RESTRICTED  
  
G/TBT/M/73  
 
 
6 March 2018  
(18-1386) Page: 1/54 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG OF 8-9 NOVEMBER  2017 
CHAIR MAN: MR JOSE MANUEL CAMPO S (CHILE)  
Note by the Secretariat1 
1   ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  ................................ ................................ ........................  1 
2   IMPLEMENTATION AND A DMINISTRATION OF THE  AGREEMENT  ................................ . 1 
2.1   Statements from Members under Article 15.2  ................................ ................................ . 1 
2.2   Specific Trade Concerns (STCs)  ................................ ................................ .....................  2 
2.2.1    Reported resolutions  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 2 
2.2.2    Withdrawn concerns  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 2 
2.2.3    New concerns  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  2 
2.2.4    Previously raised concerns  ................................ ................................ .........................  8 
2.3   Exchange of Experiences  ................................ ................................ ............................. 53 
2.3.1    Eighth Triennial Review  ................................ ................................ ............................ 53 
3   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ACTIVITIES  ................................ ................................ ....... 53 
4   UPDATING BY OBSERVER S ................................ ................................ ........................  53 
5   REPORT (2017) OF THE  COMMITTEE ON TECHNIC AL BARRIERS TO TRADE  ...............  54 
6   OTHER MATTERS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 54 
7   DATE OF NEXT MEETING ................................ ................................ ............................  54 
 
1  ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA  
1.1.  The Committee  adopted the agenda contained in WTO/AIR/TBT/ 9. 
2  IMPLEMENTATION AND A DMINISTRATION OF THE  AGREEMENT  
2.1  Statements from Members under Article 15.2  
2.1.  The Chair man reminded the Committee of Members' notification obligation under Article  15.2 
of the TBT Agreement and further informed the Committee that the latest list of statements on 
implementation submitted under this provision was contained in an annex to the Annu al Review of 
the Implementation and Operation of the TBT Agreement (G/TBT/39 /Rev.1 ), issued  on 18 May 
2017. He informed the Committee that since the last meeting in June 2017, St. Kitts and Nevis, 
Samoa and Liberia  had submitted statement s and the Philippi nes had revised its original 
statement . He further informed the Committee that since 1995 , 141  Members had submitted at 
                                                
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility  and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 2 - 
 
  least one statement of implementation. Information on the list of statements is available on the 
TBT Information Management System  (TBT IMS ). 
2.2  Specific Trade Concerns (STCs)  
2.2.1   Reported resolutions  
2.2.  There were no report ed resolutions of  STCs. 
2.2.2   Withdrawn concerns  
2.3.  The Chairman reported that the following STC  had been withdrawn from the agenda at the 
request o f the concerned Member:  
a. Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi — Alcoholic beverages specifications  
2.2.3   New concerns  
2.2.3.1   Viet Nam — Cybersecurity Measures  
2.4.  The representative of Japan  express ed concern and strong interest with regard to Viet Nam 's 
draft Cybersecurity Law,  stating that it included  various provisions which could hinder the 
participation of foreign companies in the Vietnamese market. Japan therefore asked Viet Nam to 
implement the measure in line with the TBT Agreement, in particular  regardi ng the following 
points. For "national standards " and "national technical regulations " on cybersecurity, she said that 
if these standards and conformity assessment procedures were not based on international 
standards, or if they impose d an excessive burden  on industries, the draft law  might not comply 
with the TBT A greement.  Japan asked  Viet Nam to consider its concerns,  and those of other 
Members , and to implement the draft law in a transparent manner to avoid it being  more trade -
restrictive than necessary . 
2.5.  The representatives of t he United States  and New Zealand  supported  Japan's comments.  
2.6.  The representative of Viet Nam  indicated that Japan's written comments on the  measure had 
been sent to the competent agencies in Viet Nam. She invited interested Members  to engage in 
further discussion s with her delegation . 
2.2.3.2   China — Catalogue of Solid Wastes Forbidden to Import into China 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1211  
2.7.  The representative of Japan  recognized the objective of "Catalogue of Solid Wastes Forbidden 
to Import into China" to protect the environment and public health in China, but expressed 
concerns over the content of the measure. Japan was looking forward to receiving answers to 
written  questions sent to China to clarify details of the measure and the scope of products subject 
to bans or restrictions on imports. Japan was of the view that waste, recovered paper and 
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) non -industry waste were recycled resourc es, and hazards 
associated with those materials were extremely low. Moreover, those materials could be traded as 
raw materials. The imposition of an import ban on these materials would adversely affect 
international trade and circulation of resources. Japa n asked China to ensure that the regulation 
did not become an unnecessary obstacle to trade and to the circulation of resources. Finally, Japan 
sought clarification on whether the equivalent  regulations were applied to both domestic and 
imported solid wast e such as recovered paper. In case the imported waste was at a disadvantage 
as compared to the domestic waste, Japan requested China to accord equal treatment.  
2.8.  The representative of the United States  requested China to provide a 60 -day comment period 
in line with the Committee Recommendations contained in Annex 3 of G/TBT/9. The notification 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1212 proposed entry into force on  1 September 2017, 45 days after the notification. 
The US expressed concerns about the  lack of clarity of the regulations a nd requested further 
information on the content and its current status. In particular, a clear definition of the scope of 
these measures, as the ban generated significant concern amongst  US industry and other 
stakeholders.  The US asked if China could provide details on the four classes and twenty -four G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 3 - 
 
  kinds of solid waste . Did the ban include broad coverage of recovered materials, such as all 
consumer paper and plastics including those that have been sorted and graded? Or was there a 
narrower definition bas ed on the amount of "carried " wastes included in a shipment? Did the 
measure notified  in G/TBT/N/CHN/1211 apply to  industrial scrap? Further, there was concern that 
a ban with such a broad scope was more trade -restrictive than necessary to fulfil its objec tives. 
Had China considered alternatives , and why a total import ban, rather than focus on waste from 
both foreign and domestic sources, was necessary to fulfil the objective s? The US enquired about 
the measures China was applying to the use or sale of dom estically sourced recovered materials , 
and asked if those measures might not suffice if applied to imported materials as well.  
2.9.  Given that the measure did not allow sufficient time for comments and the lack of clarity with 
respect to its scope, the US urge d China to delay the implementation period of G/TBT/N/CHN/1211 
and G/TBT/N/CHN/1212 measures, to consider comments from stakeholders , and to revise the 
measures  and provide additional guidance on implementation. The US called for the measure to be 
halted.  
2.10.   The representative of the European Union  joined the delegations of the US and Japan in 
drawing the attention of the Chinese authorities to procedural issues linked to the notifications 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1211 and G/TBT/N/CHN/1212. In the case of G/TBT/N/CHN/1211,  the notification 
had announced a two -day commenting period, and China had not granted a requested extension. 
Therefore , the EU urged China to withdraw the notification and to re -notify with a sufficient time to 
submit comments in line with the TBT Agreeme nt. The EU noted that both notifications were 
available only in Chinese causing significant interpretation challenges and creating uncertainty 
around the exact specification of categories that would be banned. The EU asked China to facilitate 
the preparati on of the official English translations of both draft measures. The EU further asked for 
clarifications on why domestic and foreign operators were treated differently with respect to the 
deadlines to comply with the new measures which defied the "equal tre atment" principle.  
2.11.   The EU requested  China to provide evidence from technical analysis on whether the 
tightening of the threshold on the purity of paper waste allowed for imports, from 1.5% to 0. 3% 
was justified for environmental or other reasons. Meanwhile , widely accepted standards, such as 
EN643, impose a 1 .5% threshold. In the absence of such evidence, the 1.5% threshold should be 
maintain ed. The EU shared the environmental and climate objectives of China, and strongly 
supported measures to ensure effect ive waste management. However, like other delegations,  
there were concerns related to the way in which the Chinese authorities were proposing to 
implement th e measures. The EU requested China to postpone the entry into force of the 
measures to provide suff icient time for the recycling industry to adapt to the changes.  
2.12.   The representative of Australia  supported  China 's efforts to reduce pollution  through a broad 
range of measures, but shared the concerns of other delegations about the ban on certain waste 
and scrap imports. Australia believed that there were more effective mechanisms for addressing 
contamination risk in waste. The blanke t ban on imports  would affect Australian exporters  and 
could lead to  large amount s of waste going  to landfill, instead of being recycled in China and 
recovered for intermediate materials. His delegation was looking forward to receiving a response 
to a number of questions and comments submitted to China's  Enquiry Point. In addition , he sought 
furthe r infor mation and clarification  on the reasons for the ban, including the specific contaminants 
and hazardous products that had been present in imports;  and the method of classification or 
definition  of the products included in the banned list . He also queried the  regulations or standards 
applied to domestic waste products  and how they were to be enforced, and whether  domestic 
waste standards were the same as the ones applied  to foreign waste . He recalled that under the 
terms of the TBT Agreement a  reasonable time should be provided that would allow stakeholders 
to adapt to the new requirement s, and urged  China to delay the implementation of this measure 
until after consultation with affected stakeholders and for industry to adjust to any change, an d for 
China to put in place a more targeted measure.   
2.13.   The representative of Canada  echoed concerns of other Members about China's import 
restrictions on solid waste and the uncertainty for traders.  Canada had exported a wide range of 
recyclable materials for use in industrial processes ( such as paper mills  and metal smelters ). 
Canada  understood  the role of those imports for the domestic economy and the importance of 
environmentally sound management of those materials. He asked for further information on the  
list of products subject to the ban, descriptions of banned materials and the rationale  for China's 
decisions  under the revised Catalogue of Solid Wastes Forbidden to Import into China. In addition, G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Canada requested clarifications on whether the proposed measures would be applicable to goods 
destined for recycling operations. The trade in recyclable materials between Canada and China was 
mutually beneficial: Canada was not able to process many of these materials as efficiently as 
China , and Canadian source s supplied valuable raw materials for Chinese companies. Import 
restriction on those materials to China might increase  prices and negatively impact the 
competitiveness of the Chinese processors. Canada encouraged China to consider all possible 
mechanisms w hich would not disrupt th is lucrative trade while reducing  harmful  environmental 
impacts.  
2.14.   The representative of China  explained that a series of measures  had been adopted , under  
the current policy framework that aim ed at prevent ing environmental pollution risks generated by 
solid waste. The reforms to the solid waste import administration regime were one of the most 
important steps by the Chinese G overnment to implement the new Development Ideas, and to 
protect the eco -environment and public health. On 18 J uly 2017, China notified the measure to the 
WTO, and attached great importance and carefully considered all comments received. China 
underlined that adjustments had been made to the final catalogue. First ly, the new catalogue 
would enter into force from 31 December 2017 , leaving a six month transition period for relevant 
industries and enterprises  to adapt to the new requirements. Second ly, the scope of the affected 
solid waste was further specified and clarified.  
2.2.3.3   India — Amended regulation on toy import s  
2.15.   The representative of the European Union  expressed concern about India's amended 
regulation on the import of toys, which had entered into force with immediate effect in September. 
The amended regulation replaced the earlier requirement - according to wh ich imported toys had 
to conform to international standards (such as ISO 8124) - with a requirement to conform to 
standards prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS). It also replaced the earlier 
requirement for testing by an independent laborator y accredited under ILAC MRA with a 
requirement that imported toys are to be tested by an independent laboratory accredited by the 
National Accreditation Board for Testing & Calibration laboratories (NABL) – India. His delegation 
considered that the latter requirement was tantamount to a de facto "in -country testing 
requirement" for imported toys and therefore constituted a significant barrier to trade. The 
application of the amended regulation with immediate effect and without appropriate stakeholder 
consul tations had a severe negative impact on EU industry as shipments of toys to India had been 
obliged to be put on hold for an indefinite period of time.  
2.16.   The EU then drew India's attention to the obligation under Articles 2.12 and 5.9 of the TBT 
Agreement, an d asked India to urgently suspend the application of the amended regulation. In 
addition India was reminded of its obligation under the TBT Agreement to notify the amended 
regulation to the WTO, to allow a reasonable time for comments and to take the comme nts 
received into account. In line with the recommendations of the TBT Committee, the EU asked India 
to provide at least 60 days and, if possible, 90 days for comments by other Members. Finally, the 
EU asked India to explain the rationale for the amended r egulation and to consider allowing 
conformance to the relevant ISO or EN standards, as an alternative to the BIS standards, and in 
particular refrain from the "in -country testing requirement" for imported toys.  
2.17.   The representative of China  acknowledged repo rted that the Indian Ministry of Commerce 
and Industry had published on its website Notification No.26/2015 -2020 to amend the Policy 
Condition No.2, specifically the import conditions of toys, which had not been notified to WTO. As 
these measures had alrea dy had an obvious impact on trade in toys, China requested that India 
notify the amended regulation on toy imports and give other Members a comment period of at 
least 60 days and a reasonable transitional period.  
2.18.   The representative of the United States  expressed her delegation's serious concerns with 
the transparency of India's recent actions. She noted that prior to the regulatory changes India 
had employed what many considered the "gold standard", meaning that toy manufacturers could 
test to either the AS TM, ISO, or EN toy safety standards in the country of manufacture by an ILAC 
accredited lab. She stressed that while India had noted that the rationale for the regulatory 
changes was a concern about the quality of products entering from a particular countr y, the 
measure was affecting all imports, regardless of the country of origin. According to India's recent 
trade statistics, India imported toys from 48 different countries in 2016, of which the US was the 
6th largest exporter, primarily in specialty toys from small and medium -sized manufacturers. She G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 5 - 
 
  added that the US was also home to two of the world's largest toy companies, for which the value 
of the Indian toy market was estimated at $75 -100 million in 2016.  
2.19.   She reported that US industry, those that pro duce domestically and produce regionally for 
sale in India, had reported that they were no longer accepting orders for toys to India and urged 
them to understand the unintended consequences this measure would have on the supply of toys 
to India. Furthermor e, she said, if reputable international toy companies such as those based in 
the US pulled out of the Indian market, it was likely that the void would be filled by counterfeit 
products circumventing the in -country testing required under the new regulation which could have 
a ripple effect on the Indian retail sector that would not have a reliable source of toys to sell during 
the upcoming gift -giving season. US industry had also reported that the current back up of toys 
waiting to be tested at Indian labs wa s estimated at 10 months.  
2.20.   It appeared to the US that, according to the Amendment, only imports were to comply with 
the new changes; explanation was sought as to whether the same standards, testing, and 
certification requirements were being equally applied  to domestically produced toys. In this light, 
the US requested that India notify the technical regulation to the TBT Committee and, consistent 
with the TBT Committee recommendations, allow for at least a 60 -day comment period. In 
addition, her delegation requested that India delay implementation until all interested parties, 
including US industry, had had an opportunity to submit written comments on the regulation, 
discuss these comments upon request, and have these comments taken into account in the final  
measure. Finally, it was requested that India issue an immediate stay on this measure and give 
toy companies time to comply with the new requirements.  
2.21.   The representative of Mexico  supported the comments made by the EU, China and the US. 
She explained tha t her delegation's concern was that under the new Indian regulations all imports 
of toys must be tested using conformity assessment facilities accredited by NABL, facilities that 
could be found only in India, to demonstrate compliance with the recently upd ated IND safety 
standards for toys IS 9873 series and IS 1566. Mexico considered that this substantially amended 
the previous regulations which allowed any laboratory accredited by ILAC to carry out such toy 
safety tests. Accordingly, Mexico requested Indi a to: (i) notify the Members of the TBT Committee 
of the measure and allow time for comments in accordance with the provisions of the TBT 
Agreement; (ii) revise the measure with respect to the laboratories accredited for carrying out 
laboratory tests; and (iii) suspend the restrictions on imports of toys into the country and 
postpone their implementation in order to give importers more time to adjust to the new changes. 
Finally, she thanked India for engaging in bilateral discussions on this issue.  
2.22.    The rep resentative of Canada  expressed support for other Members' concerns. Given 
significant concerns with the newly implemented regulation and the lack of supporting testing 
infrastructure, Canada requested that India issue an immediate stay regarding enforceme nt of this 
measure. His delegation further recommended that any compliance testing be conducted by an 
ILAC-accredited testing facility and urged notification of the regulation to the TBT Committee, in 
accordance with its international trade obligations.  
2.23.   The representative of India said that notification 26 dated 1 September 2017 had been 
made applicable with immediate effect. He explained that the regulation had been amended 
primarily as related to the equivalent standard and the conformity assessment proc edure on the 
import of toys falling under HS codes 95030010, 95030020, 95030030 and 95030090. The 
modification of earlier notifications, particularly policy condition no. 2, had been in light of several 
observations received on the issue of toy safety in I ndia, not from the industry associations, but 
from stakeholders. More specifically, concerns had been raised on the sub -standard quality of toys 
being imported which placed children at serious risk and therefore, as an emergency measure, this 
precautionary  action had been taken by India. He flagged that the regulation was in the process of 
being notified under Articles 5.7.1 and 2.10.1 of the TBT Agreement.2 His delegation nonetheless 
remained available for further bilateral discussion with other Members.  
                                                
2 Subsequently circulated as G/TBT/N/IND/68.  G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.2.3.4   China — Certification requirements for processed foods G/TBT/N/CHN/1209  
2.24.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated its support for the objective of the 
Chinese authorities to ensure the safety of  food products traded internationally , as already 
conveyed in written comments to the draft, but expressed doubt that the measure would serve 
this objective . His delegation  believed that the  objective could be achieved with less restrictive 
measures that would not create an unnecessary administrative burden for operators. The EU's 
review of the notified draft had identified several problematic aspects and China was r equest ed to 
address these issues in order to implement the measure in a way that would  not unnecessarily 
disrupt the substantial trade of the pro ducts concerned between the EU and China.  Certification 
should not be required for very low -risk foodstuffs and the range of products that would  be 
covered by the certification requirement was still unclear.  
2.25.   The EU welcome d that Chinese authorities  (AQSIQ) had  expressed assurance  on several 
occasions that they were looking for a smooth solution which would not disrupt existing trade. In 
this regard,  the transition period of two years that had been granted was particularly welcomed. 
The EU was ready to fully cooperate in findings solutions to accommodate China's needs but these 
shoul d be reasonable and could include work ing on electronic certification to reduce the 
administrative  burden to the extent possible. Finally, the EU asked China to keep M embe rs 
informed of further developments.  
2.26.   The representative of the United States  thank ed China for its bilateral engagement on the 
concerns raised on the proposed official certification requirements for imported foods, and for its 
recent notification to the TB T Committee of a two -year transitional period for implementation, from 
1 October 2017 to 30 September 2019. Whilst  welcoming  China 's 19 June 2017 notification of the  
measure to the TBT Committee, she noted that the stated objective of the measure was prote ction 
of human health and food safety and therefore requested, pursuant to Article 7 of the SPS 
Agreem ent, that China also notify the  measure to the SPS Committee.  
2.27.   She noted that the  measure, entitled "AQSIQ Food Bureau 's Correspondence [2017] No.83 ", 
would require a range of imported food products , including  processed, shelf -stable foods,  to be 
accompanied by official certificates on a shipment -by-shipment basis . Her delegation believed that 
the proposed measure was overly broad in scope, and did not ident ify the sp ecific concern that 
China wished  to address  and, a s such, deviated  from the extensive array of relevant Codex 
guidelines and principles upon which Members are ob liged to base official certification 
requirements, in the absence of  an appropriate risk assessment.  On the understanding further 
changes and clarifications to the measure were being considered prior to implementation, the US 
looked forward to continued engagement with China in order to reach agreement on non -
discriminatory, evidence -based requirements for food imports that support mutually beneficial 
trade.  
2.28.   The representative of Guatemala  welcomed the addendum to notification 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1209, extending  the transitional period to 30 September 2019. She request ed a 
written res ponse to comments submitted in August 2017,  mainly to clarify the implementation and 
use of the certificates  and relating  to Articles 3 and 13 of the relevant legislation. Her delegation 
also believed that China could  achieve the objective by using other m easures that would  not 
hinder trade . 
2.29.   The representative of Singapore  expressed interest in developments on this measure  and 
welcomed the  provision of a t wo-year transitional period . Singapore looked forward to receiving 
responses to written questions submi tted to AQSIQ in July 2017 and to further engagements with 
AQSIQ with a view to minimizing  any potential trade disruptions.  
2.30.   The representative of China  stated that after consideration of  comments from interested 
Members, China had notified the provision of  a transitiona l period of two years, postponing 
enforcement of the measure  until 1 October 2019.  He explained that the provision of the 
transitional period was based on the understanding of the pr actical situations of concerned 
Members  and encouraged inter ested parties to maintain contact with China 's competent 
department and to continu e discussion s on technical details . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.2.3.5   Ecuador — Household refrigerating appliances (RTE INEN No. 009)  
G/TBT/N/ECU/3/Add.5  
2.31.   The representative of Colombia  expressed concern about the regulation, in particular with 
respect to the interpretation of a "reasonable interval" for producers to adapt to new 
requirements.3  
2.32.   The representative of Ecuador  reported that the national technical committee had recently 
carried out a technical review of this RTE INEN 009 which had led to some amendments in respect 
of the conformity assessment of the regulation which would be implemented 365 calendar days 
after publication in the official journal, in line with TBT requirement s. She said that her delegation 
would address the matter with Colombia on a bilateral basis.  
2.2.3.6   Viet Nam — Decree on the regulation on conditions for automobiles 
manufacturing, assembling importing and automotive warranty & maintenance services  
2.33.   The representative of Japan  sought an explanation of the regulation's objective. 
Furthermore, article 6.2 of the regulation stipulated  that automobile importers were required to 
provide quality management agencies with a copy of the quality certificate of automobile types  
granted by overseas authorized agencies. Her delegation deemed that the detail s of the 
certification required by automobile importers were not clear, and even if detail s were revealed 
shortly , they might be trade -restrictive as the  regulat ion would  enter into force on 1 January 2018. 
Japan request ed Viet Nam to implement th e regulation in line with the TBT A greement, and to 
postpone the date of entry into force.  
2.34.   The representative of the United States  supported  Japan's comments. The US was 
concerned that the measure  would  be implemented without the notice of a comment period and 
also with insufficient time for implementation  and therefore encouraged Viet Nam to duly notify 
the regulation.  
2.35.   The representative of Thailand  voiced support for the comments made by Japan and the US,  
encouraging  Viet Nam to notify the regulation to the WTO in order to allow M embers to comment 
in line with TBT rules. Thailand also request ed the provision of a reasonable transition period of at 
least one year for devel oping countries to adapt their products to the new requirements  in order to 
avoid negative impacts on international trade. She thank ed Viet Nam for bilateral discussion s and 
looked forward to receiving an update on the matter.  
2.36.   The representative of Viet Na m said that the concerns raised would be sent to the 
competent agencies in capital for consideration  and that her delegation  would revert to those 
Members in due course.  Viet Nam also welcome d the  bilateral me eting with Japan and other WTO 
Members on these  measures.  
2.2.3.7   European Union — The establishment and operation of a traceability system for 
tobacco products (G/TBT/N/EU/505  and G/TBT/N/EU/507 ) 
2.37.   The representative of Cuba voiced serious concern regarding the impact that the EU's  
legislation would have on its tobacco industry .4 
2.38.    The representative of the European Union  said that the draft measures had been notified to 
the WTO on 12 September 2017 providing 60 days for comment, meaning that the deadline for 
submission of comments was 11 November 2017. He acknowledged receipt of comments from 
Cuba on both notifications, t he day prior to the meeting, and said that the EU was analysing the 
comments and would duly provide a reply. The EU remained open to further bilateral exchanges on 
the matter.  
                                                
