 
officials - employees of the Mini stry of Agriculture and local 
executive authorities in agriculture.      Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 19,582  133 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 19,582 133 
(d)  Extension and advisory services Consultancy support and training services for development of 
agricultural business.   Budget allocations to develop and support 
agricultural information-marketing system.      Ministry of Agriculture, 
Ministry of Finance Republican budget 602,460  4,084 
Local budgets 0  0 
Sub-total 602,460 4,084  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 12 Measure type Description of measure with reference to criteria in Annex 2 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture 2009 Data sources 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 
1 2 3 4 
(d)  Extension and advisory services International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Project 
"Agricultural Post-Privatization Assistance"  - advisory services.     Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 101,489  688 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 101,489 688 
(d)  Extension and advisory services International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Project  
"Irrigation and Drain age Systems Improvement"  - advisory 
services.     Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 1,128  8 
Local budgets 0  0 
Sub-total 1,128 8 
(f)  Marketing and promotion 
services Institutional development of  agricultural services. World Bank 
Project:  Improves quality and safety of agricultural products; 
provides an access to market information and develops market efficiency, etc.      Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 713,601  4,838 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 713,601 4,838 
(e)  Inspection services Inspection of agricultural crops for grading purposes. Budget 
allocations for inspection of agricultu ral crops to receive high quality 
crops for grading purposes and provis ion of expert opinion on utility 
value of such products      Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 142,857  969 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 142,857 969 
(e)  Inspection services Hydrogeological-meliorative assessment. Budgetary outlays to 
agro-meliorative inspections of arable lands.      Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 164,838  1,118 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 164,838 1,118 
(e)  Inspection services Monitoring of soil fertility. Budgetary outlays for monitoring of 
meteorological parameters and soil moisture condition.     Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 38,139  259 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 38,139 259 
(e)  Inspection services Determination of sort  and sowing qualities of seeds and planting 
materials. Budget allocations to determine sowing qualities of seeds 
and planting materials of elite seed producing farms, state varietial-testing stations and the state food grain resources.      Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 235,530  1,597 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 235,530 1,597  
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 13Measure type Description of measure with reference to criteria in Annex 2 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture 2009 Data sources 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 
1 2 3 4 
(g) Infrastructural services Infrastructural works associated with environmental 
programmes. Budgetary outlays related to regulation of the river-bed 
of the Syrdarya river and preservation of the Northern part of the 
Aral Sea.     Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 228,004  1,546 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 228,004 1,546 
(g)  Infrastructural services Capital works of water supply facilities.  Budget allocations to 
construct dams, irrigation and drainage systems.     Ministry of Agriculture, 
Ministry of Finance Republican budget 5,885,855  39,904 
Local budgets 446,905  3,030 
Sub-total 6,332,759 42,934 
(g)  Infrastructural services Development of roads in rural areas. Budget allocations to provide 
capital works on automobile roads in rural areas.     Ministry of Finance 
Republican budget 0  0 
Local budgets 21,612,285  146,524 
Sub-total 21,612,285 146,524 
Para 3. Creation of public 
stockholding for food security 
purposes Storage and handling of state reserv e of grain for food security 
purposes. Budgetary outlays related to accumulation, storage and 
handling of state reserve of grain for food security purposes.     Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 1,150,292  7,799 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 1,150,292 7,799 
Para 6. Decoupled income support       
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 0 0 
Para 7. Income insurance and income 
safety-net programmes       
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 0 0  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 14 Measure type Description of measure with reference to criteria in Annex 2 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture 2009 Data sources 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 
1 2 3 4 
Para 8. Payments for relief from natural disasters: Payment for relief from natural disasters.   Under this programme 
farmers were compensated for the losses of animals and crops in case of outbreak of highly hazardous diseases and pets     Ministry of Finance 
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 38,667  262 
Sub-total 38,667 262 
Para 9. Structural adjustment 
assistance provided through producer 
retirement programmes:       
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 0 0 
Para 10. Structural adjustment 
assistance provided through resource retirement programmes:       
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 0 0 
Para 11. Structural adjustment 
assistance provided through 
investment aids:       
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 0 0 
Para 12. Environmental programmes:       
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 0 0  
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 15Measure type Description of measure with reference to criteria in Annex 2 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture 2009 Data sources 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 
1 2 3 4 
Para 13. Regional assistance programmes:       
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 0 0 
Total 2009 54,706,369 370,891   
Note: Average annual exchange rate equals to KZT 147.5/US$ in 2009 
Source: National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 16 Supporting Table DS:2 
 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan  
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Measures exempt from the reduction commitment -- Speci al and Differential Treatment -- "Development Programmes" 
 