3 The full statement is contained in document G/TBT/W/458   (circulated on 30 November 2017) . 
4 The full statement is available in document G/TBT/W/4 59 (circulated on 8 November 2017).  G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 8 - 
 
  2.2.4   Previously raised concerns  
2.2.4.1   India — Pneumatic tyres and tubes for automotive vehi cles G/TBT/N/IND/20 
G/TBT/N/IND/40 (IMS ID 1335) 
2.1.  The representative of the European Union  repeated her delegation's concerns , raised in 
various Committee meetings,  with the Indian measure at issue which introduced a certification 
procedure with a mandatory  marking for tyres.  She also added, w ith respect to the requirements 
of the Scheme of Testing Inspections, that the recent increase of the size of the "control unit"  to 
30,000 tyres notably reduced  the industry's conformity of production (COP) testing burd en. 
However, the system remain ed specific to India, given that the international practice require d COP 
tests every two years and did not depend on the number of tyres. The EU asked India to explain 
what was the specific safety -related objectives that India was pursuing by requiring such a 
frequency of the tests and what add itional benefits did  such testing introduce in addition to COP 
tests based on the UNECE.  
2.2.  The representative of the Republic of Korea  repeated the concerns raised in previous 
meeting s, requesting India to remove the discrimination between domestic and foreign companies 
and to eliminate the usage fee for ISI mark or at least reduce it.  
2.3.  The representative of India stated that the issues raised were not new and had been 
explained several times  in previous meetings. On the concern that the testing requirements were 
burdensome and costly, he explained that  the testing frequency has been reduced six times, 
thereby considerably reducing the est imated cost and that India  had a bilateral meeting with some 
Members to further understand their concerns.  He also explained  that the performance bank 
guarantee was intended to protect the BIS during the tenure of the licence and was invoked only 
in case of breach of any condition of t he agreement si gned between BIS and licensee. This 
guarantee covered loss of revenue to BIS on account of non -payment of requisite marking fee. He 
mentioned that while compensation through court was available for breaches by domestic 
manufacturers, this wa s not possible for breaches by foreign manufacturers. India referred 
Members to its position in previous meetings concerning the concern on excessively high marking 
fees. In addition, he said that BIS was a non -profit organization, with marking fees aimed at 
covering administrative expenses (e.g. marking and testing of samples and other overhead 
expenses). The marking fee charged to foreign and domestic manufacturers was  equal.  
2.2.4.2   China — Provisions for the Administration of Cosmetics Application Acceptance 
G/TBT/N/CHN/821 (IMS ID 2966) 
2.4.  The representative  of Japan  reiterated the request for clarification (including content  and 
schedule ) regarding the revision of the "Guidance for Application and Evaluation of New Cosmetic 
Ingredients ". On the revision of "Regul ations concerning Hygiene Supervision over Cosmetics ", 
Japan request ed China to notify this measure in advance and provide sufficient time  prior to its 
entry into force. In addition, Japan remained concerned with safety evaluation and information 
disclosur e of the current Guidance . The speed of examination  was also of concern , as only four 
new ingredients had  been registered s ince the implementation of the guidance Foreign industries 
were concern ed with the implementation of the  Guidance including informati on disclosure  which 
was possibly  one of the reasons why the number of registration for new ingredients  had not been 
increasing . Japan request ed that its concerns be resolved during  the revision of "Regulations 
concerning Hygiene Supervision over Cosmetics ". 
2.5.  The representative of the European Union  repeated the concerns  stated  in previous TBT 
Committee meetings. She asked what was the planned timeframe for the adoption of the new 
approach  on cosmetics ingredients, and requested that China provide an update o n the state of 
play of the new draft on Cosmetics Supervision and Administration Regulation.  
2.6.  The representative of China  noted that m ost of the concerns had been raised in previous 
meetings  to which detailed explanations have been provided. As there were n o further updates to 
give, she referred to responses given at th ose previous meeting s. 
                                                
5 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 133  (under dates raised and references) . 
6 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 296  (under dates raised and re ferences) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 9 - 
 
  2.2.4.3   India — New Telecommunications related Rules (Department of 
Telecommunications, No. 842 -725/2005 -VAS/Vol.III (3 December 2009); No. 10 -
15/2009 -AS-III/193 (18 March 2010) ; and Nos. 10 -15/2009 -AS.III/Vol.II/(Pt.)/(25 -
29) (28 July 2010); Department of Telecommunications, No. 10 -15/2009 -
AS.III/Vol.II/(Pt.)/(30) (28 July 2010) and accompanying template, "Security and 
Business Continuity Agreement") (IMS ID 2747) 
2.7.  The representa tive of the European Union  reiterated the need for urgent clarification of  the 
effective date of entry into force of the testing requirements, which was underst ood to be 1  April 
2018. The EU repeated concerns raised in previous meetings . In addition, and in the context of the 
need to allow adequate time before the entry into force of the requirements , his delegation was  
concerned with the possible extension of the requirement of in -country testing/certification not 
only of telecom network elements, but also all equipment to be connected to Indian networks. 
Confirmation was therefore sought as to the scope of the measures. On the issue of testing and 
certification related rules, he suggested that they be looked at in the broader perspective of 
policies affecting the telecom sector, and in that regard he indicated that the EU was also closely 
following the public comment procedure on "Promoting Local T elecom Equipment Manufacturing ", 
recently launched by India.  
2.8.  The representative of the United  States  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings.  
2.9.  The representative of Japan  repeated the concerns raised in previous meetings and recalling 
that at the previous meeting India had announced that the deadline for the in -country security 
certification had been extended to April 2018 , her delegation reiterate d its request that the 
regulations be implemented in a transparent manner in terms of testing methods and certification 
requirements.  
2.10.   The representative of Canada  reported that his delegation remaine d concerned with India' s 
in-country security testing requirements and reiterate d its comments provided at the November 
2016 TBT Committee meeting as reflected in paragraph 2.68 of G/TBT/M/70.  
2.11.   The representative of India repeated the explanations provided i n previous meetings. In 
addition, on  the issue o f the extension, he clarified that the deadline for in -country security 
certification which had been  extended to 1 April 2017 was still continuing and that the notification 
was available on the website of the  Department of Telecommunications and available in English .8 
The status quo regarding security testing and certification requirements would  continue until the 
extended date and may even  be subject to further extension. He reassured Members that a 
sufficient transition time would be provided to facilitate compliance with the requirements before  
an actual effective date for the network elements. India remained available to discuss these issues 
bilaterally.  
2.2.4.4   China — Requirements for information security  products, including, inter alia, 
the Office of State Commercial Cryptography Administration (OSCCA) 1999 Regulation 
on commercial encryption products and its on -going revision and the Multi -Level 
Protection Scheme (MLPS) ; China — Banking IT Equipment Secu rity Regulation ; China — 
Insurance Regulatory Commission (CIRC) Information and Communication Technology 
Regulation G/TBT/N/CHN/1172 (IMS IDs 294 , 457 and 4899) 
2.12.   The representative of the European Union  reiterate d the importance of clarifying the 
implications and consequences of the adoption and entry into force of the new Cybersecurity Law 
for the existing rules, notably the MLPS and the OSCCA regulation on commercial encryption 
products.  The OSCCA regulation had been under review for many years and the EU requested  an 
update concerning both the timing of this review as well as  the process for the overall review of 
the MLPS along with the OSCCA regulation to bring them in line with the new Cybersecurity Law.  
                                                
7 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 274  (under dates raised and references) . 
8 www.dot.gov.in  
9 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 294 , IMS ID 457  and IMS ID 489  (under dates 
raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 10 - 
 
  2.13.   He stressed the need for a transparent and predictable process for developing rules in the 
field of information security ; while the EU  welcome d the public consultations on certain draft rules , 
this was not yet systematic. Moreover, the EU recall ed the importance  of openness and 
accessibility of the standardization process in this field, considering that any third party 
assessment of products for the purpose of information security would be carried out according to 
mandatory standards. In this respect , he noted  that the key technical committee for information 
security (TC 260) still refuse d access to some foreign invested enterprises in China. The EU kindly 
request ed China to notify draft measures in any subsequent sectoral implementation to the TBT 
Committee , in order to give adequate opportunity for WTO Members and their stakeholders to 
comment on any subsequent developments . 
2.14.   Specifically regarding information security in the banking sector, the EU requested  an 
update by China on the status and expected timeline o f the possible revision of the Guideline for 
Promoting the Application of Secure and Controllable Information Technology in Banking Sector 
(2014 -2015) . 
2.15.   As for the rules applicable to the insurance sector, the EU reiterated its concerns regarding 
the draft insurance sector informatization rules, which had the effect of mandating insurance 
institutions in China to progressively phase out non -domestic crypto graphic products. This would 
be tantamount to a ban on procuring foreign cryptography products compared with domestic 
products. It would prevent insurance institutions from using the most developed and innovative 
encryption products and solutions, which wo uld have the unintended consequence of weakening 
rather than strengthening information and network security. T he EU recalled  that the concept of 
"secure a nd controllable", which was also used in the National Security Law and the Cybersecurity 
Law, lacked p recision and created  uncertainty for economic operator s. 
2.16.   In addition, the EU raised concerns regarding the requirement that insurance institutions 
obtain the ownership of the source code of the equipment and the compulsory  use of national 
standards and enc ryption requirements based on national algorithms. The EU sought  an update 
from China with respect to the revision of the measure. He asked  that China also confirm if the 
revised draft will be notified to the WTO for comments. The EU recall ed the importanc e of allowing 
for adequate participation of interested parties in the domestic process . 
2.17.   The representative of the United States  remained  troubled by what seem ed to be a wide -
spread effort by China to impose "secure and controllable " requirements, largely b ased on the 
MLPS system, on IC T products. The US said t he MLPS was inflexibly prescriptive and could restrict 
the ability of consumers to purchase technologies established as safe everywhere else in the 
world. Additionally, the requirements raise national treatment concerns by mandating domestic IP 
and equipment usage in sectors deemed "critical".  This was particularly concerning given the 
extensive scope of projects that are classified as level 3 or above.  Other Members have rules to 
ensure security of cri tical infrastructure,  the US noted,  but do so without stifl ing international 
competition. The fact that China was now expanding the MLPS to include a wide array of 
commercial sectors that do not constitute critical infrastructure raise d further concerns. The US  
would appreciate further clarification as to the linkage between MLPS and the Cybersecurity 
Classified Protection Scheme referenced in the Cybersecurity Law.  She also hope d that China will 
take into account all stakeholder comments made on the draft standards related to MLPS, but 
more broadly  to adopt international standards instead of creating country -specific ones.  
2.18.   China's draft measures for "secure and controllable" technology in the banking sector 
continued to affect sales of foreign technology to  banks in China.  Without China's announcement 
that such rules or other measures restricting or limiting the use of foreign technology products in 
the banking sector would not be imposed at a later date, the banking sector remained reluctant to 
purchase for eign technology products, which raised concerns of national treatment. The US urged 
China to uphold its transparency commitments by notifying relevant technical regulations to the 
WTO TBT Committee, publicly soliciting comments, and taking into account sta keholders' 
comments from the US Government, industries, and foreign governments before implementing 
any similar cybersecurity measures in the banking or other commercial sectors.  
2.19.   The representative of Japan  still ha d concern s about "Regulation on the Administration of 
Commercial Cipher Codes (promulgated on October 7, 1999) " and the MLPS. At the previous 
meeting, China stated that these two regulations would be revised in line with the principles of the 
Cybersecurity Law, and Japan  requested an update on the revision process . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 11 - 
 
  2.20.   With regard to Article 56 of CIRC Information and Communication Technology Regulation, 
which prescribed the application of MLPS by insurance institutions , Japan was concerned that 
requiring Chinese intellectual property in core tec hnologies or requiring domestic certification in 
China might cause discrimination against foreign companies in some security protection levels. She 
recalled that Japan and other Members  requested that the revised draft regulation be no more 
trade restricti ve than necessary, and in accordance with international standards, and she asked 
China to confirm whether  these requests would be reflected in the revised regulation . 
2.21.   Finally, with regard to the "Chinese banking IT equipment security regulation ", China sta ted 
that the Guideline for Promoting the Application of Secure and Controllable Information Technology 
in Banking Sector (2014 -2015)  had expired. In this respect, Japan continued to observe  influence 
of the guideline  on industries after its expiration.  
2.22.   The representative of Australia  reiterate d concerns and supported those concerns raised by 
others regarding the proposed CIRC Information and Communication Technology Regulation  and 
the Banking IT Equipment Security Regulation.  Australia understood China's de sire to protect ICT 
infrastructure, but questioned whether the proposed measures were more trade restrictive than 
necessary. His delegation requested further information from China on the status of the 
regulations and whether they would be permanently with drawn.  
2.23.   The representative of Canada  supports the concerns of other Members regarding the CIRC 
Information and Communication Technology Regulation, and reiterated its statement from the 
March 2017 meeting . 
2.24.   The representative of China  said that in order to  implement the requirements of promoting 
administration according to law, deepen the administrative reform and transform government 
functions in the domain of commercial cryptography, China was organizing the revision of the 
Regulations on Commercial Cryptog raphy to further reduce the administrative licenses, and 
strengthen supervision in the whole process.  He said t he revision s of the Regulations on 
Commercial Cryptography were still in the process of research.  After the promulgation of the Law 
on Cryptography of the People 's Republic of China, China would  continue to revise the Regulations 
on Commercial Cryptography according to the Law on Cryptography, and release the Regulations 
for public consultation in appr opriate time.  
2.25.   The representative explained that the information security MLPS w ould be revised in line 
with the Cybersecurity Law. As this was still  being drafted , China would  take its trading partners ' 
concerns into consideration.  With respect to banking,  she said that the  Guideline for Promoting the 
Application of Secure and Controllable Information Technology in Banking Sector (2014 -2015) was 
suspended in April 2015, and ha d already expired.  China would  always abide by its WTO 
commitments, and be open an d transparent in drafting the measures for commercial banking 
information system s. Regarding insurance, she said that the CIRC  Regulation was still under 
drafting. She emphasized that d uring the whole process, China was open, transparent, and had 
notified the WTO.  China was  studying and evaluating all  comments, and bilateral communication 
and consultation s were ongoing . 
2.2.4.5   Russian Federation — Draft Technical Regulation on Alcohol Drinks Safety 
(published on 24 October 2011),  G/TBT/N/RUS/2 (IMS ID 33210) 
2.26.   The representative of Ukraine  reiterated his delegation 's request that the Russia n Federation 
revise and notify the draft technical regulations, and to provide comments concerning the 
mandatory requirements for applicants to register in the territory of the Eur asian Economic Union 
(EAEU). Any fees used to assess the conformity of products originating in the territories of other 
Members needed to be equitable in relation to fees charged for assessing the conformity of like 
products of national origin. It was note d that the cost for conformity assessment procedures for 
producers from other  countries could include additional costs associated with registration of legal 
entities in the territory of the EAEU or contracting with existing legal entities registered on the  
territory of the EAEU, and hence could be higher than the costs of producers from member States 
of the EAEU. Ukraine asked the Russian Federation to provide Members with updated information 
                                                
10 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 332  (under dates raised and references).  G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 12 - 
 
  and called on Russia to remove unjustified technical barriers to trade and to bring the provisions of 
the mentioned Technical Regulation in line with the requirements of the international practice.  
2.27.   The representative of the  European Union  also asked Russia to update the Committee on 
any changes of status, or new information in relation to the timeline for adoption and 
implementation of the draft technical regulation on alcohol product safety, which had been notified 
in 2012. The delegation  recalled the detailed comments submitted to Russia in writing during 2013 
through the WTO -TBT notification system and which had been a matter of discussion at 
subsequent meetings of the TBT Committee. Yet no revised text had been notified to the TBT 
Commi ttee, nor had any measure been published. The EU requested Russia to provide clarification 
on the state of play for the draft notification. If the draft measure had been modified and included 
substantial changes, the EU asked Russia to notify once again th e revised text to the TBT 
Committee.  
2.28.   The representative of the United States  said that she had previously outlined a number of 
concerns with Russia 's draft alcoholic beverage regulation (G/TBT/N/RUS/2). At the June 2017 TBT 
Committee meeting, Russia had no ted that further EAEU consultations had taken place in April and 
were due to continue in July. She asked if Russia could provide an update on the outcome of those 
consultations. The measure had been notified to this Committee in 2012; could Russia provide 
further information on the process and timelines for finalizing the regulation? At the June TBT 
Committee meeting, Russia had said that no comment period would be provided on the revised 
text; in this respect, Russia was referred to the TBT Committee 's rec ommendations on the 
coherent use of notification formats which provided that a new comment period should be provided 
when substantial changes had been made to a draft measure. The United States requested that 
Russia provide such an opportunity for input be fore finalization.  
2.29.   The representative of Guatemala  asked Russia for further information on the results of the 
internal consultations that had taken place in June 2017. She asked for more information about 
the date of notification, and on any modifications  made to the measure. She was also concerned 
that the measure could constitute a barrier to international trade.  
2.30.   The representative of the Russia n Federation  said that the draft technical regulation "On 
Alcohol Drinks Safety " had been elaborated in order t o establish uniform requirements in the EAEU 
for commercial turnover of alcoholic products, both imported and domestic, and to protect human 
health and life and consumer rights. Member States of the EAEU continued working on the draft 
technical regulation;  all comments of the WTO Members would be taken into account as provided 
for by Article 2.9.4 of the TBT Agreement, and Members would be informed about further 
developments regarding the adoption of the technical regulation.  
2.2.4.6   Indonesia — Technical Guideline s for the Implementation of the Adoption and 
Supervision of Indonesian National Standards for Obligatory Toy Safety, 
G/TBT/N/IDN/64, G/TBT/N/IDN/64/Add.1 -2 (IMS ID 32811) 
2.31.   The representative of the European Union  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings . In 
this meeting he emphasised that t he participation of the Indonesian national accreditation body, 
KAN, in the ILAC MRA  would, in the EU's view, establish  trust between KAN and the other 
signatories to the ILAC MRA and it should therefore be a sufficien t basis for the Ministry of 
Industry to accept test results from laboratories accre dited by ILAC MRA signatories. A formal  
government -to-government MRA would no longer be  necessary . Alternatively, the Indonesian 
authorities could consider explicitly permit ting Indonesian certification bodies to enter into sub -
contracting agreements with foreign laboratories for the recognition of foreign test results as a 
basis for certification in Indonesia.  
2.32.   The representative s of the United States  and Japan  repeated conce rns raised in previous 
meetings  and requested that Indonesia provide  an update on the current status of the revision 
process.  
                                                
11 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 328  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 13 - 
 
  2.33.   The representative of Indonesia  informed the Committee that it was  still reviewing 
Ministerial Regulation No.  55/2013 . He also said that,  whereas the Indonesia National Standard for 
Toys refers to ISO  8124:2012 , currently,  the SNI for Toys refers to ISO  8124:2014 , which was  still 
being consulted for consensus among related stakeholders. Such consensus would then become  
the basis f or the revision of the Ministerial Regulation. Indonesia assure d Members that the 
revision of this Regulation would  comply with WTO obligations and would  also consider the 
different s ampling method. Indonesia placed  utmost importance on consumer protection , which 
was an overarching objective of this revision.  Indonesia w ould recognize the test results of foreign 
conformity assessment bodies if accredited by national accreditation bod ies signatory to APLAC  
and ILAC. Regarding  acceptance at the national level , Indonesia required a  mutual recognition 
agreement (MRA) with a  regulatory authority  on a reciprocal basis . 
2.2.4.7   Republic of Korea — Regulation on Registration and Evaluation of Chemical 
Material G/TBT/N/KOR/305, G/TBT/N/KOR/305/Add.1, G/TBT/N/KOR/478, 
G/TBT/N /KOR/547, G/TBT/N/KOR/592, G/TBT/N/KOR/700   (IMS ID 30512) 
2.34.   The representative of the United States  asked for an implementation update, including 
whether there would be new decrees or public consultations. Pointing out that the succession of 
new decrees and implementation dates had added to compliance difficulties, she asked for the 
modifications to be notified to the WTO. She also asked whether industry concerns were being 
considered and whether SME assistance would only be for Korean SMEs. Considering that the 
reduction in data requirements was only for substances considered to be non -hazardous, she 
asked whether other data requirement changes were also being considered. In addition, she asked 
that Korea provide feedback, preferably in writing, in response t o the comments submitted by US 
industry regarding the recent announcements and notifications. Pointing out that US requests for 
guidance on how industry could comply remained unanswered, she asked whether guidance, 
preferably also in English, would be issu ed. Noting the 26 May 2017 announcement of the National 
Institute of Environmental Research (NIER) on registrations permitting alternatives to test reports, 
she sought clarification on alternative data sources that would be accepted.  
2.35.   In light of recent di scussions, the US requested an information -sharing DVC between the US 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Korean regulators and the industry in the pursuing weeks 
as well as an explanation on how its recent enforcement notifications would ease requireme nts for 
US manufacturers. Recent announcements had not alleviated concerns about the compliance 
burden, with many US companies considering withdrawing from the Korean market, to the 
detriment of Korean manufacturing sectors. There was also confusion and un certainty about 
specific requirements and acceptance of notifications and registrations. Also, chemicals continued 
to be added or removed from the toxic substances list without proper procedures. While Korea had 
indicated that companies could apply to the Ministry of Environment for confidential treatment of 
some information, US companies reported that Korea was denying most CBI (Confidential Business 
Information) claims. She asked how this issue could be resolved so that companies could have 
their CBI prot ected. Furthermore, reports had been received from US industry that NIER did not 
accept QSAR and read -across techniques, which would help reduce duplicative testing. She asked 
whether this was correct and if so, why Korea did not accept these conformity as sessment 
procedures as per KORUS Article 9.5.2. In addition, she asked Korea to clarify in writing whether 
the US industry's indication was correct that Korea was moving towards ending the research and 
development exemption, with negative implications for innovation, and was no longer accepting 
international assessments. Finally, she requested Korea to consider "Only Representative " 
functions, similar to the EU 's. 
2.36.   In addition to registering chemicals, companies needed to submit annual reports containing 
volume, uses, company data, etc. There was no indication as to how the government used this 
proprietary information, how it was necessary to protect human health and the environment, why 
this reporting was necessary and how it fulfilled Korea's objectives.  The US had repeatedly 
expressed concerns that AREC was potentially more trade restrictive than necessary and had 
received assurances that the Ministry of Environment was considering revising or easing the 
burdens, only to find additional requirements in t he subsequent ly notified  measures. She 
underlined the importance the US attached to ensuring that the Act on the Registration  and 
Evaluation of Chemicals (AREC) did not create unnecessary obstacle s to trade.  
                                                
12 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 305 (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 14 - 
 
  2.37.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  said that the Draft Amendment to K -REACH had 
been submitted to the Korea n National Assembly in  August 2017 for review.  Once the 
amendments to K -REACH were finalized, the d raft of each related regulation would  be notified to 
the WTO and Korea would  provide an opportunity for comments  from interested parties , including 
foreign stakeholders. R egarding the specific comment on alternative data sources,  when literature 
or research such as international organizations ' or othe r countries' assessment reports were  
reliable, potential registrants could already  submit this data instead of a test report. The Ministry 
of Environment planned to retain  this system. Lastly, the bilateral consultation s held  with the US 
earlier in the week had been very productive in  understand ing each other's views and clarifying 
some miscommunications. In particular , Korea hoped that the written replies provided to the US 
would answer their specific questions and comments. Korea would continue  to communicate with 
interested parties , including th e US , for th e smooth implementation of the  regulations in a 
transparent manner as well as in full compliance with TBT Agreement obligations.  
2.2.4.8   European Union — Draft Implementing Regulations amending Regulation (EC) 
No. 607/2009 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) 
No 479/2008 as regards protected designations of origin and geographical indications, 
traditional terms, labelling and presentation of certain wine sector products , 
G/TBT/N/EU/246 , G/TBT/N/EU/246/Add.1  (IMS ID  34513) 
2.38.   The representative of Argentina  expressed regret at having  to reiterate concern about the 
EU's unjustified delay in resolving this STC , raised by Argentina and other Members since 2009. 
Argentina had repeatedly pointed out that Regulations (EC) No. 479/08 and No. 607/09 were 
inconsistent with the TBT Agreement for reasons that were already familiar to Members as they 
had been discussed at previous meetings. He reminded the EU that Argentina had submitted an 
application for approval of the traditional  terms "Reserva" and "Gran Reserva" in 2009 with a view 
to secur ing entry to the European market for Argentine wines with labels that included such 
traditional terms, in response to a trade interest of the productive sector. The application had 
fulfilled a ll the stages of the European Commission's substantive assessment. In March 2012, only 
one formal step remained: its inclusion in the agenda of the College of Commissioners for adoption 
and publication in the Official Journal of the EU. Since that date, Ar gentina had been waiting in 
good faith for the European Commission to complete this final formal step in accordance with its 
own legislation. Unfortunately, Argentina's application was blocked in limbo and the EU had not 
provided any legal justification fo r the lack of action by the European Commission for over five 
years. Argentina did not agree that the argument concerning a legal review of the use of 
traditional terms, announced by the EU more than three years ago, could legally justify the 
blocking of a pplications for the registration of traditional terms. This situation frustrated the 
legitimate expectations created by the EU's own regulations and perpetuated  a state of doubt and 
legal uncertainty that had lingered for more than three years on the refor m of the wine regime  and 
for five years on Argentina's application for approval of the traditional terms "Reserva" and "Gran 
Reserva". His delegation therefore concluded that Regulation (EC) No. 607/2009 had become 
obsolete, at least with regard to the req uests for approval of "traditional terms". Argentina was 
seriously concerned about the trade impact of the EU's measures and, more fundamentally, about 
the lack of willingness and interest shown by the EU to resolve this trade concern, which was 
unfortunat ely turning into a routine matter to the detriment of its legal and commercial value.  
2.39.   Argentina  renewed its request that the EU present the proposed amendment to the wine 
regime without delay, as it should have done in 2016, according to the EU's  own annou ncement. 
He also urged the EU to conclude the formal procedure for approving the registration of the 
traditional terms "Reserva" and "Gran Reserva" without further undue delay. Lastly, with regard to 
both requests, he called upon the EU to initiate constru ctive dialogue with a view to resolving this 
STC. 
2.40.   The representative of the United States  expressed regret at the EU's ongoing failure to 
provide updates on revisions to its draft regulation on geographical indications and traditional 
terms. The US had und erstood that the draft regulation was to be released around the summer of 
2017 but her delegation had not seen any revision yet. She also reiterated her delegation's 
request for EU to inform the status of US'  applications for use of traditional terms, whet her they 
were currently under consideration or whether that consideration was on hold. She stated that 
                                                
13 For previous statements fo llow the thread under IMS ID 345  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 15 - 
 
  transparency about when and how the US applications would be dealt with was essential  and also 
again sought assurance that the applications would  be expe dited giv en the number of years that 
had elapsed since they were submitted . 
2.41.   The representative of Brazil  renewed its support to those raising concerns  as this ordinance  
also raised obstacles to wine producers in Brazil. The issue was also under discussion in the 
Mercosur -EU negotiations and therefore Brazil hoped the EU would show flexibility and solve this 
matter as soon as possible.  
2.42.   The representative of the European U nion repeated statements made in previous TBT 
Committee meetings and said the EU continued to be available  for bilateral discussions with trade 
partners at expert level.  
2.2.4.9   India — Electronics and Information Technology Goods (Requirements for 
Compulsory Regi stration) Order, 2012 G/TBT/N/IND/44, G/TBT/N/IND/44/Add.1 -5, 
G/TBT/N/IND/47 G/TBT/N/IND/47/Add.1 -3, G/TBT/N/IND/47/Add.1/Corr.1 
(IMS ID 36714) 
2.43.   The representative of the United States  said that India's Compulsory Registration Order 
(CRO) requirements contin ued to raise serious concerns, including the requirement that product 
testing be done only by BIS -accredited labs located within India. She questioned why India could 
not recognize test results from internationally accredited labs , particularly under the I ECEE CB 
scheme , of which India was a member. The US was also troubled by the continued expansion of 
products, without notification to the TBT C ommittee and the required comment and review period , 
which created confusion and uncertainty, added unnecessary b urdens and increased  the cost of 
doing business in India. The lack of a notification regarding the expansion of the CRO products list 
by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) was inconsistent with the TBT 
Agreement's transparency r equirements.  
2.44.   The representative of the European Union  supported the concerns raised by the US and 
reiterate d the EU's  interest in particular in the further simplification of the compulsory registration 
scheme and the wider acceptance of foreign test result s as a basis for the registration.  As regards 
the registration proced ure as such, the EU appreciated the initiatives undertaken so far by the 
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) concerning the automatio n of the process. The EU remained  
interested in the furth er streamlining of the procedure in order to ach ieve shorter delays. At the 
previous  Committee meeting, India had indicated that the streamlining of the registration 
procedure, including the possibility of a single registration for multiple factories, was still under 
considerati on. In this context, the EU request ed an update on the possible introduction of a single 
registration for multiple factories manufacturing the same product under the same brand and the 
respons ibility of the same brand owner. With res pect to foreign tests, recognition of test results 
produced by foreign laboratories participating in the IECEE CB scheme or accred ited by ILAC MRA 
signatories was currently granted only for safety critic al components. The EU reiterated its request 
that Ind ia consider improving reliance on these arrangements beyond safety critical components in 
order to cover the whole spectrum of tests required for any product covered under the compulsory 
registration scheme.  
2.45.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  expressed his delegation's appreciation for the 
numerous bilateral meetings held with India since 2015 , however  some concerns remained 
unresolved. In particular, Korea asked that Indian authorities  accept test report s approved by  the 
IECEE CB scheme. According  to IECEE 02 , India, as a member of the IECEE CB scheme, had  an 
obligation to mutually accept test results of other member s. In addition , it was stipulated in Part I 
of the "Rules of Procedure" that a member which failed to meet its obligations would face  a 
suspensio n or exclusion from membership. A ccepting test results of laboratories accredited by the 
IECEE CB Scheme  would eliminate the unnecessary burden on foreign companies . 
2.46.   The representative of Canada  express ed support for the previous interventions regarding  
the benefits of using the IEC's CB scheme. It was recognized by many in the Committee that 
everybody benefitted from  strengthen ing international platforms for recognizing test results and 
simplifying procedures for all. Despite the considerable ef forts of the Indian authorities to explain 
                                                
14 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 367  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 16 - 
 
  the requirements to  Canadian companies , there was still  room to make the process simpler while 
respecting fully the intent of the Indian measure to ensure safety.  
2.47.   The representative of India suggested that interes ted delegations consult India's statements 
from previous meetings. He also clarified that he would pass on the additional concerns to his 
capital for their response. With regard to the  acceptance of IECEE CB test reports and the 
streamlining of procedures,  he reiterate d that BIS accepted  IECEE CB test report s for critical 
components under  the BIS Registration scheme. Further more, the IECEE Publication " IECEE 01" 
specified the  Basic Rules of the IEC Conformity Assessment Sys tems, wherein the legal provisions 
at the National Level provided  for the country law to prevail over any other obligation under IEC 
Conformity Assessment Systems. The matter of acceptance of CB test reports and certificates had 
been discussed between Indi an authorities and IECEE officials in a meeting held on 18 October  
2013. In the ensuing  joint communication, both sides  had noted that India had not made any 
infringement of the IECEE Rules. Regarding streamlining of procedure s, India had  already  provided 
information during the June 2017 meeting of the TBT Committee that provision had  been made for 
online acceptance of documents rela ting to revision of IS 16046. Further simplification would be 
carried out in due time. Responding to US concerns on notificati ons, he underlined that India's 
latest notification to the TBT Committee on this matter had been circulated as 
G/TBT/N/IND/44/Add.6 on 6 November 2017.  
2.2.4.10   European Union — Revised Proposal for the Categorization of Compounds as 
Endocrine Disruptors of 19 Febr uary 2013 by DG Environment G/TBT/N/EU/383, 
G/TBT/N/EU/383/Add.1, G/TBT/N/EU/384, G/TBT/N/EU/384/Add.1, 
G/SPS/N/EU/166,  G/SPS/N/EU/166/Add.1  (IMS ID 39315) 
2.48.   The representative s of Canada , the United States  and Australia  continued  to raise their 
delegations' concerns with the hazard -based approach the EU was taking on the regulation of 
active ingredients.16 
2.49.   The representative of Brazil  supported the concerns raised by Canada and the US. His 
delegation believed that the European legislation lacked sufficient sci entific basis as it used a 
merely hazard -based approach instead of one which contemplate d a full risk analysis and which 
would be less restrictive to trade.  
2.50.   The representative of Thailand  supported statements made by other Members regarding the 
revised draft. Whilst fully support ing the right of the EU to protect public health and the 
environment , the development of criteria should be based on risk assessment  instead of hazard 
cut-off criteria.  In addition, the setting of maximum re sidue levels (MRLs) and import tolerance 
levels for substances having endocrine disrupting properties and suspected endocrine disruptor s 
should be set on the basis of risk assessment by considering the potency of substance and 
exposure assessment. Thailand  hoped  that the EU w ould take its requests into account.  
2.51.   The representative of Costa Rica  expressed concern about the approach taken by the EU in 
the implementation of  Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009  which had led to the adoption of a hazard -
based decision c riterion. Costa Rica  urged the EU to ensure that the impl ementation of its 
regulation w ould be  based on the use of risk assessments for the identification and regulation of 
endocrine disruptors, through the application of criteria supported by sufficient s cientific evidence, 
in line with the commitments established in the TBT Agreement.  
2.52.   The representative of Colombia  noted that her delegation believed that it was particularly 
important that the EU regulation be in accordance with international commitments a nd that the 
comments submitted in the TBT  Committee by their trad ing partners be taken into account. 
Colombia continued to follow developments very carefully.  
2.53.   The representative of Guatemala  reiterated its concern regarding the EU policy on 
identifying end ocrine disruptors  which , in its opinion,  lacked  scientific basis because it adopted a 
hazard -based approach instead of risk -based analysis. Her delegation supported the concerns that 
                                                
15 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 3 93 (under dates raised and references) . 
16 The full statement s are available in document s G/TBT/W/454 and G/TBT/W/455  (circulated on 
10 November  2017) and G/TBT/W/4 57 (circulated on 17 November 2017).  G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 17 - 
 
  had been expressed by other Members and reiterated that this type of deci sion would have a 
negative impact on trade and would affect the rural development of developing countries in 
particular.  
2.54.   The representative of Argentina  said that a lthough the European Parliament had rejected 
the European Commission's proposal of 4 October  2017, in the same act it had asked the 
Commission to come up with a new proposal without delay. Given the systemic and commercial 
importance of the issue , his delegation asked what steps the EU would take, whether it intended to 
submit a new proposal to establish definitive criteria with respect to substances with endocrine -
disrupting properties as requested by the European Parliament  or to maintain  the provisional 
criteria for such substances in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 . His delegatio n was 
also concerned about the possibility of the European Commission  not authorizing the import 
tolerances for unauthorized substances in the EU simply on the basis of hazard identification 
instead of a complete risk assessment . Argentina reiterate d its request to the EU to maintain -both 
for substances with endocrine disruptive properties and for any other substance that falls within 
the cut -off criteria - import tolerances with maximum residue limits (MRLs) higher than the default 
values, taking into acco unt what was established in Regulation 396/2005, according to information 
and scientific evidence provided for this purpose that demonstrates that said MRLs are safe.  
2.55.   The representative of Uruguay  shared many of the concerns of other Members. His 
delegatio n had said in the TBT  and SPS Committee s that Uruguay was concerned about the 
approach adopted by the EU and its many effects on international trade. The use of the substances 
concerned had been shown  to be safe on a risk -based analysis. His delegation the refore asked for 
further information from the EU on the future steps that would be taken , considering the decision 
taken by the European Parliament.  
2.56.   The representative of the European Union  repeated responses provided in previous TBT 
Committee meetings. As  to the latest procedural developments, he reported that on 4 October 
2017, the European Parliament had objected to the draft act, including the scientific criteria to 
identify endocrine disruptors in the field of plant protection products, which had been endorsed by 
EU Member States on 4 July 2017. The Commission was to resume discussions regarding the 
technical amendment to the clause on negligible exposure for plant protection products once the 
criteria had been adopted. In view of the latest events, the  Commission would reflect on next 
steps. The delegated act including the criteria to identify endocrine disruptors for biocides had 
been adopted by the Commission on 4 September 2017 and had been under scrutiny by the EU 
co-legislators until 4 November wit h no objections received. The act would enter into force 20 days 
after publication and would be applicable six months later (expected in June 2018). Lastly, the EU 
reiterated its commitment to act in full transparency and would keep Members duly informed 
about further developments.  
2.2.4.11   Peru — Act to Promote Healthy Eating Among Children and Adolescents , 
G/TBT/N/PER/59, G/TBT/N/PER/89, G/TBT/N/PER/89/Corr.1 , 
G/TBT/N/PER/89/Add.1 , G/TBT/N/PER/97 (IMS ID 38317) 
2.57.   The representative of Mexico  recalled  that concerns regarding Law No. 30021  had first been 
raised  in July 201318 and repeated at the March 2017 Committee meeting . In addition to 
reiterating concerns on Law No. 30021 and its regulations, she raised concerns with the Manual on 
Health Warnings, n otified in G/TBT/N/PER/97 on 4 September 2017 . Mexico had  concern s with the 
restrictions in the "stop sign" labelling model . The manual  include d technical specifications for 
health warnings displayed on processed foods or published in the media , and the requirement for 
including nutritional warnings in the form of a "stop sign" on products containing trans fats or 
considered to be high in sodium, sugars or saturated fats.  Mexico felt this "stop sign" could cause 
confusion among consumers as : (a) The purpose  of the nutrient information was  to provide 
consumers with data on the nutrients contained in the food, so as to make  informed decision s 
when purchasing food19; (b) Consumers could  be misled as the  guidance  was not on the nutritional 
                                                