Measure type Name and description of measure with reference to criteria in Article 6:2 of 
the Agreement on Agriculture 2009 
Data sources 1,000  
KZT 1,000  
US$ 
1 2 3 6 
(а) Investment 
subsidies Agricultural machinery leasing  KazAgroFinance under the 
Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 4,670,011  31,661 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 4,670,011 31,661 
(b) Input subsidies 
generally available to low-income or 
resource-poor 
producers Subsidies to reduce the cost of mineral fertilizers, seed disinfectants and herbicides applied by 
agricultural producers  Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry 
of Finance 
Republican budget 2,928,650  19,855   
Local budgets 0 0   
Sub-total 2,928,650 19,855   
Micro-crediting  Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 394,252  2,673 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 394,252 2,673 
Soft loans for spring- field and harvesting works Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 5,248,071  35,580 
Local budgets 0  0 
Sub-total 5,248,071 35,580 
Supply of fuel to agricultural producers at fixed reduced prices Ministry of Energy and Mineral 
Resources, Ministry of 
Agriculture  Republican budget 14,213,815  96,365 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 14,213,815 96,365 
Subsidies for purchase of oil products to agricultural producers Ministry of Energy and Mineral  
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 17Measure type Name and description of measure with reference to criteria in Article 6:2 of 
the Agreement on Agriculture 2009 
Data sources 1,000  
KZT 1,000  
US$ 
1 2 3 6 
Republican budget 16,418,831  111,314 Resources, Ministry of 
Agriculture, Ministry of Finance  Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 16,418,831 111,314 
Subsidies to reduce the cost of water delivery services Ministry of Agriculture 
Republican budget 1,358,101  9,207 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 1,358,101 9,207 
Partial compensation of feedstuffs cost Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry 
of Finance  Republican budget 11,666,580  79,095 
Local budgets 0  0 
Sub-total 11,666,580 79,095 
Pedigree livestock subsidies Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry 
of Finance  Republican budget 2,497,397  16,932 
Local budgets 3,373,413  22,871 
Sub-total 5,870,810 39,802 
Elite seed subsidies Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry 
of Finance Republican budget 4,391,548  29,773 
Local budgets 4,978,182  33,750 
Sub-total 9,369,730 63,524 
Soft loans for agricultural producers - small businesses Fund for Small Business 
Development Republican budget 79,236  537 
Local budgets 0 0 
Sub-total 79,236 537 
Soft loans from local budgets for resource poor  agricultural producers at the local level Local budgets 
Republican budget 0 0 
Local budgets 198,635  1,347 
Sub-total 198,635 1,347 
Total 2009 72,416,722  490,961    
Note:  Average annual exchange rate equals to KZT 147.5/US$ in 2009 
Source:  National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 18  
Supporting Table DS:3 
 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Measures exempt from the reducti on commitment -- Direct Payments under Production-Limiting Programmes -- 
"Exempt Direct Payments” 
 
   Measure type Name and description of 
measure Monetary value of measure in year in question Data sources 
1,000 KZT 1,000 US$ 
1 2 3   4 
(а) "payments based on constant and fixed areas and harvesting"   - - - 
(b) "payments based on 85% and less from the base level of production"   - - - 
(c) "payments per head of livestock made  by fixed head of livestock"   - - - 
N/A  
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 19Supporting Table DS:4 
 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Calculation of the Base Total Aggregate Measurement of Support 
                               b y  d e  m i n i m i s  1 0 %  
 
Description of basic 
products 
(including non-product 
specific AMS) Calendar 
year Product specific AMS 
(from Supporting Tables  
DS: 5 - DS:7 below)  Product specific 
equivalent 
measurements 
of support (from 
DS:8) Calculated AMS  Value of production Base total AMS in 
percentage of 
production cost 
1,000  
KZT 1,000  
US$ 1,000  
KZT 1,000  
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ % de minimis 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
Wheat 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Raw cotton 1,366,251 9,263 0 1,366,251 9,263 14,055,371 95,291 9.7 de minimis 
Cotton fibre 153,704 1,042 0 153,704 1,042 20,229,662 137,150 0.8 de minimis 
Lamb 796,871 5,403 0 796,871 5,403 62,647,857 424,731 1.3 de minimis 
Sheep wool 3,017,366 20,457 0 3,017,366 20,457 5,464,230 37,046 55.2   
Total for all 
commodities (after de 
minimis deduction)       3,017,366 20,457         
Non-product-specific 
AMS       28,043,414 190,12
5 1,641,352,400 11,127,813 1.7 de minimis 
Total: Current Total 
AMS  3,017,366 20,457  
Note: Average annual exchange rate equals to KZT 147.5/US$ in 2009 
Source: National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 20 Supporting Table DS:5 
 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Product-Specific Aggregate Measuremen ts of Support:  Market Price Support 
 