17 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 383  (under dates raised and references) . 
18 The full statement is  available in G/TBT/W/429 (circulated on 19 January 2016 ) 
19 In accordance with the recommendations of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics . (February  2013). 
"Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Total Diet Approach to Healthy Eating." Journal of the 
Academy of Nutrition and Diete tics: 113 (2). 307 -317. G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 18 - 
 
  benefits  of the food bu t to its classification as "good" or "bad" ; (c) There is no scientific evidence 
to show that products with certain levels of nutrients (technical parameters) were more harmful or 
dangerous than other products that contain ed lower levels of the same nutrien ts, (for example, 
fruit ha d high sugar levels but would not be subject to the  warnings ); (d) With regard to the 
format of the warnings on processed food contained  in the Manual, the use o f the colour red for 
the label  could  have negative consequences by affecting the buyer's preferences ; and, (e) the 
braille label included under supplementary considerations, would mean substantial changes in 
production lines and costly implications as neither Mexico nor Peru had the necessar y equipment.  
2.58.   Mexico also asked that Peru reconsider the date of entry into force of the measure as six 
months was not sufficient, and to allow for a transition pe riod of one year so as to allow industry 
to make the necessary changes . Mexico recognized  Peru's right to safeguard its legitimate 
interests  but the  measures lacked  scientific basis . She suggested that Peru use other public policy 
instruments that could prove less burdensome for private individuals and trade, such as strategies 
to encourage the pub lic to adopt a proper healthy diet, physical activity programmes, etc.  Mexico 
thanked Peru for its willingness to engage in bilateral discussions and looked forward to this 
continuing dialogue on the scientific and technical information regarding nutrient content on labels 
affixed to processed food.  
2.59.   The representative of the United States  said that while the US supported Peru 's public 
health objectives of reducing obesity and related non -communicable diseases, there were 
continued concerns over potential tr ade impacts of Peru 's revised draft regulations to implement 
the Healthy Eating Act. This act failed to consider total dietary intake or the amount and frequency 
of a food 's consumption. Furthermore, given the draft regulation 's broad definition of "proces sed" 
foods and nutrient thresholds, a majority of pre -packaged foods offered in Peru would require new 
labels on packages and in marketing materials. The US thanked Peru for notifying the draft manual 
to implement the Healthy Eating Law. Comments would be submitted in writing by the 30 
November deadline.  She pointed out though that the draft manual establishe d a labelling regime 
that exceeded the requirements laid out in Article 10 of the Law, which did not stipulate the 
inclusion of the words "Ministry of Health " on the warning label. This new requirement coupled 
with a stop sign icon for each nutrient (fat, saturated fat, sodium, and sugar) that exceed set 
levels for content implied a governmental warning. She asked if Peru had studied the effectiveness 
of using more neutral messaging to inform consumers of nutritional content of packaged foods, 
rather than instructing consumers not to consume particular products or entire groups of product, 
that can be part of a balanced healthful diet. The US was disappoi nted that Peru has chosen to 
adopt a labelling approach that did not educate consumers about the role that different nutrients 
play in an overall healthy and balanced diet. Given that the draft manual could enter into force six 
months after its approval, s he asked that Peru ensure that the final implementing regulations allow 
sufficient time of at least a year for industry compliance, before enforcement of any new labelling 
requirements.  
2.60.   The representative of Guatemala  reiterated concerns raised in previous  meetings. She 
requested an update on whether the publicity and health warnings would be subject to 
complimentary standards and what was the status of those complimentary standards. Guatemala 
reiterated the importance of the consideration of Codex discussi ons, particularly as they were just 
beginning and could lead to greater harmonization of the measures.  
2.61.   The representative of Costa Rica  supported the concerns raised by Mexico. Costa Rica 
recognized the importance of establishing a regulatory framework to  guarantee the protection of 
public health, particularly child and adolescent health, and of strengthening initiatives seeking to 
ensure consumers were properly informed about food on the market. However this regulatory 
framework should be consistent with international trade disciplines, and where possible, should 
use Codex Alimentarius standards as a basis. The provisions established in the Act to Promote 
Healthy Eating Amongst Children and Adolescents and in the Regulations thereto had an 
unnecessary and unjustified impact on trade, particularly with regard to exports of processed food 
products.  
2.62.   The representative of Peru confirmed that the Regulations to Law No. 30021 were published 
in Peru's Official Journal, and subsequently notified to the WTO and the Andean Community (CAN) 
in June 2017.  He responded to the concerns raised by confirming that there was scientific evidence 
of the health problems associated with the excessive consumption of sodium, sugar and fat, which 
contributed to the development of non -communicable diseases. Several other countries, in G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 19 - 
 
  addition to Peru, were adopting measures to protect the health of their people and introducing 
appropriate regulations to curtail the excessive consumption of sodium, sugar and fat. Thus, the 
Regulations lay down technical parameters to be phased in with a view to determining the quantity 
of sodium (salt), sugar and saturated fat in processed and ultra -processed foods, solid or liquid. 
These parameters would be applied 39 months from the approval of the Ma nual on Health 
Warnings. Open consultations on the manual were ongoing among the interested parties.  
2.63.   With regard to the Manual on Health Warnings, he said that  in compliance with the Law and 
its Regulations, the Manual on Health Warnings was pre -published on 18 August 2017 and notified 
to the WTO, the CAN and the other trading partners on 1 September 2017. A period of 90 days, 
ending on 30 November 2017, was provided for comments by stakeholders at the national and 
international levels, following which the Ministry of Health would issue the final version, in keeping 
with its international TBT commitments. The purpose of this Manual was to establish the technical 
specifications in respect of the health warnings "high sodium content", "high sugar content", "hi gh 
saturated fat content" and "contains trans fats" displayed on processed foods or published in the 
media. The proposal contained in the Manual was based on a qualitative study carried out by the 
Ministry of Health to identify language most widely accepte d among consumers that could be used 
in nutrition warnings displayed on processed foods or published in the media. The study was also 
specifically intended to evaluate proposals for the shape and colour of the warnings, their content, 
and the content of au dio and visual precautionary warnings. The study involved focus groups 
comprising men and women, parents with school children and adolescents.  
2.64.   Peru stressed that the Law to promote healthy eating among children and adolescents and 
the Regulations thereto w ere consistent with TBT obligations as they sought to fulfil the legitimate 
objective of protecting the health of its citizens by endeavouring to provide better nutrition 
information for consumers, and of meeting the country's international trade commitmen ts. In 
adopting the supplementary rules, Peru would be reaffirming its commitment to free trade without 
creating unnecessary barriers.  
2.2.4.12   Russian Federation — Safety of products for children and adolescents 
G/TBT/N/RUS/29 (IMS ID 41820) 
2.65.   The representative of the European Union  once again requested more information 
concerning the timeframe for the adoption and entry into force of the notified amendments. She 
asked whether the amendments had been adopted and whether the EU comments had been  taken 
into account. She also requested a copy of the final adopted text once available.  
2.66.   The representative of t he Russian Federation  inform ed the Committee that Amendments 
No.2 to the Technical Regulation o n safety of products for children and adolesce nts were adopted 
by Decision No.51 of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission. The decision was 
published on the website of the Commission on 25 September 2017. These amendments would  
enter into force on 25 September 2018  and would prohibit the use o f artificial leather for lining in 
children 's shoes but would allow  the use of other artificial materials.  
2.2.4.13   Ecuador — Resolution No. 116 of the Foreign Trade Committee of Ecuador of 
19 November 2013 and Technical Regulation of the Ecuadorian Standardization  Institute 
RTE INEN 022 on the labelling of processed and packaged food products 
G/TBT/N/ECU/19 G/TBT/N/ECU/19/Add.1 –11 (IMS ID 41121) 
2.67.   The representative of Mexico  repeated concerns raised in previous TBT Committee 
meetings. She reported that d uring a bilateral meeting in the margins of the June 2017  TBT 
Committee meeting , Ecuador had stated that TR 022 was undergoing a comprehensive review in 
the Ministry of Health  but due to a change of government, a tentative date for submitting the 
revised version had no t been  set. Mexico also regretted not receiving  information during that 
meeting  on whether substantial changes were envisaged or whether there a new notification would 
be submitted  to the TBT Committee. In light of the above, Mexico request ed that Ecuador:  (i) 
inform on  the status of th e revision;  (ii) explain the reasoning and scientific evidence justify ing the 
use of the colour -coded graphic system for indicating the "high", "medium" or "low" co ncentration 
                                                
20 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 418  (under dates raised and references) . 
21 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 411  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 20 - 
 
  of three components  (total fats, sugars and salts , respectively ) as well as information about the 
results of that system ; (iii) provide justification for, or, where appropriate, give consideration to 
eliminating, the requirement to include the term "transgenic" on labels, in the case of transgenic 
conten t; and  (iv) reconsider the restrictions on advertising on labels.  
2.68.   The representative of Costa Rica  reiterate d support for the concern raised by Mexico. In 
particular, his delegation consider ed that the labelling system establish ing permitted amounts of 
fats, sugars and salt, using traffic light colours to identify products that have a low, medium or 
high content of these ingredients, was not supported by the Codex Alimentarius framework. Costa 
Rica believed t here was no scientific evidence to demonstrate th at a certain percentage or 
concentration of one of these ingredients in a product was damaging to health or should be 
avoided by the consumer, a priori , without considering the specific circumstances of each 
individual. Furthermore, t he warnings based on s pecific concentrations and the traffic light system 
did not provide the consumer with greater information, if such consumption was not taken into 
consideration in relation to total daily intake. His delegation therefore held that the Ecuadorian 
standard on  food labelling establishe d unnecessary trade restrictions that could be contrary to the 
obligations established in the TBT Agreement  and urged Ecuador to provide an update with regard 
to the regulation.  
2.69.   The representative of Guatemala  associate d her deleg ation with the concerns raised by 
others. As discussions had repeatedly been on the agenda in the  TBT C ommittee , Guatemala 
wanted to underline the importance  of discuss ing these issues with Codex . Guatemala would 
continue to follow the issue closely . 
2.70.   The representative of Ecuador  stated that TR 022 was currently being reviewed by  the 
authorities in order to ensure a correct interpretation and implementation thereof  and that it had 
not yet been amended . The requirements  continue d to be mandatory and were to be complied 
with for both national and imported products. Ecuador remained available for more detailed 
consultation bilaterally.   
2.2.4.14   China — Regulations for the Supervision and Administration of Medical Devices 
(Order No. 650 of the State Council)  G/TBT/ N/CHN/1022, G/TBT/N/CHN/1023, 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1024, G/TBT/N/CHN/1025, G/TB T/N/CHN/1026, G/TBT/N/CHN/1029 
(IMS ID 42822) 
2.71.   The representative of the European Union  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings. 
On the issue of exemptions, she stated that so far, t he Chinese FDA had  published three 
catalogues with medical devices exempted from clinical trials – the first list with 567 devices in 
August 2014, the second with an additional 359 devices in September 2016, and a third one - 
covering only 28 devices – which had been published for public consultation in May 2017. The EU 
maintained that this was still a very small number compared with other markets. In addition to 
these catalogues, Article 17  of the Order No. 650 stipulated  that "substantially equivalent " medical 
devices may be exempted from clinical trials. However, in practice, exemption from clinical trials 
based on Article 17  had only been granted for a very small number of medical devices.  
2.72.   In relation to the implementa tion of Order No. 650 the EU had  noticed that China's Ministry 
of Finance and National Development and Reform Commission had recently cancelled 
administrative fees in an effort to reduce cost and complexity to  manufacturers, a goal the EU 
considered important and well worth pursuing. Howeve r, the implementation of this policy had  
resulted in an immediate and negative impact on availability of testing services critic al to the 
registration process. Many labs  had indicated they would  no longer guarantee timelines for 
completion of testing , nor would  they accept product testi ng responsibilities involving  domestic or 
overseas travel for on -site testing in the manufacturer's home city or country. This would  lead to 
significant increases in  costs and delays in the registr ation process for new produc ts. The EU 
understood  that no solution to this issue had  yet been found . Whilst appreciating  the intentions of 
the Chinese government to reduce expenses and complexity within the regulatory system , the EU 
hoped that a solution could  be found to the benefit  of regulators, manufacturers, and patients who 
depend on advanced medical technology.  
                                                
22 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 428  (unde r dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 21 - 
 
  2.73.   The representative s of the Republic of Korea  and Canada  repeated the concerns raised  in 
previous meetings.  
2.74.   The representative of Australia  continue d to express interest in the  issue. Australian 
businesses had  raised concerns regarding the fee schedule and registration processes. He thanked 
China for the recent constructive bilateral discussions on this issue, and look ed forward to further 
cooperation.    
2.75.   The representative  of China  reiterated responses given at previous meetings  and announced 
that on 31 October 2017 the third list of medical devices exem pted from the clinical tests had  been 
released, totalling 164 devices. The previous lists had  been released in August 2014  and 
September 2016.  
2.2.4.15   Thailand — Draft Notification of the Alcoholic Beverages Control, Re: Rules, 
Procedure and condition for Labels of Alcoholic Beverages, issued under B.E. , 
G/TBT/N/THA/437, G/TBT/N/THA/437/Add.1  (IMS ID 42723)  
2.76.   The representative of the European Union  had followed closely the developments and 
implementation of the Regulation on Criteria, Procedures and Conditions for Labels of Alcoholic 
Beverages (B.E 2558/2015), applicable from 19 October 2015. Although he regretted that the text 
of the Regulation itself had not been amended, the EU welcomed the revised version of the 
technical implementing guidelines published at the website of the Office of the Alcoholic Beverages 
Control Committee in early April 2017. The EU also welcomed the consultat ion (involving industry 
and embassies) on the alcohol labelling Regulation and the technical implementing guidelines held 
on 31 October 2017 by the Thai National Health Commission Office (NHCO) upon request of the 
Ministry of Public Health. The EU noted th at the consultation had been organised at short notice 
and with the sole purpose of gathering industry's views. No clarifications had been provided by the 
Thai authorities and no commitment had been made to amend the Regulation or the technical 
guidelines.  As had been stated in previous TBT Committee meetings and in written comments 
submitted in December 2015, as well as in the recent consultation by the NHCO, the EU was 
concerned about the strict labelling requirements included in the Regulation and also w ith the lack 
of clarity of the provisions relating to the messages permitted on the label which could lead to 
inconsistent interpretations.  
2.77.   The EU acknowledged that the revised technical guidelines seemed to provide certain 
clarification, for instance, on the use of true and factual statements or statements supported by 
evidence. Nevertheless, the regulation as explained in the guidelines, pro hibited claims about 
properties, benefits or quality of the alcohol products whether directly or indirectly. This prohibition 
would have an impact on certain specific terms commonly used in the EU linked to the ageing or 
maturation process and to the condi tions or characteristics of the product. The guidelines clarified 
that the Regulation also prohibited statements that encouraged the consumption of alcohol. While 
the EU shared concerns linked to the protection of consumers, the EU considered that further 
clarification would be needed on the specific requirements so as to avoid undue impacts on trade 
and divergent interpretations. The guidelines appeared not to be clear and did not provide industry 
with concrete information on how to ensure that labels of a lcoholic drinks were compliant with the 
Thai regulation. The EU invited the Thai Government to further clarify the implementation of the 
regulation and welcomed any further involvement of stakeholders in this process, since they had 
not been consulted duri ng the revision of the technical guidelines. The EU asked for updated 
information on possible upcoming initiatives - if any - with regard to graphic health warnings on 
alcoholic drinks. According to recent information, a draft could be ready by the end of 2017. 
Thailand was invited to consult with relevant industry and to notify to the TBT Committee any draft 
proposal so to allow Members to become acquainted with it and submit comments, in accordance 
with Article 2.9.2 of the TBT Agreement.   
2.78.   The representat ive of the United States  said that her delegation had consistently raised 
concerns about Thailand 's regulation on the labelling and packaging of alcoholic beverages ( "The 
Rules, Procedure and Condition for Labels of Alcoholic Beverages " G/TBT/N/THA/437) in  the TBT 
Committee. The US strongly supported Thailand 's efforts to tackle the public health challenges 
associated with excessive alcohol consumption and welcomed Thailand 's statement at the June 
                                                
23 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 427  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 22 - 
 
  WTO TBT Committee meeting that it would review the regulatio n and might issue a revision; it was 
the US understanding that Thailand was also reviewing the guidelines to the regulation. The 
representative of the US asked Thailand to confirm that it was reviewing both the guidelines and 
the regulation. Thailand was a lso asked to suspend the enforcement of the regulation until the 
review process had been complete as the current situation was making it very difficult for 
producers to know how to comply with the regulation. Would Thailand be able to provide an 
update on the review process, timelines and opportunities for consultation? The United States 
asked if Thailand was considering the implementation of pictorial health warnings for alcohol 
beverages and whether Thailand could provide information concerning Thailand 's plans in this 
regard. What were Thailand 's specific health concerns related to alcohol that had prompted the 
consideration of new warning labels? If such a measure were to be adopted and apply to imported 
products, the US was of the view that it would hav e a trade impact as it would require US 
producers to relabel their products. The US asked Thailand to ensure that any measures were no 
more trade restrictive than necessary to achieve the public health objectives and requested 
Thailand to notify any draft measures to the WTO TBT Committee, and for Members ' comments to 
be considered prior to finalization.  
2.79.   The representative of New Zealand  acknowledged and supported Thailand's right to 
introduce new regulations to address specific public health concerns. New Zealand appreciated that 
in seeking to address the harmful use of alcohol the technical regulation was directed to achieving 
a legitimate public health objective. As had been said at previous meetings, New Zealand 
continued to follow the development of the  measure with interest, particularly regarding the 
potential impact on trade. Any updates Thailand might be able to provide about the 
implementation status of the measure would be appreciated. New Zealand also asked if Thailand 
intended to introduce mandat ory graphic health warnings on alcohol labels and if so when Thailand 
expected to notify this to the WTO.  
2.80.   The representative of Japan  shared the concerns raised by the US and EU. While Japan 
welcomed the revised technical implementing guidelines published in April, Japan was particularly 
concerned about whether even accurate information on labels would be prohibited based on the 
regulation. Thailand had held a public hearing on the regulation on 31 October and many Members 
and stakeholders had shared variou s concerns. Japan requested Thailand to amend the regulation 
before enforcement considering all comments from Members and stakeholders.  
2.81.   The representative of Canada  supported the concerns raised by previous WTO Members and 
signalled Canada's interest in a ny further information available.  
2.82.   The representative of Australia  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings.  
2.83.   The representative of Guatemala  recognized the need to protect the health of consumers 
and the legitimate objective of Thailand to reduce alcoh ol consumption in its population. 
Nevertheless, Guatemala was not convinced that the measure at issue, establishing certain criteria 
for labelling of alcoholic beverages, would be effective to reduce consumption. Thailand was 
requested to inform the Commit tee about the current status of the measure.  
2.84.   The representative of Thailand  said that since last TBT meeting, Thailand had been working 
to improve its technical document. A stakeholder consultation on the alcohol control regulation had 
been convened at the end of October 2017; the private sector, representatives from foreign 
embassies and ministries had participated. The official report of the consultation would be 
available shortly. Thailand had also planned to convene another consultation with civil socie ty and 
would certainly take into consideration all comments and suggestions gathered from the 
consultations in revising the technical document. The representative of Thailand noted that the 
technical document would help clarify and interpretation of the te chnical regulation.  He said that a 
report on the primary evaluation of the technical regulation had been published on the website of 
the Centre for Alcohol Studies of Thailand. It had been found that labelling that contained the 
messages and pictures on al coholic beverage label had a significant impact on Thai people 's 
decision -making when purchase alcoholic beverages. The photos of movie stars, performers, 
singers and athletes were most attractive to consumers. Thailand had also planned a long -term 
impact assessment of the regulation. Thailand trusted that all delegations recognized that the 
harmful use of alcohol could directly affect drinkers ' health as well as others ' health indirectly. 
Thailand reaffirmed its intention to control the use of alcohol beve rages to protect public  health, G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 23 - 
 
  especially children and adolescents. This was part of Thailand's effort towards its commitment to 
attain the Sustainable Development Goals.  
2.2.4.16   European Union — Common Criteria for Information Technology Security 
Evaluation (Com mon Criteria) certification in the EU  (IMS ID 44824) 
2.85.   The representative of China  said that despite considerable expenses and resources, since 
2009, no Chinese -manufactured security smartcard chip had been granted Common Criteria 
EAL4+ Certificate by any EU member state. Some certification bodies in the EU did not accept any 
Chinese pr oduct applications while those being accepted had encountered unclear test programs, 
an excessively long, obscure certification process and other difficulties. Comparatively speaking, 
many IC products manufactured in other countries (not limited to those w ithin the EU) had been 
certified with the level of EAL4+ and above in the EU. In conclusion, this had created trade barriers 
and exerted a negative impact on Chinese enterprises, since their IC products had not been 
certified. In addition, although many Ch inese companies had submitted their membership 
applications to CC -related standard organizations such as JIL Hardware Attack Subgroup (JHAS), 
no Chinese company had been granted membership by any CC -related standard organization. 
According to Article 5 of the TBT Agreement, conformity assessment bodies shall treat domestic 
and foreign products equally in adopting technical regulations and standards, and minimize the 
negative effects on trade. China urged EU member states involved in the Common Criteria 
Recognitions Arrangement (CCRA) to grant Chinese companies' membership applications and 
Chinese products' certification the same treatment as their domestic companies and products. 
Meanwhile, China hoped that JHAS would increase the transparency of standards, introduce the 
requirements of cryptography testing and certification, such as the relationship between the 
organizations relevant to security smartcard chip certification (CCRA, SOGIS, JHAS) and 
Certification Bodies, and the working mechanism of cryptograp hy standardization, testing and 
certification.  
2.86.   The representative of the European Union  said that in the EU, unlike in China, commercial 
encryption and encryption for national security were clearly distinguished. The latter was limited to 
few sectors close ly linked with national security matters. Neither the EU nor its member states 
imposed mandatory cryptography standards or conformity assessment procedures to access the 
EU market. It was up to individual companies to ensure secure transmission of data ove r their 
systems and networks. European certification schemes were voluntary and based on international 
standards for security evaluation (in particular, the Common Criteria standard ISO/IEC 15408, 
available since 1999) and global practices, such as the Com mon Criteria Recognition Arrangement 
(CCRA –international scheme) and SOGIS -MRA (Senior Officers Group for Information Systems, 
Mutual Recognition Agreement –European scheme, EU MS plus EFTA countries). Moreover, the ICT 
security certification was a member  state competence. The security testing laboratories operated 
under the oversight of the national certification bodies established by EU member states. In this 
context, these measures were outside the scope of the TBT Agreement. The EU had asked China 
repeatedly to identify concrete measures, technical regulations or conformity assessment 
procedures, falling within the scope of the TBT Agreement. The EU was of the view that regulatory 
approaches should not prevent authorities and IT system operators to use the best technology 
available, regardless of ownership of technology or location of equipment manufacturers. While in 
China no foreign company had ever been granted a license by OSCCA, some Chinese companies 
had obtained certification up to Evaluation Assu rance Level (EAL) 4, which was high in the 
evaluation scale under the Common Criteria in international standards. The JIL Hardware Attack 
Subgroup was not a standards body, but a subgroup composed of EU member state experts set up 
under the Senior Official  Group on Information Systems Security (SOG -IS). The SOG -IS comprised 
only nine member States along with Norway and dealt with information security issues - those 
member states who were fully participating in the Common Criteria Recognition Agreement. 
Finally, the EU wished to stress that while Chinese stakeholders were able to participate in the 
activities of European standardization bodies in information security, some European companies 
had difficulties in participating in the activities of Chinese stand ardization bodies, such as the 
Technical Committee 260 (TC260).  
                                                