Description of 
basic products Calendar 
year Measure type(s) Applied 
administered 
price 
(KZT/tonne) External 
reference price 
(KZT/tonne) Eligible 
production, 
(KZT/tonne) Associated 
fees/levies Total market 
price support 
(1,000 KZT) Data sources 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ((4-5*6)-7) 9 
Wheat* 2009 procurement into the state reserve at 
fixed price 18,500.0 28,755.0 500,000.0 - -5,127,500  "Food Contract 
Corporation" 
procurement to support domestic 
agricultural producers 24,640.0 28,755.0 16,552,000.0 - -68,111,480  
Raw cotton* procurement to support domestic 
agricultural producers 64,281.0 59,221.0 270,010.0 - 1,366,251  Agency for 
Statistics of the 
RK,"Food 
Contract Corporation" and 
"KazAgroProduct" 
under the Ministry of Agriculture Lamb** procurement to support domestic 
agricultural producers 520,000.0 514,094.3 134,932.6 - 796,871  
Sheep wool* procurement to support domestic 
agricultural producers 168,000.0 85,169.5 36,428.2 - 3,017,366  
* Reference price - export price FOB 
** Reference price - import price CIF 
Please see Methodological Note to DS:5 
  
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 21Supporting Table DS:6  
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Product-Specific Aggregate Me asurements of Support: Non-Exempt Direct Payments 
 
Description 
of basic 
product Calendar 
year Measure 
type(s) Applied 
administered 
price External 
reference 
price Eligible 
production Total 
price-
specific 
direct 
payments Other non-exempt 
direct payments Associated 
fees/levies Total direct 
payments 
Data sources 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ((4-5)*6) 8 9 10 (7+8-9) 11 
Cotton 
fibre 2009 Compensation 
payments*         153,704   1,042.1  0 153,704  1,042.1   Ministry of 
Agriculture 
 
 
*According to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 298 "On Cotton Industry Development" of 21 July 2007, cotton producers are required to conduct assessmen t of cotton fibre quality on a 
compulsory basis.  Quality asse ssment is conducted by expert organization, whic h is appointed by the government in accordance w ith the qualification requirements se t out by Article 6 of the Law. 
Under this programme government co mpensates the full cost of assessment services  rendered to cotton producers by expert organiz ation. 
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 22  
Supporting Table DS:7 
 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Product-Specific Aggregate Measurements  of Support:  Other Product-Specific Support and Total Pr oduct-Specific AMS  
 
Description of 
basic product Calendar 
year Measure 
type(s) Other 
product-
specific 
budgetary 
outlays Other 
product 
specific 
support 
(including 
calculations) Associated 
fees/levies Total other 
product-specific 
support Market 
price 
support 
(Supporting 
Table 
DS:5) Other non-
exempt 
direct 
payments 
(Supporting 
Table 
DS:6) Total product - 
specific AMS 
Data sources 
1,000  
KZT 1,000  
US$ 
1 2 3   4   5   6   7 (4+5-6) 8   9   10 (7+8+9) 11   
Wheat 2009   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "Food Contract 
Corporation" Raw cotton   0 0 0 0 1,366,251 0 1,366,251 9,263 
Cotton fibre   0 0 0 0 0 153,704 153,704 1,042 
Lamb   0 0 0 0 796,871 0 796,871 5,403 KazAgroProduct 
(former - Mal 
Onimderi 
Corporation) 
under the 
Ministry of 
Agriculture Sheep wool   0 0 0 0 3,017,366 0 3,017,366 20,457 
Note:  Average annual exchange rate equals to KZT 147.5/US$ in 2009 
Source:   National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
 
  
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 23Supporting Table DS:8  
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Product-Specific Equivalent Measurements of Support 
 
Description 
of basic 
product Calendar 
year Measure 
type(s) Applied 
administered 
price Production 
eligible to 
receive the 
applied 
administered 
price Market 
price 
support 
budgetary 
outlays Equivalent 
measurement 
of support 
(including 
calculated 
details) Non-
exempt 
direct 
payments Other 
product-
specific 
support Associated 
fees/levies Total 
monetary 
value of 
equivalent 
commitment Data 
sources 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 
            