24 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 448  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 24 - 
 
  2.2.4.17   Kingdom of Saudi Arabia , Kingdom of Bahrain, State of Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, 
United Arab Emirates, Yemen — The Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf 
Draft Technical Regulation for  "Requirements of Handling Energy Drinks" , 
G/TBT/N/ARE/262 , G/TBT/N/QAT/389 , G/TBT/N/SAU/669 , G/TBT/N/SAU/789 , 
G/TBT/N/ARE/299 , G/TBT/N/BHR/426 , G/TBT/N/KWT/309 , G/TBT/N/OMN/23 , 
G/TBT/N/QAT/423 , G/TBT/N/SAU/910 , G/TBT/N/YEM/29 , G/TBT/N/ARE/301 , 
G/TBT/N/BHR /428 , G/TBT/N/KWT/311 , G/TBT/N/OMN/240 , G/TBT/N/QAT/425 , 
G/TBT/N/SAU/912 , G/TBT/N/YEM/31 ( IMS ID 44225) 
2.87.   The representative s of the United States  and the European Union  repeated concerns raised 
in previous meetings and requested any additional information th e Kingdom of Saudi Arabia could 
provide on the status of the regulatory process, in particular on the possible convergence between 
current Saudi Arabia measures and draft GCC -wide measures.  
2.88.   The representative of Switzerland  supported the concerns raised by  the EU and US. While 
Switzerland shared GCC countries' legitimate concerns regarding public health, this measure on 
energy drinks could create unnecessary obstacles to trade. Why was it necessary or useful for GCC 
members to require mandatory statements t hat go beyond relevant Codex guidelines, thus forcing 
producers to warn consumers about alleged detrimental effects of specific consumption quantities 
or for certain groups. Could the GCC provide scientific evidence for targeting these specific social 
groups and mandating producers to label the product as not recommended for those groups. 
Switzerland encouraged the GCC countries to engage with exporting countries to find less trade 
restrictive solutions to their legitimate health concerns. Other alternative s in compliance with 
international standards could be considered, such as campaigns to inform consumers of the 
advantages of a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle. Switzerland regulated such beverages based 
on Codex recommendations on nutritional labelling  and health claims. Switzerland had submitted 
comments in 2015, 2016 and, more recently, in October 2017. Switzerland thanked Bahrain for 
providing some answers to the questions posed last October and requested that consideration be 
given by the GCC and GS O to all these remaining questions and that an update on regulatory 
developments be provided.  
2.89.   The representative of the Kingdom of Bahrain , supported by the representative of the 
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia , informed the Committee that the status of the regula tion remained the 
same as it was described in the last meeting, i.e. the regulation was still being revised based on 
comments received from interested Members. GCC countries remained available for engaging 
bilaterally with any concerned delegations.  
2.2.4.18   China — Administrative Measure on Cosmetics Labelling (AMCL) 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1064  (IMS ID 45626)  
2.90.   The representative of Japan  repeated concerns raised in previous TBT Committee meetings, 
notably that manufacturing labelling only contain the name of the company with f inal legal 
responsibility; the non -disclosure of testing results for cosmetic efficacy claims; and that the 
"efficacy a ssessment testing organization " not be  limited to institutions within China. She also 
reiterated the request that  China provide clear gui dance and a sufficient transition period for the 
smooth implementation of the new label ling regulation. In addition, recalling that at the meeting in 
June, China had announced that the draft AMCL would be revised, Japan reiterated its request that 
China no tify this in advance and provide sufficient time until the date of entry into force in 
accordance with TBT rules. She asked China to explain the details of discussion on manufacturer 
labelling and efficacy assessment testing in the studies of the reviewing  process.  
2.91.   The representative s of the European Union  and New Zealand  repeated concerns raised in 
previous TBT Committee meetings.   
2.92.   The representative of China  repeated its previous reply that the AMCL was still being 
drafted. Comments from trading partners were being evaluated. In line with international practice, 
labels in Chinese could be attached to imported products so long as they were consistent with 
relevant Chinese rules and regulations.  
                                                
25 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 442  (under dates raised and references) . 
26 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 456  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 25 - 
 
  2.2.4.19   Brazil — Draft Ordinance Act Nº 374, 27 November 2014 (Portaria  SDA/MAPA 
374/2014) Establishes quality requirements for wine and derivatives of grape and wine , 
G/TBT/N/BRA/613, G/TBT/N/BRA/613/Rev.1, G/TBT/N/BRA/675 (IMS ID 47027) 
2.93.   The representative of the European Union  requested an update from Brazil on the status of  
this draft ordinance following the public consultation held at the end of June 2017, especially on 
the foreseen schedule for its adoption.  
2.94.   The representative of Brazil  stress ed that the process relating to this ordinance was 
conducted in a transparent manner, in accordance with the TBT Agreement. All comments were 
taken into consideration and individual answers to specific concerns were delivered, and the 
Brazilian agricultural authorities held a public hearing on 27 -29 June 2017. He recalled that the EU 
itself noted at the last TBT Committee meeting t hat many of its suggestions had  been taken into 
consideration in the latest version of the ordinance. As the ordinance was not in yet force, no 
actual losses could  be claimed.   
2.2.4.20   China — Registration Fees for Drugs and Medical Device Products 
(IMS ID 46628) 
2.95.   The representative of  the Republic of  Korea  was concerned about China's discriminatory 
registration fees. These imposed, it was stated, much higher fees for imported medical devices 
compared to the fees charged on domestically manufactured devices. China, it was noted, had 
responded that the higher  registration fee was set for imported medical devices because it 
included costs for on -site inspection of foreign facilities. However, because on -site inspection of a 
foreign facility was not a requirement for all medical devices, Korea requested China to  set the 
registration fee for imported devices in a reasonable and transparent manner by separating on -site 
inspection costs from the total fee.  
2.96.   The representative of Canada  remained concerned about the general lack of clarity and 
transparency regarding re gistration fees for drugs and medical device products in China. In order 
to enhance transparency, Canada had requested that China publish the on -site inspection fees 
separately from the registration fees for foreign manufacturers.  In addition, Canada reque sted that 
China publish the registration fees to be levied by China 's provinces on domestic manufacturers. It 
was important that it was clear what services manufacturers were being charged for to ensure: a) 
that registration fees conformed to China 's WTO n ational treatment obligations, and, b) that the 
on-site inspection fees corresponded to international averages.  
2.97.   The representative of Australia  expressed its continued interest in this matter. Australian 
businesses had raised concerns regarding the China Food and Drug Administration 's fee schedule 
and registration processes. Australia thanked China for the constructive bilateral discussions and 
looked forward to further cooperation.   
2.98.   The representative of China  noted that the imposition of r egistration fee s for drugs and 
medical devices was common practice internationally. The registration fees in China were 
calculated on the basis of costs. The difference between the drugs and medical devices only 
reflect ed different workloads and pricing levels.  
2.2.4.21   India — The Stainless Steel Products (Quality Control) Order, 2015  
(IMS  ID 48629) 
2.99.   The representative of the European Union  repeated concerns raised in previous TBT 
Committee meetings. On factory inspections in EU steel mills, she highlighted communication 
problems between inspectors and their Delhi counterparts where there was a lack of clarity on the 
Mill Test Certificate (M TC) which was causing significant delays. She requested that coordination 
between the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI) and Indian customs offices be improved as a BIS 
approval letter or other documents were sometimes requested which led to problems in cl earing 
                                                
27 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 470  (under dates raised and references) . 
28 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 4 66 (under da tes raised and references) . 
29 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 486  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 26 - 
 
  goods. The EU also asked that the certification only be applied to stainless steel grades and not to 
physical dimensions  nor to the finishing of the products.  
2.100.   The representative of India reiterated the response provided at the previous meeting of 
the TBT Committee and said that the new issues raised by the EU would be looked into. India 
looked forward to continuing discussion on a bilateral basis.  
2.2.4.22   Brazil — Toy Certification; Ordinance No. 89, No. 310 and draft administrative 
rule No. 321 G/TBT/N/BRA /612, G/TBT/N/BRA/612/Add.1  (IMS ID 47830) 
2.101.   The representative of the European  Union  thanked Brazil for the clarifications provided at 
the last Committee meeting concerning various aspects of the measure, in particular as regards 
the rationale, implementatio n timeline, and certification process. Although the EU understood the 
rationale behind the measure, which was to increase the traceability of toys and facilitate recall of 
toys in case of safety issues, the requirement on the registration of individual toy s with INMETRO 
according product family continued to be the main concern for European toy manufacturers. This 
related, more specifically, to both the registration requirement as such (requiring the submission 
of burdensome documentation requirements and li nking the registration to a non -automatic import 
licensing regime) and to the narrow definition of "family of product" adopted by the Brazilian 
regulator INMETRO. This meant that toys with substantially identical safety properties, or even 
identical toys, if manufactured in different plants, would have to undergo separate registrations. 
Ordinance 563, he noted, laid down seven cumulative conditions to be fulfilled in order for toys to 
be considered to belong in the same product family and be therefore eligi ble for a single 
registration. One of  these conditions was  that the toys must be produced in the same plant. At the 
last Committee meeting, Brazil had indicated that INMETRO would start developing implementation 
guidelines to clarify the application of the  new requirements. The EU thus requested Brazil to 
consider, as part of the implementation phase, less burdensome alternatives such as a registration 
system per  producer or importer (as opposed to registration per each product family) . This could 
be combin ed with a requirement for toy manufacturers to have an internal traceability system 
capable of tracking relevant data on each toy, such as production line, date and batch number, to 
enable effective enforcement of product recalls. The establishment of "tru sted trader" -like 
programmes for manufacturers/importers could also be considered.  
2.102.   He also noted that, after registration, according to Ordinance 563, toys would be subjected 
to a non -automatic import licensing regime, which implied that the importer must  obtain consent 
from INMETRO in order for the toys to be placed on the market. The procedure was therefore quite 
onerous and had the potential of adding significant costs and delays in marketing toys in Brazil. 
The EU asked that Brazil provide further clar ifications regarding the process and the timeline for 
the issuance of the non -automatic import licenses. Finally, he noted that the Ordinance appeared 
to make the testing requirements concerning the migration of certain dangerous chemical 
elements from the  toys also applicable to inaccessible components for which there was no risk of 
migration . This was inconsistent with similar requirements in other jurisdictions (for instance the 
EU toy safety requirements exempted inaccessible components from this kind o f testing). The EU 
reiterated its request for INMETRO to amend or, at least, clarify through implementation 
guidelines, that inaccessible components would be exempted from such testing. Only those parts 
that were exposed to contact with the child should be  subjected  to testing . The EU encouraged 
INMETRO to engage with all affected stakeholders, including foreign toy manufacturers, during the 
implementation phase in order to find pragmatic solutions to the concerns outlined above.  
2.103.   The representatives of the United  States  and Canada  supported and shared the concerned 
raised by the EU, and reiterated the statements they made in the last TBT Committee meeting.  
2.104.   The representative of Brazil  stressed that the preparation of this measure had been 
undertaken in an o pen and transparent manner. All comments from Members had been taken into 
account . He also explained that the register was  meant to guarantee the traceability and to 
provide in formation to the consumer. This was  in line with the objectives listed in  Article 2.2 of the 
TBT Agreement and intern ationally -approved market surveillance benchmarks. Nevertheless,  
INMETRO had  created a working group to deal with issue s relating to toys registering. With regard 
                                                
30 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 47 8 (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 27 - 
 
  to the obligation to test the painting of internal compo nents, such a requisite was  based on safety 
concerns related with the improper manipulation of toys and their parts by children.   
2.2.4.23   Indonesia — Halal Product Assurance Law No. 33 of 2014 (IMS ID 50231) 
2.105.   The representative of the European Union  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings 
and requested further information on the two governmental regulations currently under 
preparation, namely, (i) the  regulation setting tariffs for certification, and (ii) a regulation on the 
implementation of t he Halal Law, which would foresee a two -stage timeline for the certification of 
different sets of products. He requested updated information on the Halal implementing 
regulations and on the time frame for its adoption.  
2.106.   The representative s of the United Sta tes and Australia  repeated concerns raised in 
previous meetings.  
2.107.   The representative of Brazil  supported the concerns raised by the EU and the US. In 
addition to questions raised in the previous meeting, he asked what would be required by 
companies who comp ly with the law so as to receive the halal certificate.  
2.108.   The representative of Canada  supported the concerns raised by previous Members and 
sough t further details regarding the scope of certification requirements, including how nominally 
halal foods would be considered. Canada was concerned that the certification requirements could 
be excessively wider in scope than intended by the measure. Halal products that would not have 
any potential to be non -halal could unjustifiably require costly supply chain segre gation so as to 
meet certification requirements. In this context, would there be any type of commodities that 
would automatically be granted Halal status without any certification requirement, for example, 
grains and oilseeds or fresh fruits and vegetables , or processed foods that would not potentially 
contain any non -halal ingredient.  Canada also requested further information on the scope of the 
measure so as to be able to fully assess its potential impact on exports, and any further 
information on the coo peration between BPJPH and the foreign Halal certification agency. 
Considering the potential impact on trade, Canada requested that this measure be notified to the 
TBT Committee and for information around implementation steps and timelines on the date of 
entry into force of the law, which Canada understood to be in 2019, including steps taken by 
Indonesia to minimize this measure 's potential impact on trade.  
2.109.   The representative of Indonesia  informed the Committee that Law No. 33/2014 would 
come into force in  2019. The Agency of Halal Product Assurance (BPJPH), established in October 
2017 under the Ministry of Religious Affairs would be tasked with implementing the law. One of the 
responsibilities of the Agency would be to conduct reviews and issue halal certi ficates. The 
implementing regulation was still in progress. Law No 33/2014 did not prohibit the sale and 
circulation of non -halal products, but given that Indonesia had the largest  Muslim population 
amongst WTO M embers, it underscored the importance of pro viding a certainty about halal 
products. Differentiation of halal and non -halal products was a way to ease concern amongst 
domestic stakeholders. He ensured the Committee that the implementation of this Law would not 
limit the freedom of society to choose desired products.  
2.2.4.24   Russian Federation – Rules of cement certification G/TBT/N/RUS/48, 
G/TBT/N/RUS/49(IMS ID 49732) 
2.110.   The representative of the European Union  repeated concerns raised in previous TBT 
Committee meetings. In addition to the comments made in previ ous meeting s with respect to 
Section 8.2, fourth sentence, of the notified GOST standard  (which provided that for imports from 
third countries the certification body should conduct "additional inspection controls" for each batch 
of cement  arriving in Russi a), she also added that it appeared  that this aspect ha d also been 
addressed on 11 July 2017 by the Russian Federal Anti -monopoly Service (FAS) in a warning sent 
to Rosstandard  regarding the need to avoid undertaking any action that would involve 
discriminatory treatment in the trade of cement from foreign suppliers.  The EU ask ed Russia what 
actions had been undertaken in this regard . The EU once more asked Russia for the reason s and 
                                                
31 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 502 (unde r dates raised and references) . 
32 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 497  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 28 - 
 
  justification for additional conformity assessment requirements which affect ed only imported 
products  as such requirements may contravene both Articles 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 of the TBT 
Agreement. The EU also reiterated its request that Russia suspend all e voked measures that led to 
a de facto ban of EU -originating cement imports, to justify the additional testing processes at the 
border for each cement batch exported to Russia by the EU in light of TBT rules. The EU also asked 
Russia to confirm that strengt h test s would not have to be performed for certified cement, as this 
would lead to products being blocked at the border.  
2.111.   The representative of Ukraine  expressed his delegation's concern with the fact that the 
rules of cement certification in the Russian Fe deration stipulated that, upon conformity 
(verification) assessment of products, the applicant may only be a legal entity or an individual as a 
sole proprietor, or as a producer or seller, or as the agent of a foreign producer on the basis of a 
contract wi th the producer, which was registered pursuant to the legislation of the Eurasian 
Economic Union member state on its territory. He recalled that, under  Article 5 of the TBT 
Agreement, conformity assessment procedures shall be prepared, adopted and applied so as to 
grant access for suppliers of like products originating in the territories of other Members under 
conditions no less favourable than those accorded to suppliers of like products of national origin. 
The requirement for mandatory registration on the  territory of Member States of the Eurasian 
Economic Union put national producers and producers from other WTO Members  in unequal 
positions, thus violating Article 5 of the TBT Agreement. Ukraine urged Russia to take these issues 
into consideration so as t o ensure that the requirements of the abovementioned rules were in line 
with international practice and did not cause unnecessary technical barriers to trade.  
2.112.   The representative of Mexico  repeated concerns raised  in previous meetings.  
2.113.   The representative of the Russian Federation  referred the Committee to the explanations 
given in previous meetings concerning the reasons for mandatory certification of cement in Russia. 
Since March 2016, about 700 certificates for cement had  been issued , 25% (approximately) of 
which were for imported products. Russia continued to analyse the practice of applying cement 
certification rules in light of concerns of raised  and would continue working with interested 
Members on this matter.  
2.2.4.25   United Arab Emirates – Control Scheme to restrict the use of hazardous 
materials in electronic and electrical devices, G/TBT/N/ARE/265 (IMS ID 49633) 
2.114.   The representative of Japan  said that the United Arab Emirates' Control Scheme to Restrict 
the Use of Hazardous Materials in Electronic and Electrical devices ", the so -called "UAE RoHS " 
(G/TBT/N/ARE/265) had been published as the UAE Cabinet Resolution No. 10 of 2017 in April 
2017, listing EN 50581 as one of the "Approved Standards ". Regarding conformity assessment, EN 
50581, which was equivalent to IEC 63000, allowed manufacturers to evaluate conformity in a 
comprehensive way, by using not only analytical test results but also suppl ier declarations, 
contractual agreements and material declarations as evidence of compliance. However , the 
Guidance document on RoHS published by the E mirates Authority f or Standardization & Metrology 
(ESMA) in Oc tober 2017 required submission of test repo rts. Since this requirement seemed not to 
be consistent with EN 50581, the relation between the Guidance and EN 50581 was unclear. Japan 
sought confirmation that an analytical test was not essential for conformity assessment in 
accordance with the Cabinet Resolution. Considering the interest in this issue by various 
industries, Japan requested that the Control Scheme be harmonized with international standards 
and practices and not be more trade -restrictive than necessary  
2.115.   The representative of the European U nion said that the UAE had notified the draft measure 
in August 2015, following which the EU had sent written comments and raised its concerns on 
several occasions. Recalling the EU's previous interventions in their entirety and referring to the 
publicatio n of the Decision of 27 April 2017, the EU requested that the UAE reconsider the list of 
exemptions, in particular those applicable to the use of mercury in fluorescent lamps, and in 
general that further alignment with other international regulations be un dertaken as they foresaw 
a regular review of the need for restrictions and exemptions, which was very beneficial for the 
environment, consumers and industry. In addition, the EU requested clarification in relation to the 
application of the measure to produ cts, which were already on the market, and to spare  parts and 
                                                
33 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 496  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 29 - 
 
  exemptions for "products" versus "applications. Furthermore, the EU sought confirmation as to 
whether the conformity assessment procedur e in the revised measure of 10  April 2017 implied a 
compul sory registration and authorisation by ESMA before placing of products in the UAE market. 
Moreover, the EU asked that the UAE clarify the overall timeframe for the implementation of the 
measure, provide WTO Members with the latest version of the measure an d, taking into account 
the time lapse since the notification of the measure in August 2015, re -notify the current draft or 
the final measure. Finally, the EU asked whether there would be a transitional period so that the 
trading partners had enough time to  adapt to the new measure before it came into force.  
2.116.   The representative of the United States  supported  the concerns of the EU and Japan.  
2.117.   The representative of Switzerland  supported the interventions of other Members 
concerning the Control Scheme. Industry had recently reported concerns related to the 
implementation of the requirements and in particular the conformity assessment procedures and 
testing requirements. Switzerland encouraged the UAE to work closely with the industry and take 
comments and concern s into account so as to avoid  unnecessary barriers to trade.  
2.118.   The Chairman  took note of the statements and requested that the Secretariat convey the 
concerns raised to the delegation of the UAE.  
2.2.4.26   India — Draft Food Safety and Standards (Alcoholic Beverages S tandards) 
Regulations, 2015, G/TBT/N/IND/51 (IMS ID 49434) 
2.119.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated its concerns regarding this measure. 
The EU noted the publication of the regulation concerning additives in the Gazette on 3 August 
2017. His dele gation understood that the regulation covering standards for alcoholic beverages 
had been revised and sent for approval to the competent Minister and would be published in the 
Gazette soon. He requested confirmation of the timeline of the publication adopt ion. In January 
2016, the EU had provided detailed written comments on the Indian draft alcoholic beverages 
regulation. The EU also had explained in detail a number of concerns in relation to the notified 
draft at the Committee meeting in March 2017.  The E U noted that the list of food additives 
permitted in alcoholic beverages adopted by the competent Indian authorities was notified to the 
SPS Committee on  22 September 2016.  He requested that India, also notify the Regulations to the 
TBT Committee, allowing a reasonable time for comments before the entry into force  of the 
Regulation . In relation to the new draft Regulations, the EU had underlined its concerns at 
previous Committee meetings. The EU had raised a number of inconsistencies between the new 
text and curre nt international practices and suggested  that India align its draft alcoh olic beverages 
regulation with international practices and standards in order  to be fully in line with Article 2.4 of 
the TBT Agreement. Lastly, the EU requested that India provide a reasonable transition period for 
manufacturers to comply with the new provisions and to allow the sale of products already present 
on the Indian market until stocks were exhausted.  
2.120.   The representative of the United States  supported India's efforts to develop safe and 
effective standards for regulating alcoholic beverages. However, her delegation reiterated that 
there were a number of areas where India 's proposed Food Safety and Standards (Alcoholic 
Beverage Standards) Regulation fell outside of wide ly accepted international approaches and might 
restrict trade more than necessary.  She appreciated India 's willingn ess to engage in  dialogue on 
these issues and for the response that had been provided to US's comments in April. The US 
understood that India  had been revising the draft alcoholic beverage standard. Therefore, the US 
asked whether India could provide an update on the process and timelines for revision to the draft 
alcoholic beverage standard and whether India would provide an opportunity for fu rther comment. 
The US  also requested an assurance from India that the revised draft alcoholic beverage standard 
would be notified to the TBT  Committee in accordance with the Committee recommendation  on the 
Coherent Use of Notification Formats  (G/TBT/35 ) so as to provide an adequate opportunity for 
trading partners to comment.  
2.121.   The representative of Japan  shared the concerns  of others on this issue. His delegation 
requested India to update the information concerning amendment of this measure and repeated 
                                                