N/A 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 24 Supporting Table DS:9 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Non-Product-Specific AMS  
 
Measure type(s) Calendar y ear Non-product-specific 
support budgetary 
outlays Other non-product specific support  
(including calculated details) Associated 
fees/levies Total non-product-
specific support  Data sources 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 
1 3 4 5 6 7 8 
Partial compensation of 
insurance payments  2009  Ministry of 
Agriculture 
 Republican budget 100,000  678      100,000  678  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 100,000  678      100,000  678  
Subsidizing systems of agricultural production management 2009 
Republican budget 33,702  228      33,702  228  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 33,702  228      33,702  228  
Capital works and 
reconstruction of damaged 
parts of inter-farm channels and irrigation facilities 2009 
Republican budget 493,414  3,345      493,414  3,345  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 493,414  3,345      493,414  3,345  
Soft loans for institutional 
development of agricultural 
sector 2009 KazAgroFinance 
under the 
Ministry of 
Agriculture Republican budget 2,136,889  14,487      2,136,889  14,487  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 2,136,889  14,487      2,136,889  14,487  
Soft loans within the Asian Bank for Development Project 
"Water Resources 
Management and Land Rehabilitation" 2009 Ministry of 
Agriculture  
Republican budget 319,909  2,169      319,909  2,169  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 319,909  2,169      319,909  2,169   
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 25Soft loans within the 
International Bank for 
Reconstruction and 
Development Project "Irrigation and Drainage 
Systems Improvement" 2009 Ministry of 
Agriculture  
Republican budget 272,117  1,845      272,117  1,845  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 272,117  1,845      272,117  1,845  
Debt writing off                           (Fund for Financial Support of Agriculture) 2009 Fund for 
Financial Support of 
Agriculture 
under the Ministry of 
Finance Republican budget 1,556,919  10,555      1,556,919 10,555  
Local budgets 0 0      0 0  
Sub-total 1,556,919 10,555      1,556,919 10,555  
Revenue forgone on overdue 
debts (Fund for Financial Support of Agriculture) 2009 Fund for 
Financial Support of 
Agriculture 
under the Ministry of 
Finance Republican budget 8,536,884  57,877      8,536,884  57,877  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 8,536,884  57,877      8,536,884  57,877  
Revenue forgone on overdue 
debts (Rehabilitation Fund) 2009 Rehabilitation 
Fund under 
Ministry of 
Agriculture Republican budget 3,542,084  24,014      3,542,084  24,014  
Local budgets 0  0      0  0  
Sub-total 3,542,084  24,014      3,542,084  24,014  
Soft loans to agricultural producers through a network of rural credit cooperatives 2009 Agrarian Сredit 
Сorporation 
under the 
Ministry of 
Agriculture Republican budget 11,051,496  74,925      11,051,496  74,925  
Local budgets 0 0      0  0  
Sub-total 11,051,496 74,925      11,051,496  74,925  
Total  2009 28,043,414  190,125      28,043,414  190,125    
Note:  
Average annual exchange rate equals to KZT 147.5/US$ in 2009 
Source:  National Bank of Republic of Kazakhstan   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 26 Supporting Table ES: 1 
EXPORT SUBSIDIES:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar year 2009 
 
Export Subsidies: Outlay and Quantity 
 
Calendar 
year Description 
of products Direct export 
subsidies Producer financed 
subsidies Sales of stocks Cost reduction 
measures Internal transport 
subsidies Total product 
specific export 
subsidies Quantity 
of 
subsidized 
export Data Source 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000  
US$ 1,000  
KZT 1,000  
US$ 1,000  
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000  
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
tonnes 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 
2009 Cereal crops - - - - - - 5,000,000 33,898 - - 5,000,000 33,898 1,146 Ministry of 
Agriculture 
 
 Grain exporters receive partial reimburs ement for transportation costs when exportin g grain through the Russian Federation or to/through China. 
The reimbursement is made by the Ministry of Agriculture on th e basis of the document confirming the costs actually incurred by  an exporter. 
 
Legal basis: 
1. Resolution of the Government of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan No. 1909 of 21 November 2009  
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 27ANNEX 2 
 
Supporting Table DS:4 
 
DOMESTIC SUPPORT:  Republic of Kazakhstan 
REPORTING PERIOD:  Calendar years (2007, 2010, 2011) 
 
Calculation of the Base Total Aggregate Measurement of Support at de minimis 5% 
 
Description of basic 
products 
(including non-product 
specific AMS) Calendar 
year Product specific AMS 
(from Supporting Tables 
DS: 5 - DS:7 below) Product 
specific 
equivalent 
measurements 
of support 
(from DS:8) Calculated AMS Value of production Base total AMS in 
percentage of production 
cost 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$  1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ % de minimis 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
Wheat 2007 133,139,312 1,086,408 0 133,139,312 1,086,408 276,280,700 2,254,432 48.2   
2010 3,280,723 22,265 0 3,280,723 22,265 210,406,272 1,427,935 1.6 de minimis 
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Barley 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2010 6,204,340 42,106 0 6,204,340 42,106 26,111,000 177,204 23.8   
2011 0 -232,251 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Raw cotton 2007 9,088,153 74,159 0 9,088,153 74,159 20,279,900 165,483 44.8   
2010 6,452,059 43,787 0 6,452,059 43,787 23,770,655 161,321 27.1   
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Cotton fibre 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2010 153,704 1,043 0 153,704 1,043 30,527,108 207,174 0.5 de minimis 
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Bovine meat 2007 48,910,255 399,104 0 48,910,255 399,104 140,076,297 1,143,013 34.9   
2010 77,726,184 527,494 0 77,726,184 527,494 214,400,168 1,455,040 36.3   
2011 79,339,436 541,123 0 79,339,436 541,123 254,866,970 1,738,282 31.1   
Pork 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2010 47,326,104 321,182 0 47,326,104 321,182 99,604,330 675,971 47.5   
2011 3,685,432 25,136 0 3,685,432 25,136 109,739,878 748,465 3.4 de minimis  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1 
Page 28 
Description of basic 
products 
(including non-product 
specific AMS) Calendar 
year Product specific AMS 
(from Supporting Tables 
DS: 5 - DS:7 below) Product 
specific 
equivalent 
measurements 
of support 
(from DS:8) Calculated AMS Value of production Base total AMS in 
percentage of production 
cost 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$  1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ % de minimis 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
Poultry 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2010 13,106,999 88,951 0 13,106,999 88 ,951 32,658,657 221,640 40.1   
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Small ruminants 2007 69,627,426 568,155 0 69,627,426 568,155 141,637,218 1,155,750 49.2   
2010 123,420,615 837,602 0 123,420,615 837,602 206,978,224 1,404,671 59.6   
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Horses 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2011 107,846,453 735,551 0 107,846,453 735,551 342,386,509 2,335,196 31.5   
Dry milk 2007 155,067 1,265 0 155,067 1,265 1,071,006 8,739 14.5   
2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2011 500,257 3,412 0 500,257 3,412 1,885,889 12,862 26.5   
Fatless Cheese 2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Butter 2007 18,647 152 0 18,647 152 7,647,223 62,401 0.2 de minimis 
2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Sheep wool 2007 1,245,019 10,159 0 1,245,019 10,159 3,375,700 27,545 36.9   
2010 5,116,247 34,722 0 5,116,247 34,722 4,023,313 27,304 127.2   
2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -   
Total for all 
commodities (after 
de minimis deduction) 2007       262,165,232 2,139,251         
2010       279,352,548 1,895,844         
2011       187,686,146 1,280,086          
   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.6/Add.1
 Page 29Description of basic 
products 
(including non-product 
specific AMS) Calendar 
year Product specific AMS 
(from Supporting Tables 
DS: 5 - DS:7 below) Product 
specific 
equivalent 
measurements 
of support 
(from DS:8) Calculated AMS Value of production Base total AMS in 
percentage of production 
cost 
1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$  1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ 1,000 
KZT 1,000 
US$ % de minimis 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
Non-product-specific 
AMS 
(from Supporting 
Table DS:9 below) 2007       21,558,670 175,917 1,089,384,000 8,889,302 2.0 de minimis 
2010       26,325,457 178,659 1,442,630,100 9,790,499 1.8 de minimis 
2011       30,587,356 208,617 2,286,042,300 15,591,613 1.3 de minimis 
Total: Current Total 
AMS 2007       262,165,232 2,139,251         
2010       279,352,548 1,895,844         
2011       187,686,146 1,280,086         
Average 
2007-2011       243,067,975  1,771,727          
 
Note: Average annual exchange rate equals to: 
- KZT 122.55/US$ in 2007 
- KZT 147.35/US$ in 2010 
- KZT 146.62/US$ in 2011  
Source: National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
 
 
__________