34 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 494  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 30 - 
 
  Japan's request for India to provide a consolidated draft text after considering all of Member 's 
comments.  
2.122.   The representative of Canada  continued to follow the development of India 's proposed 
regulation on food safety and standards related to alcoholic beverag es. His delegation  asked 
whether India could provide an update regarding when the standard w ould enter  into force.  
2.123.   The representative of India referred to the  detailed statement provided in the Committee  
meeting s in March and June 2017. In those meetings, the Indian delegation had said that the 
written replies of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI ) would be forwarded to 
the concerned delegations  and this had been done . According to  the India n authorities , the 
regulation might come into force six months after the date of final notification. There had  been no 
further update available at this stage . He believed that most of the questions raised until now  had 
been responded to and asked the concerned M embers forward their remaining questions  or 
concerns in writing.  
2.2.4.27   China — Formula Registration Regulation for Infant and Follow -up Formula, 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1165 (IMS ID 49335)  
2.124.   The representative of the United States  support ed China's efforts to ensure "protection of  
human health or safety, " the stated objective of this measure . However, the US shared the 
concerns of other WTO Members that this measure m ight unnecessarily restrict trade without 
advancing its stated objective. The US thank ed China 's Food and Drug Administration  (CFDA)  for 
providing inf ormation on Decree 26 in the very useful 20 July workshop in Beijing, hosted by the 
US and EU diplomatic missions. However, her delegation continued to seek assurance that trade 
would not be disrupted as a result of this measure . She asked whether CFDA ha d come to a 
decision regarding the request to extend the implementation date for Special Foods registration 
beyond the  1 January 2018 deadline . There was still a huge divide between what CFDA was 
requiring for infant formula registration and what industry was capable of . Therefore, if an 
extension was not granted , US producers of infant formula w ould likely experience a supply chain 
disruption leading to Chinese consumers e unable to legally import  these important foodstuffs .  
2.125.   The representative of the Europ ean Union  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings . 
2.126.   The representative of Japan  supported the concerns  raised by the US. He recognized that 
China had deleted the articles to limit the number of the product of infant formula from "the 
regulation on the  implementation of the food safety law of the People's Republic of China (revised 
draft)" , which reflected Japan 's past comments. Therefore, Japan  expected China to implement the 
necessary amendments of the relevant articles in the other laws.  
2.127.   The represen tative of China  reiterated that market disorder and other challenges had led 
to authorities strengthen ing the supervision and administration of the infant and follow -up formula 
milk powder. Theoretically,  infant formula should only be a nutritional supplement to 
breastfeeding, and composition of infant formula milk powder should be similar to breast milk. 
China's re search had concluded that large  infant formula manufacturers usually had no more than 
three brands. Her delegation emphasized that the regulation was applied in a non -discriminatory 
manner to both domestic and foreign manufacturers, and that a transitional period had been  
provided  to avoid unnecessary trade distortions. In addition, China was mak ing efforts to speed up 
the review and approval process  by setting up a fast track for formula registration  and forming an 
experts team especially for the review of foreign formula applications . 
2.2.4.28   European Union — Quality Schemes for Agricultural Products an d Foodstuffs, 
G/TBT/N/EU/139, G/TBT/N/EU/139/Add.1 ( IMS ID 51236) 
2.128.   The representative of Argentina  expressed his delegation's serious concerns with the EU 
decision to authorize the registration of the name "Danbo" as a P rotected Geographical I ndicat on 
(PGI) .37  
                                                
35 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 493  (under dates raised and references).  
36 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 51 2 (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 31 - 
 
  2.129.   The representative of the United States  expressed her delegation's serious concerns with 
the recent registration of the name "danbo"  as a protected geographical indication (PGI), which 
underscore d a lack of transparency and due process. She recalled that the Commission convened 
consultations in 2012 -2013, under Regulation 510/2006 , between Denmark,  the US, Australia, 
New Zealand, Uruguay and Argentina, during which the objecting parties made clear that danbo 
was to be  considered to be a generic term i n the EU. Following these consultations, the objecting 
parties received no indication from the Commission as to its consideration of the evidence 
presented by the objecting parties or its timeline for making a recommendation on the registration 
of danbo as  a PGI. Moreover, despite the US raising such concerns with respect to the EU' s Quality 
Schemes Regulation on various occasions, most recently in June 2017, no  formal noticed was  
receive d that the Agricultural Product Quality Policy Committee (APQPC) was t o vote on the danbo 
application. The US was thus  surprised to learn that the EU wished to move forward with the 
scheduling of the IP/TBT DVC discussed at the 2017 June meeting , even while the danbo 
registration was set to be considered for approval by the APQPC. It would however appear , based 
on the 2012 -2013 consultation process , that the Commission in effect had  no legal responsibility to 
respond to objections raised by trading partners under Regulation 510/2006. The US asked that 
the EU confirm whether t his was indeed the case.  The US also asked that the EU confirm that an 
objecting party had  no right, under the regulations, to appeal this decision ; and that, i n contrast, if 
protection for a term were rejected, the party seeking protection would have a r ight to appeal.  
2.130.   It was the US understanding, from the previous TBT  Committee meeting, that the EU 
would  prefer to discuss this issue in a more GI -focused forum. This did however remove the 
obligation to noti fy its quality schemes regulation under the TBT  Agreement  as this was a  labelling 
issue with elements that concern Codex standards which were subject to TBT disciplines. The 
Codex Alimentarius Standard for danbo had existed for over 50 years, and had been  effectively 
reconfirmed by Codex members – includ ing the EU – in 2007, 2008 and 2010. The Council's own 
decision on the EU' s accession to the Codex  Alimentarius Commission affirmed that " Codex 
standards have acquired increased legal relevance by virtue of the reference made to Codex in the 
WTO Agreements  and the presumption of conformity which was conferred on  national measures 
when they were based on such standards."  The EU and its Member States also supported and 
agreed to the Codex Committee for Milk a nd Milk Product's  Individual Cheese standards, whic h 
contain ed labelling provisions under section  7 that preserve d the generic nature and use of the 
names of these cheeses . Danbo was one of these cheeses, which underwent a rigorous review to 
prove its use in public domain and internat ional trade. Had  the C ommission' s view of the legal 
relevance of Codex standards changed since the publication of the Council Decision? The US 
concluded by asking for a  status update on the havarti application, which has been pending since 
2014.  
2.131.   The representative of Uruguay  said that his delegation supported the  statement s made by 
the US and Argentina. He recalled that Uruguay ha d, on several occasions , expressed its concern 
at the possible registration of the term "danbo" as a GI in the EU because of the impacts this could 
have on trading in this product and also for systemic reasons. The EU delegation 's responses in the 
previous two meetings had only been  that it had no information to provide concerning that 
application as the  process was still pendi ng; it further responded  that issues concerning intellectual 
property rights sh ould be dealt with in TRIPS Council  and not in the TBT  Committee. The EU gave 
the latter response , despite the fact that the stan dard under which such rights were  granted were 
notified by the EU itself to the TBT Committee on 18 November 2013 in G/TBT/N/EU/139. He also 
noted that on the 19 October 2017 , in the official gazette of the EU, the implementing regulation 
2017/1901 was published including the term "Danbo " as a protected GI (PGI) in the EU. He 
expressed his delegation's r egret that the EU ha d opted for providing protection t o a generic term 
despite several WTO Members , including Uruguay,  as well as organizations of producers , oppos ing 
this procedure in 2012. The adoption and registration of the t erm "Danbo " as a PGI  would run 
directly counter to Codex standard  264 adopted in October 1966 , i.e., m ore than 50 years ago. 
This standard was updated several times , including with the participation of the EU and its 
member states. Codex s tandard 264 in po int 7.1 , on labelling , clearly established  that the 
appellation "danbo" can be app lied in conformity with section  4.1 of the general standard for the 
labelling of processes products i n as far as the product complied  with the standard. Whereas point 
7.2 of this Codex standard established  that the coun try of origin shall be declared: in other words, 
the country  in which the cheese was made and not the country of origin of the denomination. The 
                                                                                                                                                  
37 The full statement is available in document G/TBT/W/456, circulated on 14 November 2017.  G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 32 - 
 
  general interpretation of point 7 , as a whole , was  that the members of Codex and also of the WTO  
recognize d that Danbo was a generic term and this cheese could  be produced in several  locations 
in as far as there would be  compliance with the requisites es tablished in the standard. He also 
recalled that is the 19 80s, Denmark provided technical cooperation to Uruguay for it to produce 
this type of cheese a nd thanks to that initiative, Uruguay  now produce d this variety. Granting 
exclusive rights to use a term which, like Danbo, has been recognized as being gen eric by the 
international community was of concern for two reasons. Firstly , that request would be more 
restrictive than necessary to trade. Something which would possibly deteriorate further as a 
consequence of extending its protection into third markets,  as has happened with many other GIs . 
Secondly, a Member 's option  to undermine an international standardizing body such as Codex  
would be disruptive,  for it would call into question the future validity  of Codex as a  benchmark for 
the both the TBT Committee  and the  TBT Agreement.  
2.132.   The representative of Kenya  expressed his delegation's  support for the concerns of other  
Members  as the measures could  indeed affect access to the EU market.  
2.133.   The representative of the European Union  informed the Committee that the  procedure for 
granting of protection to the term "Danbo" as a geographical indication (GI) had recently been 
finalised . The EU again noted that the elements raised by the Members pertain ed to intellectual 
property rights (IPRs) of GIs  and should therefore  not be discussed in the TBT Committee , or 
through TBT notification channels. Such issues would be more appropriate for discussion in the 
TRIPS Council. The EU invited Members to consider discussions on this issue through appropriate 
WTO channels, as well as bilaterally.   
2.2.4.29   The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Pen ghu, Kinmen and Matsu – Draft 
of the Organic Agriculture Act, G/TBT/N/TPKM/225, G/TBT/N/TPKM/225 Add.1 -2 
(IMS  ID 51138) 
2.134.   The representative of the European Union  repeated concerns raised in previo us meetings. 
On the  concern regarding the short time -period, the EU understood that the deadline would only 
apply effectively one year after the adoption of the law. However even this time period – 
effectively 2 years - would be too short for the EU .  
2.135.   The representative of The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Pen ghu, Kinmen and 
Matsu  noted that this issue was about its Draft Organic Agriculture Promotion Act, previously 
named Organic Agriculture Act. The draft Organic Agriculture Promotion Act had been  approved by 
the Executive Yuan on 27 July 2017 and was now under legislative process. According to Article 37 
of the d raft, Chinese Taipei would withdraw the unilateral recognition of organic equivalence with 
trading partners if no bilateral agreement, ar rangement, or official document on organic 
equivalence was concluded within one year after the Act enter ed into force. In addition, Article 42 
of the draft had been  revised to provide a one -year period between the adoption and entry into 
force of the Organ ic Agriculture Promotion Act, which mean t that the total grace period was two 
years. As it currently stood, the draft allowed trading partners two routes to export their organic 
products to the Chinese Taipei market. The first route was through a bilateral agreement, 
arrangement, or official document on organic equivalence. The second  was through certification 
bodies accredited by Chinese Taipei authorities. This practice was similar to that of the EU and did 
not constitute a trade barri er. 
2.2.4.30   Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi — East African Community 
alcoholic beverage standards , G/TBT/N/KEN/472 -477, G/TBT/N/KEN/479, 
G/TBT/N/KEN/482 -483, G/TBT/N/KEN/556 -561 G/TBT/N/KEN/563 -565 
G/TBT/N/KEN/567, G/TBT/N/UGA/434 -435, G/TBT/N/UGA/437 -441 (IMS ID 510 and 
51939) 
2.136.   The representative of the European Union  expressed support  for the efforts of the 
Members of the East African Community (EAC)  to ensure the quality standards of alcoholic 
beverages consumed in their territories . The EU recalled its e ntire interventions in the previous 
                                                
38 For previous statements follow the thread und er IMS ID 511  (under dates raised and references) . 
39 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 510  and IMS ID 519  (under dates raised and 
references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 33 - 
 
  Committee meeting  with regard to  this matter.  His delegation invited Uganda and Kenya to debrief 
the Committee on the status of the revision and on how comments presented by other WTO 
Members were being taken into accoun t in the standard's revision process. I n relation to the 
process of revision , he encouraged EAC members to continue to  ensur e that foreign stakeholders 
have an opportunity to present their views on the revision process. The EU also repeated its 
request for  Ugandan and Kenyan representatives to explain the process foreseen in order to 
incorporate these standards into the appropriate technical regulations. In this regard, the EU 
encouraged all EAC members to adopt the standard in a harmonised way , as national  deviations 
from the regional standard would create additional barriers to trade. The EU also recalled that the 
minimum time for the entry into force of the new technical regulations should be at least six 
months and therefore encouraged EAC members to pro vide a longer transition period to allow 
companies to adapt to the new requirements.  
2.137.   The representative of the United States  appreciated Kenya 's and other EAC countries  
efforts ' to revise the draft regional EAC alcohol standards following comments from WTO  Members . 
At the Committee meeting in June 2017, the US shared some  outstanding concerns that had been 
provided  in written comments  and Kenya advised that WTO Members ' comments would be taken 
into account in a new revision of the regulation . Her delegation therefore requested Kenya to 
confirm that EAC members  had an intention to make further revisions to the draft standard before 
it was finalized . She also asked Kenya to provide a status update on the process and timelines for 
completion of th at revision . 
2.138.   The representative of Kenya  stated that Kenya  had notified the regional harmonized 
alcoholic beverage standards  to the Committee in July 2016. Following the notification, Kenya had 
received comments from the EU and the US . His delegation expla ined that East African Standards 
were developed by technical committees comprising of technical experts from member states and 
adopted by member states for implementation upon approval by the East African council of 
ministers.  In relation to the East Afric an Community alcoholic beverage standards, the se were 
regional harmonized standards  and a regional technical committee meeting had been  held from 
20-24 February 2017 . The technical committee reviewed the comments that were raised on the 
East African Commun ity harmonized alcoholic beverages standards in order to address the 
concerns expressed. The revised standards were released for public review in April 2017 and 
subsequently notified as required under  the TBT Agreement. The public review comments were 
being combined and w ould be discussed at the regional technical committee meeting which would  
be held in early 2018 . Kenya remained available for further engag ement with the delegations of 
the EU, the US, and others on this issue.  
2.2.4.31   China — National Standards on  Limits of Volatile Organic Compounds for 
Furniture, G/TBT/N/CHN/1094, G/TBT/N/CHN/1095, G/TBT/N/CHN/1096 
(IMS  ID 50940) 
2.139.   The representative of the European Union  expressed continued concerns regarding the 
standard as the bilateral exchanges wi th the Chinese  authorities had not resolved the problems 
identified . The proposed mandatory standards include d unnecessary deviations from the existing 
international ISO standards. In case the use of such new standards beca me mandatory, products 
which were  currently ass essed on the basis of international standards would then have to be 
assessed for the Chinese market on the basis of other, specific tests , some of which require d a 
complex and costly assessment, such as multiple test chambers and a newly created te st chamb er 
for mattresses. It was  not clear whether Chinese testing laboratories would be equip ped to carry 
out such tests. Furthermore, there were  significant doubts among the EU industry about the 
relevance of the tests and their replicability. For example, with  regard to the presence of harmful 
elements to be measured, the parameter TVOC (Total Vola tile Organic Compounds) measured  a 
sum of harmful and harmless substances. However, this would risk mixing up the tested values for 
individual substances, meaning tha t a significant value for a harmful substance could be shrouded 
by average values. Such results could have important environmental and/or health consequences.  
The EU sought confirmation as to whether TVOC requirements would  be applied on a voluntary 
basis and also requested clarification regarding those parts of the standard that would remain 
voluntary or become mandatory . For instance, she asked whether the TVOC limits or the testing  
method set out in the standards and their annexes would  be considered as voluntary  and whether 
                                                
40 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 509  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 34 - 
 
  a differentiation between voluntary  and mandatory requirements would  apply to all three notified 
draft standards and, if so, how this would apply, e.g. what limi ts and/or other requirements were  
included in the notified drafts (e.g. f ormaldehyde emissions).  
2.140.   At previo us Committee meetings, China had  indicated that deviations from international 
standards were justified by realistic conditions of use. It was the EU's understanding that the 
notified standards were still under development a s they had not been published yet. The EU 
request ed a progress report on their development as soon as possible, together with the likely 
date of their entry into force, as well as with an a prio ri impact assessment of the  health, 
environment, and/or econom ic consequences of the standards.  In the meantime, the EU 
encourage d the Chinese authorities to accept equivalent international standards, in particular the 
ISO standards, for the product categories covered by the notified drafts. Should China consider 
that the relevant ISO standards could be improved, the EU invited  China to bring its proposals for 
discussion to the ISO, enabling  improvements to be considered without creating differences 
between Chinese and i nternational standards and  thus avoid ing unneces sary barriers to trade.  The 
EU was available  to hold a technical meeting in Brussels on the issues raised, as proposed by 
China in Jun e 2017.  
2.141.   The representative of China  said that  Chinese standards were based on the relevant 
international standards, includ ing ISO series of standards. Any deviation from the relevant 
international standards was aimed at simulating real conditions in which the products were used so 
that the testing results could be more scientific. China was reforming and streamlining the nati onal 
standardization sc heme to some extent, which had  an impact on the development, approval and 
implementation process of certain proposed standards. The development process of the National 
Standards on Limits of Volatile Organic Compounds for Furniture was still in progress  
2.2.4.32   Egypt — Manufacturer Registration System (Decree No. 43/2016 and Decree 
No. 992/2015) G/TBT/N/EGY/114, G/TBT/N/EGY/115 (IMS ID 50541) 
2.142.   The representative of the United States  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings.  
2.143.   The representative of the European Union  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings  
and highlighted the challenges faced by EU industry and in particular by SMEs with regard to the 
application of the Egyptian decrees .  
2.144.   The representative of Switzerland  repeated concerns raised in previous meetings. He 
encouraged Egypt to create a publicly accessible database of registered companies so as to 
increase transparency in the registration process and requested a list of all registered Swiss 
companies. He thanke d Egypt for the bilateral exchanges and looked forward to further 
cooperation on this issue.  
2.145.   The representative of Canada  supported the concerns raised by other Members and said 
Canada would continue to monitor developments regarding these decrees  
2.146.   The repr esentative of Ukraine  supported the concerns raised by other Members on Decree 
No. 43/2016. This measure specifically targeted importers with requirements involving many 
authorities and a complicated approval process. The lengthy and costly procedures dama ged the 
competitiveness of Ukrainian exporters and inhibited market access in Egypt. He encouraged Egypt 
to reconsider the existing approach so as to bring it into compliance with the requirements under 
the WTO and with the TBT Agreement so as to avoid add itional obstacles to trade.  
2.147.   The representative of Australia  supported the concerns raised by other Members . He 
encouraged Egypt to review the measures in line with international standards and approaches to 
conformity assessment.  
2.148.   The representative of Egypt repeated replies provided in previous meetings and again 
stressed that Minister of Trade Decree No. 43/2016 was aimed solely at market surveillance and 
protection from counterfeited products. He thanked those Members who had requested bilateral 
                                                
41 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 505  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 35 - 
 
  meetings and urged those who had specific concerns to communicate them to the TBT Enquiry 
Point. His delegation had taken note of the comments made in the meeting and would convey 
them to capital for response in due course.  
2.2.4.33   Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz R epublic — Pharmaceutical products - 
Resolution 1314 of the Government of the Russian Federation on determining 
compliance of medicinal products' manufacturers with the requirements of Good 
Manufacturing Practice (non -notified); draft decisions of the Board  of the Eurasian 
Economic Union ,  G/TBT/N/RUS/54 , G/TBT/N/RUS/58 , G/TBT/N/RUS/63  
(IMS ID 52142) 
2.149.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated concerns  regarding measures the 
Russian Federation had adopted to introduce certification requirements for me dicinal products  both 
for human and animal use, which was also raised at the November 2016 TBT Committee meeting . 
At present,  the most significant concern related to Resolution 1314 of the Russian Federation 
Government on Determining Compliance of Medicina l Products' Manufacturers with Good 
Manufacturing Practice (GMP) requirements, of 3 December 2015 . This Resolution had not been 
notified to the WTO . It introduced a requirement of inspection and certification of production si tes 
of medicines with regard to  GMP, including foreign manufacturing sites, which was a pre -condition 
to obtaining a marketing authorization in Russia .  
2.150.   Whilst recalling previous statements in the TBT Committee meeting s, the EU once again 
requested that: (i) the measure be notified to t he WTO, so as to allow time for  WTO Members to  
provide comments and for those comments to be  taken into consideration before the finalization of 
the measure;  (ii) appropriate transition time and additional accompanying measures be taken by 
Russia,  includin g in the area of organization of inspections, so as to ensure that the GMP 
certification requirement could be complied by foreign manufacturers without a negative impact on 
their exports to the Russian Federation.  It was understood that no action had yet l ed to such a 
transition period, while the measure was fully in place since the beginning of this year, except for 
the draft amendments to Law 61 on veterinary pharmaceuticals only, which was posted for public 
discussion in December 2016 as a new adoption; and (iii) the specific issue for veterinary products 
of double inspection of sites manufacturing Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients and final products 
be reconsidered by Russia . 
2.151.   The representative of the Russian Federation  said that more than 200 GMPs would  be 
conducted  in the second half of 2017. Concerning a  single mark for pharmaceutical products in the 
Eurasian Economic Union  (EEU) , he confirmed that  all necessary documents entered into force on 
6 May 2017. However, the entry into force of these documents did not mean significant changes in 
the existing registration system.  Current  producers and importers had the opportunity to register 
pharmaceutical products in the national system or in the system of the EEU. Registration 
certificates i ssued in Russia  would  be valid only in the territory of Russia . Registration certificate 
issued in accordance with the rules of the EEU would operate within  the territory of all countries of 
the Union . The  transition period would last until 31 December 202 1. In 2022 the Russian 
registration system would be completely replaced by the system of the Union. Moreover, 
previously issued registration certificates would be valid until 31 December 2025.  During this 
transition period, the special working group of the  EEU would  contin ue to take into account all  the 
concerns of  stakeholders . He took note of concerns raised by interested members and expressed 
readiness to continue to work  with them on this matter.   
2.2.4.34   Russian Federation — Medical Devices , G/TBT/N/RUS/51, G/ TBT/N/RUS/52, 
G/TBT/N/RUS/53, G/TBT/N/RUS/55 (IMS ID 52043) 
2.152.   The representative of the European Union  said that comments had been sent on these 
notifications on 15 June 2016  and acknowledged the efforts Russian authorities were making 
regarding common rules in the field of medical devices.  
2.153.   In relation to G/TBT/N/RUS/51, the EU understood that the notified draft established a 
long review time for dossiers presented in the framework of technical testing for medical devices 
                                                
42 For previous statements follow the thread unde r IMS ID 521  (under dates raised and references) . 
43 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 520  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 36 - 
 
  as part of the ir "expert evaluation" . This could lead to the market not keeping pace with  
innovation . She  invited Russia to explain the necessity of such a long review time. For the sake of 
comparison, the timeline for expert evaluations in the EU was normally between 3 0 and 60 days, 
whereas the notified draft  seemed to establish a timeline of over 300 days. The EU asked Russia to 
clarify  the timeline for the expert evaluation included in the final measure.  
2.154.   Regarding G/TBT/N/RUS/53, the EU understood that all the relevan t information regarding 
"safety and efficiency" of a medical device had to be put on its label. The EU asked Russia for 
clarification regarding the information to be included in the "labe lling" and the information that had 
to be included in the "operationa l documentation". At the bilateral meeting on 26 May 201 7, the 
Russian Federation had said that the Ministry of Health would be contacted to clarify the necessity 
of an amendment in this regard. The EU requested an update on the results of the announced 
consultations with the Ministry.  
2.155.   The representative of Ukraine  reiterated its previous concerns about some inconsistencies 
in the mentioned documents with the requirements of the TBT Agreement. He asked that the 
requirements of the draft agreement be justifi ed on the basis of a scientifically substantiated 
clarification as to why stricter conditions for mandatory state registration applied to exporters 
compared with domestic producers. State registration of medical devices was based on the 
examination of safe ty, quality and effectiveness of medical devices, which was conducted by 
expert authorities defined by the member states of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). The 
mandatory requirement for applicants to register within  the territory of member states of th e EAEU 
put national producers and producers from other member states of the WTO in an unequal 
position. Conformity assessment procedure s depended directly on the justified risks, i.e. harder 
procedure  for higher risk. The choice  of conformity assessment pr ocedures  by the Russian 
Federation – certification – implied high risks associated with imported medi cal devices. For many 
other WTO M embers, risks were considered low and conformity assessment procedures provided 
for manufacturer's declaration of conformi ty. 
2.156.   The reference of the representative of Russia to the existence of the transition period of 
the draft agreement before entering into force did not address already existing technical barriers 
to trade. The draft agreements specified requirements for impl ementation, installation, repair and 
disposal of medical products that were inconsistent with international practices. Ukraine called on 
Russia to remove unjustified technical barriers to trade and bring the provisions of the draft 
documents on medical dev ices in line with international practice.  
2.157.   The representative of the Russian Federation  said implementation of the agreement of 
common principles and rules of medical device circulation was similar to the situation with respect 
to implementation of the agreement of common principles and rules on pharmaceutical products 
circulation.44 He empha sized that both requirements and conformity assessment procedures were 
identical for domestic and imported products. Russia took note of concerns raised, and would 
inform the special working group of the Eurasian Economic Commission accordingly.  
2.2.4.35   Korea — Amendment of the Notifications on Warning Messages on Smoking 
and Drinking  (IMS ID 51845) 
2.158.   The representative of the European Union  shared Korea's objective of fighting excessive 
alcohol consumption, especially with respect to some particularly vulnerable cate gories of 
consumers. Nevertheless, a number of concerns were reiterated. The draft measure required that 
at least one out of the three possible warnings were included in the labels of alcoholic beverages. 
In accordance with its understanding of the warning s, the EU noted that these established a direct 
link between alcohol and the occurrence of certain health problems without mention of 
consumption patterns. The EU considered that the majority of the negative effects on health of 
alcoholic beverages were re lated to higher levels of consumption, and to certain consumption 
patterns. It was therefore suggested that Korean authorities consider re -drafting the health 
warnings in a way that better reflected the fact that alcoholic beverages were more likely to cau se 
certain diseases when linked with higher levels of consumption and certain consumption patterns. 
It was noted that following the notification of the draft amendment on 29 July 2016, Korea had 
                                                
44 See STC 40 , para 2.187.  (IMS ID 521)  
45 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 518  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 37 - 
 
  notified on 8 December 2016 an addendum which modified one of  the three possible warnings. The 
modified warning referred to increased risk rather than to direct causality. This was welcomed by 
the EU. On this basis, the EU suggested that Korea redraft the other two warnings in a similar 
sense, i.e. referring to incr eased risk, taking into account the fact that the majority of the negative 
effects on health were related to higher levels of consumption and to certain consumption 
patterns. The EU asked that Korea provide an update on any plans to redraft alcohol warning s in 
this regard.  
2.159.   Regarding the transition period provided for the application for the measure, at the 
previous TBT Committee meeting , Korea had indicated that from 9 August 2017 only products 
complying with the new labelling requirements could be imported  into Korea, and that from 8 
February 2018 only products complying with the new labelling requirements could be sold to 
consumers. This schedule also meant that from February 2018 products complying with previously 
applicable labelling requirements and whi ch were already present in the distribution chain and on 
shelves in Korea but not yet sold to consumers would have to be recalled by distributors and 
sellers. The EU considered that recalling products was an extreme measure only justified in case of 
a seri ous risk to health and safety of consumers, and not in cases related to evolving labelling 
requirements.  
2.160.   The representative of Japan  shared the concern raised by the EU. While supporting  Korea 's 
measures to reduce the harmful use of alcohol , Japan request ed that specific information 
concerning the extension of the transition period  be provided . Confirmation was also requested on 
whether wholesaler or retailers' stocks with old warning labels as of 8 February 2018 could be sold 
and that importers would not be obliged to recall them. If not, Japan requested that Korea allow 
for the exhaustion of such stocks without enforcement of the new requirement.  
2.161.   The representative of New Zealand  acknowledged and supported Korea's right to introduce 
new regulations to ad dress specific public health concerns and appreciated that in seeking to 
address the harmful use of alcohol the notification at issue was directed towards achieving a 
legitimate public health objective. However, she shared some of the concerns raised by th e EU and 
other Members , in particular regarding the clarification of the transition period and how this 
measure would apply to existing stock complying with the previous labelling requirements that had 
been imported and/or distributed but remain unsold by 8 February 2018.  
2.162.   The representative of Australia  sought further information from Korea about recent 
changes to the National Health Promotion Act related to alcohol and wine labelling. Australia had 
joined in with other WTO members and had written to Korea 's Ministry of Health and Welfare on 
28 March 2017 expressing concerns regarding the new alcohol warning label requirements. 
Australia continued to request that Korea provide an official English translation of the proposed 
health warning statements. Further  to this, Australia questioned the characterisation of a direct 
link between alcohol consumption and certain diseases. He suggested that Korea share the 
scientific basis for mandating alcohol warning labels that directly associated alcohol consumption 
with the various diseases stipulated on the proposed labels. Australia noted the disparity between 
the period for presentation of comments by WTO Members (27 September 2016), the date that 
the new requirements came into effect (3 September 2016) and amendments  to the text of one of 
the proposed warning label options (8 December 2016) which now had a separate implementation 
date (8 February 2018) to the other two labels (1 September 2017). Australia strongly requested 
an appropriate adaptation  period across all warning label options to allow importers and exporters 
time to comply with the new requirements.  
2.163.   The representatives of Canada , Chile and the United States  supported the concerns raised 
by other Members.  
2.164.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  said th at an adaptation period of six months 
(until 8 February 2018) had been provided; therefore, beverages which had been imported before 
9 August 2017 could be sold with former warning messages on drinking. This measure was 
intended to grant  an additional grac e period of six  months. Responses to other questions raised by 
Members would be delivered to capital, and, bilateral consultations would continue both with 
Members and stakeholders in a transparent manner.  G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 38 - 
 
  2.2.4.36   Ireland — Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015, G/TBT /N/IRL/2 (IMS ID 51646) 
2.165.   The representative of Mexico  raised concerns with  the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015, 
notified by Ireland in document G/TBT/N/IRL/2 on 9 June 2016 . This measure sought  to reduce 
alcohol consumption to 9.1 litres of pure alcohol per capita. Mexico had first expressed concern s 
regarding this Bill at the Committee meeting in November 2016 and had reiterated these in  March 
and June 2017. Mexico wishe d again  to reaffirm  previous concern s in particular regarding the 
requirement to display warning messages  – including a warning symbol regarding consumption 
during pregnancy  and the Irish Ministry of Health's website address  – on product labels. The 
aforementioned website provide d information on the risks linked to alcohol consumption. This 
legitimate objective could be fulfilled without burdensome and restrictive labelling requirements, in 
accordance with Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement.  As had been previously mentioned in 
statements relating to this measure, the Irish authorities could carry out campaigns to raise the 
population's awareness of the harmful effects on health caused by excessive consumption of 
alcohol, thereby achieving its legitimate objective without adversely af fecting imports. In light of 
the above, Mexico again request ed the European Union to (i) inform Mexico  of the measure's 
approval status before the European Commission or whether it was undergoing any sort of 
revision; and, (ii) to  indicate when the Europea n Union w ould respond to the comments submitted 
by Mexico, and whether those comments ha d been considered.  
2.166.   The representative of Guatemala  express ed her delegation's interest in th e measure.  
2.167.   The representative of the European Union  noted that in parallel w ith the WTO notification, 
Ireland ha d also notified the measure to the European Commission in accordance with internal EU 
requirements for notification of draft national technical regulations under Article 5(1) of Directive 
(EU) 2015/1535.  Ireland had received comments from the Commission and detailed opinions and 
comments from some EU member States on the draft measure within the framework of the 
internal notification procedure. These were currently being analy sed and considered by the Irish 
authorities. Concerning  comments received from WTO Members under the WTO TBT notification 
procedure, these would be likewise examined and written replies would  be provided in due course.  
2.2.4.37   Kazakhstan, Russian Federation, Kyrgyz Republic — The amendments No. 2 to 
the Technical Regulation of the Customs Union on Safety of Toys (TÐ ÌÑ 008/2011) 
GTBT/N/KAZ/7,  G/TBT/N/RUS/73, G/TBT/N/KGZ/48  (IMS ID 51447) 
2.168.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated serious concerns about the proposed 
amendment to the Eurasian Econom ic Union (EAEU)'s Technical Regulation on the Safety of Toys. 
The EU acknowledged  the need to protect childr en's health and safety but noted  that the propose d 
requirements bore  no relation with the stated objective of "protecting children from the possible  
negative impact of toys on their development and health, causing aggressive behaviour, fear and 
anxiety." According to the revised proposal submitted by Kazakhstan to the EAEU Working Group 
in charge of this matter on 31 March 2017, the amendment would no w specifically apply to dolls. 
The proposal would prohibit the marketing of dolls not complying with the very prescriptive 
psychological and pedagogical criteria laid down in the proposal. One of these  criteria, for instance, 
related  to the requirement tha t "Dolls must give a true image of a person, corresponding to 
different age stages; and dolls should be externally attractive and represent the image of a 
physically healthy pe rson". Specific requirements were  then set on the shape and size of certain 
parts of the body , which could result in arbitrary decisions based on very subjective assessments 
relying on moral criteria that bore  no relation with toy safety.  The proposed psychologic al and 
pedagogical criteria had  no scientific basis, such as behavioural studies. No other WTO Member 
had ever introduced similar criteria in their toy safety l egislation. In general, there was  no 
scientific evidence that an individual toy alone, regardless of its play time, could  cause any 
psychological harm to children. Durin g the previous  Committee meeting, in response to requests 
for clarifications by Members as to which products were  the main sources of concern, Kazakhstan 
had shown  some pictures allegedly representing toys that could have a negative impact on 
children 's developm ent and health. According to EU's  information, such pictures did not, in fact, 
represent children's toys on the market , leading the EU to conclude that the proposed mea sure 
                                                
46 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 516 (under dates raised and references) . 
47 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 514  (under dates raised and references) . 
 G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 39 - 
 
  was not based on solid grounds related to toy safety.  For these reasons, the EU urged  the 
withdrawal of the proposed amendment. As mentioned at the previous Committee meeting, the EU  
invite d Kazakhstan and the other members of the EAEU to consider alternative approaches  
instead, focus ing on ensuring the suitability of toys for diff erent age groups by appropriate age 
grading. Internationa l guidance in this regard existed in  ISO/TR (Technical Report) 8124 -8-2016 
on age determin ation guidelines, which provided  detailed technical guidance on the 
appropriateness of toy s by age. Finally, the EU requested  an update on the state of play with 
respect to the process both at EAEU and at national level in Kazakhstan and Russia.  
2.169.   The representative of Ukraine  drew attention to some inconsistencies of the mentioned 
documents with the requirements o f the TBT Agreement. Application of co nformity assessment 
procedures  depended directly on the justif ied risks, i.e. the higher risk,  the harder the procedure. 
The reliance on toy  certification by Kazakhstan and Russia showed that they considered toys as 
posing high risks, as oppo sed to many WTO members, which considered them as low risk products 
and therefore accepted product declarations.  The stricter conformity assessment requirements 
needed to be justified by  scientifically substantiated clarification s. In addition, the requirement  of 
Article 5.1.2 of the TBT Agreement that  conformity assessment producers should not create 
unjustified barriers to international trade was not being met. Ukraine called on  mentione d 
Members to remove unjustified technical barriers to trade and to bring the provisions of the 
technical r egulation on safety of toys in l ine with the requirements of  international practice.  
2.170.   The representative of the United States  recalled the images share d at the June 2017 TBT 
Committee meeting as the basi s for the proposed amendments. Upon research, it was established 
that the picture of the alligator attacking the child was the artwork of  a Chilean -born German 
artist. Correspondence with the artist had confirmed that her work was art displayed in galleries 
and that the images were  not reproduc ed for sale as children 's toys.  The second  image of the baby 
with horns was  not a toy but a collectable , age -graded for 16+ or 18+. Neither of these images 
represent ed items that would be considered toys under the Customs Union Technical Regulation 
definition of a toy.  If Kazakhstan proceeded  with the draft amendments, it was  important to note 
that dolls similar to the images  provided by the Kazakh delegation  were unl ikely to  be covered by 
the Customs Union Technical Regulation and could still be sold on the market. Article 2 of the 
Customs U nion Technical Regulation stated that it applied  to products designed or intended for 
children under 14 and in Article 8, folk an d decorative dolls not  intended for children under 14 
were specifically exempted f rom the safety requirements. The US understood  that the images 
represent ed items that some consumers  would choose not to purchase. However, amendments to 
the Customs  Union Te chnical Regulation would not address those concerns. The US called on all 
Members to be r espectful of the purpose of the TBT Committee and the work done  to ensure 
transparency in the development of tech nical regulations. Great care needed to  be taken to ensure 
that the information presented was accurate and reliable. Therefore, the US request ed that the 
Chair caution M embers about sharing potentially inflammatory material in the future. Furthermore, 
the US suggested  that Kazakhstan explore less trade restri ctive alternat ives to achieve its 
objective. For example, age grading was  a globally recognized practice cited in international 
standards that could  be applied to ensure children had access to toys that were  appropriate and 
safe for particular stages of ph ysical and mental development. As noted in ASTM F963 -16 Annex 
A1"age grading is intended to provide point of sale guidance to consumers for the selection of 
appropriate toys for children with respect to average abilities, interests of various age groups, a nd 
safety aspects of the toys themselves. " Finally, the US urged Kazakhstan to consider the 
unintended consequences of implementing the measure as amended as toys that represent ed 
children with disabilities wo uld be banned from the market.  
2.171.   The representati ve of Canada  said that Canada, which was  home to a large toy industry , 
shared  the concerns raised by  other WTO Members and continued  to follow this measure with 
interest.  
2.172.   The representative of Kazakhstan  thanked  delegations for their continued interest and  for 
expressing sympathy with Kazakhstan's concerns with regard to psychological health of children. 
With respect to questions of the  US and the EU, draft amendments were  still being discussed by 
the working group in order to take into account comments rec eived during the comment period. In 
particular , relevant agencies were  currently considering changes to draft amendments , in 
particular the possibility to replace  the proposed psychological and pedagogical expertise by the 
age grading requirement based on ISO standard 8124. In addition, the Ministry of Health was  also 
considering the conduct of studies on the  impact of toys on the mental health of children. Wit h G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 40 - 
 
  respect to the comments of  Ukraine, he made reference to previous replies provided in November 
2016 and March and June 2017 TBT Committee meetings.  
2.173.   The representative of the Russian Federation  support ed the efforts of Kazakhstan aimed at 
protecting the health of children. According to the procedure for drafting, adoption , amendment 
and cancellation of the EAEU technical regulations (adopted by Eurasian Economic Commission 
Council Decision No. 48 of 20.06.2 012), a special Working Group had been  created from 
representatives of all member states of the Union  to review the draft amendments  as well as all  
comments received. Russia took note of the concerns raised by interested Members and would  
inform the special working group accordingly.  
2.2.4.38   Italy — Labelling requirements of the origin of grains used in the preparation 
of dried pasta (IMS ID 53048) 
2.174.   The repres entative of Canada  thanked the European Union for a productive bilateral 
meeting held earlier in the week regarding country of origin labelling in the EU, including EU 
Regulation No. 1169/2011 on the Provision of Food Information to Consumers. Canada sought 
further clarity on the scope of the EU's implementing regulation regarding the rules for country of 
origin labelling. He asked whether the regulation would be voluntary for those specific instances 
where the primary ingredient of a food was different than the country of o rigin or place of 
providence for that food and also whether Member States would be able to maintain mandatory 
national regimes in parallel to the proposed implementing legislation once it took effect. As noted 
previously, mandatory COOL measures could caus e discrimination within food supply chains, as 
food processors adjusted their production processes to comply with the labelling requirements. 
Canada requested that Italy, and any other EU member state, notify any implementing measure to 
the WTO in order to  comply with the transparency obligations under the WTO TBT Agreement.  
2.175.   The representative of Brazil  continued to support the concerns raised by Canada. As the 
regulation could set a dangerous precedent, Brazil asked the EU to consider alternative approach es 
and also urged the EU and its member s tates to notify such measures to the Comm ittee, providing 
an opportunity for other Members to submit  comments."  
2.176.   The representative of the European Union  said that as explained in previous TBT 
Committee meetings, Reg ulation (EU) 1169/2011 on the provision of Food Information to 
Consumers allowed member states to introduce measures concerning the mandatory indication of 
the country of origin or place of provenance for certain category of foods, following the specific 
notification procedure established for this purpose in the Regulation. Accordingly, EU member 
states which deemed it necessary to adopt such national measures had to notify them to the 
European Commission and the other member states, and provide the reasons  justifying them. The 
grounds on which the justifications had to be based were specified in the Regulation and included 
consumer protection. In addition, member states needed to provide evidence supporting their 
measures, for instance, that the majority of  consumers in the member state concerned attached 
significant value to the provision of the origin indication. On 12 May 2017, Italy had notified to the 
Commission a draft decree on the origin indication of durum wheat for pasta, in accordance with 
this pr ocedure but had withdrawn the notification on 25 July 2017. As a result, the Commission 
had not pursued the assessment of the measure. The Italian decree was not yet applicable. The EU 
had taken note of Members' concerns and was available for bilateral dis cussion.  
2.2.4.39   Republic of Korea — Household Chemical and Biocidal Products , 
G/TBT/N/KOR/684 , G/TBT/N/KOR/547, G/TBT/N/KOR/702 (IMS ID 52949) 
2.177.   The representative of the United States  reiterated concerns raised in previous meetings 
and requested that Korea take the least trade -restrictive approach necessary to meet its legitimate 
objectives of protecting human health and the environment.   
2.178.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  repeated responses provided in previous 
meetings. He stressed that Korea had conclude d that these substances risked being inhaled and 
therefore posed a danger to human health.  
                                                
48 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 530  (under dates raised and references) . 
49 For previous statements fo llow the thread under IMS ID 529  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 41 - 
 
  2.2.4.40   China — Tentative Administrative Rules on Enterprises Average Fuel 
Consumption and New Energy Vehicle Credits and Administration Regulation on the 
Access of New Ene rgy Vehicle Manufactures and Products, G/TBT/N/CHN/1187, 
G/TBT/N/CHN/1188 (IMS ID 52750) 
2.179.   The representative of Japan , referring to G/TBT/N/CHN/1187, welcomed changes made to 
the final Administrative Rules, published on 28 September 2017, and the partial acc eptance of 
their request for sufficient lead time. Her delegation particularly welcomed the postponed 
enforcement of the Administrative Rules from 2018 to 2019 and the assurance that unachieved 
credit in 2019 could be offset by mandated credit in 2020. As for penal regulations, Japan 
recognized that some parts of the regulations had been changed and that China had still been 
considering details of the system. She reported that Japanese automobile manufacturers continued 
to have concerns on this matter and r equested that China allow foreign industries and other 
countries to make comments sufficiently in advance and to avoid creating unnecessary obstacles 
to international trade. Regarding G/TBT/N/CHN/1188, Japan maintained that the regulation, which 
had entere d into force  in July 2017, would also have a substantial impact on automobile 
manufacturers located in China and therefore reiterated its request for the consideration of the 
following three points, raised in the previous meeting, once  the control system f or the regulation 
was established : (i) the national and local monitoring platforms should be integrated into a single 
system; (ii) the monitoring and recording period should be limited, for example, to five years; and 
(iii) adequate lead time should be pro vided for the creation of these systems.  
2.180.    The representative of the European Union  thanked the Chinese authorities for the new 
version of the Administrative Rules which took into account many of the suggestions and 
improvements the EU and other Members had  put forward in writing and also at previous 
Committee  meetings. Nevertheless, clarification was sought regarding Article 12 of the Chinese 
rules, dealing with the specific provisions applicable to Small -Volume Manufacturers (SVMs) 
producing or importing f ewer than 2000 vehicles per year. The EU welcomed the fact that, as in 
the EU legal framework, Article 12 recognized the specific situation of SVMs by providing for a 
relaxation ratio for average fuel consumption targets for these manufacturers as compared  to the 
general compliance target. Her delegation nonetheless remained concerned with the concrete 
implementation of Article 12 relaxation ratio and asked China to confirm and/or to consider the 
SVM relaxation ratio being calculated on the basis of an aver age reduction during the full period 
(2016 -2020) rather than on a year -to-year basis (i.e. a manufacturer that had achieved a 
substantial fuel consumption reduction on year 1, for instance 20%, would benefit from the 
relaxation ratio not only in year 2 but  also in years 3 and 4). She explained that fuel consumption 
reductions were a result of technological jumps achieved over a certain period of time, i.e. new 
technologies were introduced over 5 -year vehicle development cycles. SVMs would therefore be 
able to achieve fuel reductions (because of the introduction of a new technology or new model) 
over a 5 -year time -period, but they would not be able achieve an annual/linear reduction (due to 
the limited number of vehicle types in their respective fleets). She requested that this technical 
issue be taken into account and reconfirmed her delegation's readiness to cooperate with China at 
a bilateral/technical level on this specific matter.  
2.181.   The representative of the United States  welcomed the fact that changes had been made to 
the new energy vehicle (NEV) requirements. Her delegation was of the understanding that the 
requirements only applied until 2020, with quotas for subsequent years to be announced at a later 
date by the Ministry of Industry and Information Tech nology. Due to the long lead time required 
for compliance in the automotive industry, and in the interest of transparency and clarity, the US 
urged China to notify the requirements for 2021 with sufficient advanced notice for companies to 
plan accordingly and to comply.  
2.182.   The representative of China  said that in order to relieve the pressure on energy and the 
environment and to improve the energy conservation of passenger vehicles, the Parallel 
Administration Rules on Average Fuel Consumption and New Energy V ehicle Credits of Passenger 
Vehicle Corporate (Parallel Administration Rules) had been released on 27 September 2017 and 
would come into effect on 1 April 2018. She explained that the Parallel Administration Rules 
adopted a parallel administration mechanis m of two types of credits, namely average fuel 
consumption credits and NEV credits, in line with the current stage of development of the 
                                                
50 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 527  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 42 - 
 
  automobile industry in China. This administration mechanism took into account not only the 
improvement of energy conver sation of traditional automobiles but also the innovative 
development of NEVs. The rules aimed at establishing a market -oriented, long -term mechanism so 
as to promote the development of the energy -saving and NEV industries. She stated that the 
fulfilment of a certain proportion of NEV credits would not be required until 2019, to allow  
automobile enterprises time for R&D of products and production layout. This requirement had been 
made on the basis of soliciting comments from all parties both domestically a nd abroad, bearing in 
mind the current situation of the automobile industry. She further explained that the Parallel 
Administration Rules insisted on treating domestic and foreign enterprises equally. Since their 
release, major automobile manufacturers had  expressed their support for the rules and had 
actively conducted R&D and production layout of energy -saving and NEVs in order to meet the 
rules' requirements.  
2.183.   China also stated that the Administration Regulation on the Access of New Energy Vehicle 
Manufac tures and Products (Administration Regulation) had been released on 6 January 2017 and 
had come into effect on 1  July 2017 in order to protect the life and property of the public, improve 
the safety performance of NEVs, and promote industrial development. The Administration 
Regulation required NEV manufacturers to comprehend and master the development and 
manufacturing technologies of the NEVs they produced, which was the basic requirement of 
ensuring production consistency as well as the safety and quality  of NEV products. Her delegation 
maintained that the regulation was non -discriminatory and applied to all NEV manufacturers in 
China and that there was no mandatory technology transfer for foreign -invested enterprises.  
2.2.4.41   China — Cybersecurity Law (IMS ID 52651) 
2.184.   The representative of the United States  said that her delegation remained very concerned 
about China's suite of cybersecurity measures. The US had already , earlier in the agenda,  raised  
its concerns with specific aspects of China's proposed cybersecurit y review regime, as well as 
cybersecurity rules and guidelines for the civil aviation, banking, insurance, and internet of 
vehicles sectors. The US was concerned with the fact that no further clarity has been provided on 
the meaning of the term "secure and  controllable", which has been understood in the past to 
include references to solely domestic technology requirements. Further, the US understood that 
companies sourcing ICT products in China were already interpreting this language conservatively, 
i.e. as  requiring the purchase of only domestic goods. In this respect, the US asked China to clarify 
whether "secure and controllable" required only domestic technology.  
2.185.   Additionally, the US was also concerned about China's Cybersecurity Law, which was 
implemen ted on 1 June 2017, in spite of serious and long -standing concerns from the US and 
many other international stakeholders. The US understood that related implementing measures, 
introducing cybersecurity regulations into additional critical sectors of the Ch inese economy, would 
be developed over the coming months. Further, China's National Information Security 
Standardization Technical Committee (TC  260) has released several draft standards for public 
comment in recent months. The US was pleased that these vo luntary standards have been open 
for public comment, and had  heard that TC 260 ha d made some changes to the standards based 
on the feedback it had received. It thus encouraged China to continue to carefully consider and 
incorporate feedback on these and ot her cybersecurity drafts. While these draft standards were 
identified as voluntary standards, the US was concerned that they would be made mandatory by 
inclusion in China's other cybersecurity technical regulations or by other means. Indeed, on 11 
January 2017, TC  260 released a Guide to Cybersecurity National Standards Project Application, 
which called for development of mandatory standards to support implementation of the 
Cybersecurity Law on, among other things, critical information infrastructure protec tion. Should 
TC 260, or other voluntary standards, be incorporated into a technical regulation or conformity 
assessment procedure, the US would expect them to be notified with a 60 -90 day comment period 
and at least a six  month -interval between notificatio n and implementation, given China's WTO 
transparency obligations and China's bilateral commitment at the 2016 JCCT to notify relevant 
"secure and controllable" technical regulations.  
2.186.   The US also said that, because these issues were technically complex and  China's 
approach appeared to be both novel and would have a potentially widespread impact in the 
                                                
51 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 526  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 43 - 
 
  commercial sector, the US requested that China undertake in -depth consultations with the 
US government, other WTO Members, as well as global stakeholders. The  US also requested that 
China afford subsequent opportunities for interested parties to submit comments on revised 
versions  of these draft standards, and all other implementing measures related to the 
Cybersecurity Law. Given the broad potential impact of these standards and measures and the 
serious concerns they have raised, it was critical that China collaborate with all interested parties, 
and take their comments into account before adopting the drafts as written.  
2.187.   The representative of Japan  said that he r delegation still had concerns about the law and 
its relevant regulations . Definitions, requirements and scope of standards or procedures for 
conformity assessment adopted in them were not clear. In addition, she recalled that at past 
meetings China repea tedly clarified the definition of terms "secure and controllable" or "secure and 
trustworthy". She noted that, with respect to the former term, China had explained this term did 
not mean the requirement to use Chinese technology or the procurement of domes tic products. 
Japan also asked whether China has issued any guidelines or regulations based on this law, which 
prescribed the clear explanation of terms "secure and controllable" or "secure and trustworthy". If 
this was not yet the case, Japan requested that China expressly provide the definition of these 
terms in the law or regulations in order to enhance its transparency and predictability.  
2.188.   The representative of the European Union  reiterated his delegation's concerns with the 
entry into force, on 1 June 2 017, of the new Cybersecurity Law. The EU recalled that it had already 
provided written comments in 2016 detailing these concerns and as well raised concerns during 
the last TBT Committee meeting in June 2017. The EU kindly requested China to notify draft 
measures in any subsequent sectoral implementation to the TBT Committee in order to give 
adequate opportunity for WTO Members and their stakeholders to comment on any subsequent 
developments. The EU summarized its main concerns as follows: (i) that the sco pe of the 
requirements was not clear as key terms have not been specified in sufficient detail. Concepts such 
as "critical information infrastructure" and "secure and trustworthy products" were not clarified, 
which lead to ambiguity as to which sectors wer e impacted by the measures; (ii) that because the 
law only referenced national standards, rather than including  international standards, this could 
lead to lack of interoperability with international standards. In the development of national 
standards, it would be appropriate to build on existing international standards and to involve all 
relevant stakeholders (including foreign -invested and wholly foreign -owned enterprises) in a 
non-discriminatory manner in the relevant Technical Committees; and (iii)  that, as regards data 
localization, the EU understood that the storage obligation has been replaced by controls on 
cross-border transfers of data. The EU was, in this respect, concerned that these controls would 
create the same level of restriction as the obli gation to store data in China. Moreover, the EU 
noted with concern that the scope of the relevant obligations has been enlarged to "network 
operators" in general (and not only those of "critical information infrastructure"). In conclusion, the 
EU appreciat ed that the date of entry into forc e of these specific measures had  been postponed to 
31 December. Moreover, the EU welcomed the opening of TC  260 standard defining the concept of 
"important  data" for public comments.   
2.189.   The representative of the Republic of  Korea  expressed his delegation's support for the 
comments made by previous delegations. He noted that Article  23 of the Chinese law regulated 
the safety certification requirements for core network devices and network safety products, and 
that Article  28 dealt with network businesses' obligation to cooperate with matters of national 
security and criminal investigations. However, there was a possibility of an infringement of 
intellectual property if a certification by a third party was conducted according to  Article  23, 
because there was no clause to  protect intellectual property i n the law. Furthermore, the Chinese 
Government could demand businesses' sensitive information according to Article  28. Korea 
requested  that China add clauses in Articles  23 and 28 i n order to protect intellectual property and 
prevent leakage of security. Article  35 of the Chinese law stated that operators of infra -facility for 
core information should be screened when they purchased internet products and services, 
including those that  could possibly affect national security. Korea was also concerned  that the 
measure would unnecessarily burden companies if the designation of infra -facility for core 
information would be  over-issued, when done in accordance with this article. In this rega rd, Korea 
requested China to specify the designation criteria of core infra -facility, in order to prevent 
excessive  designation of infra -facility of  core information. In addition, Article  24 of the Chinese law 
required the verification of identification information of users, but the provision about management 
of collected identification information was insufficient. Could China how data -related 
identification  information was kept an d discharged . Lastly, Korea noted that Article  58 of the G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 44 - 
 
  Chinese law dealt with temporary measures, such as restriction of network communication. 
However, if the government would frequently restrict network communication according to this 
article, there wa s a possibility that Korean companies would be disrupted by stopping their 
services. Therefore, Korea requested China for reasonable and clear basis for restriction of network 
communication.  
2.190.   The representative of New Zealand  said that her delegation shared  some of the concerns 
raised by other delegations. She added that Members must work together to ensure that critical 
information infrastructure would be stable, secure and well -functioning.  New Zealand recognized 
that, while Members have the right to regul ate on these important public interest grounds, such 
measures nonetheless should be introduced in a manner that would both be consistent with 
existing international obligations and minimize negative effects on trade. Data localization 
requirements and rest rictions on cross -border transfer of data impact the conditions of competition 
for foreign firms in a manner that rendered them at a disadvantage. Overly broad data localization 
regulations therefore risked discriminating against foreign firms by making le gitimate data 
transfers more costly relative to local businesses. New Zealand  shared concerns raised by 
delegations regarding the ambiguity of terms used in the Chinese measure. B road definitions of 
these terms - such as "critical information infrastructur e", "networ k operator" or "important 
data" - have the potential to impact on large numbers of foreign service suppliers. The complexity 
of some of the measures in question could pose a significant burden on smaller service suppliers or 
those from developin g economies. New Zealand  thus urged China to ensure that these measures 
would be implemented consistently with in the letter and spirit of WTO obligations. Issues, such as 
whether data should be required to be stored locally in the country of origin and wha t type of data 
would fall under these conditions, were issues that should therefore be kept to the minimum 
necessary to achieve public policy objectives.  
2.191.   The representative of Canada  said that her delegation supported the comments made by 
previous Members  and reiterated the statement made by Canada in the previous meeting under 
this STC. Canada also welcomed the opportunity to continue discussions and explore areas of 
cooperation on cyber  security -related regulations and best practices.  
2.192.   The representative  of Australia  said that his delegation supported the comments made by 
previous Members. While Australia recognised the right of Members to pursue legitimate policy 
objectives in protecting and safeguarding its cybersecurity, it also considered that efforts  to 
strengthen cybersecurity must be pursued with input from all relevant stakeholders, including 
governments, industry and civil society. Australia also acknowledged China's commitment to 
"international exchanges and cooperation for cyberspace governance" , as expressed in Article  5 of 
its law. Australia, like other Members found that many details about the cyber security law 
remained unclear, and that the measures should be implemented in a way that would not be more 
trade restrictive than necessary. Austr alia also suggested the implementation period be delayed 
until there would be greater certainty around the scope and application of the provisions in the 
cybersecurity law.  
2.193.   The representative of China  said that  opening -up was the basic policy of China, th at is, 
China's door was always open: this was also the principle of China's cyber security policy. The 
purpose of this law was to ensure the cyber space sovereignty and national security, to safeguard 
the public interests, rights and interests of citizens,  legal persons and other organizations in China. 
There was therefore no intention of restricting the market access of foreign enterprises, 
technologies in China. At present, the relevant authorities were drafting the follow -up rules and 
regulations in acco rdance with the requireme nts in Cyber security law. Some were already 
completed, while some others were still in the preparatory process. After the release of the Law, 
more than 30 meetings for information exchange, consultation, and introduction were held , and in 
the meantime, the follow -up polices, standards were also open for comments. Regarding the 
definition of "secure and controllable", China again made the following clarifications. Firstly, data 
was controllable for the users. The product or service providers were not to use their product or 
service to illegally obtain users ' data. Secondly, equipment was controllable for the users. 
Providers were not to illegally control users ' equipment. Th irdly, to guarantee that users had  
choices , providers were not to operate a monopoly or seek illegal interest by making use of users ' 
reliance on the product or service, such as  stopping providing safety technical support without a 
justifiable reaso n or force users to upgrade. As regards certain terms, China explained that the se 
terms were not created by China. There was no distinction between domestic and foreign G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 45 - 
 
  companies  as all enterprises had to abide by these requirements . She also stated that China 
attached great value to IP and its effective protection.  China was therefore against any behaviours 
that would impair the IP of enterprises. China would not therefore require enterprises to hand  in 
their source code to the government.  
2.2.4.42   European Union — Radio Equipment Directive , G/TBT/N/EU/93  (IMS ID 52552) 
2.194.   The representative of China  said that while the transitional period had ended and the Radio 
Equipment Directive had come into effect on 13 June 2017, there were s till som e harmonised 
standards that had  not yet been published in the official journal . In add itional some standards 
were published only in draft form and f inal version s were usually different from draft standards. 
China was also concerned that the renewal of certificates for CE marking incurred a lot of 
repetitive work. The EU only publish ed sever al harmonised standards  in April giving only two 
months for enterprises to conform to those standards , rather than  one year. During these two 
months, companies  had to ensure their newly manufactured products were compliant with new 
standards  and those prod ucts in stock that were already compliant with R&TTE had to be re -
certifi ed. This presented great challenges to companies.  
2.195.   While the EU considered the harmonised standards as voluntary, according to the Article 
5.1 of the RED guide "the application of harmonised standards has the advantage of giving 
presumption of conformity with the corresponding essential requirements that they aim to cover. " 
This appeared to recognize the harmonized  standards as mandatory. According to the RED guide, 
if a manufacture r chose not to follow a harmonised standard or only partly, there was an obligation 
to prove that the radio equipment was in conformity with the essential requirements by other 
means and to provide a full technical justification. This could lead to high co sts and long delays in 
certification if harmonised standards were not yet adopted. She requested that those products that 
had not yet been certified apply to the new directive or standards and those products already 
certificated be allowed a grace period d uring which original directives or standards could be used. 
Lastly, China requested that the EU clarify the potential mandatory feature of the voluntary 
harmonised standards.  
2.196.   The representative of the European Union  repeated its statement provided in previ ous 
meetings, emphasising in particular that h armonised standards are a voluntary means to 
demonstrate conformity  with legislative requirements. In addition, he clarified that the  extra cost 
caused by the intervention of notified bodies, applied  only in re lation to the lack of harmonised 
standards on Articles 3(2)  and 3(3) of the RED and affected  all manufacturers in the same way. He 
stressed  that economic operators systematically face d such costs in several other territories , which 
used detailed essential requirements and mandatory third party conformity assessment 
procedures.  An additional alternative to the certification of notified bodies, the lack of harmonised 
standards prepared for the essential requirements in Articles 3(1)(a) and 3(1)(b) of the Dire ctive 
could be overcome by a self -declaration of conformity of the manufacturers at no additional costs 
or burden.  
2.197.   On the partial unavailability of some voluntary harmonised standards, this applied to 
equipment manufactured in any country (i.e. EU or non -EU). Therefore, EU manufacturers were 
affected in the same way as non -EU ones. In addition, the list of harmonised standards was being 
populated as long as they were sent by ETSI and CENELEC. On 13  October 2017 , 135 "unique" 
harmonised standards (on Article s 3(2) and 3(3 )) out of the 136 delivered had  been publ ished on 
the OJEU. This included  the re -publication of 17 harmonised standards from the former Radio and 
Telecommunication Terminal Equipment Directive (RTTED), whose last list was comprised of 127 
"unique" harmonised standards. For this  equipment, Notified Bodies had  already drafted guidance 
which includes  accept ance that the transmitter part is covered by the Radio and 
Telecommunication and Terminal Equipment Directive standard and only the receiver p art requires 
assessment.  
                                                
52 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 525  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 46 - 
 
  2.2.4.43   European Union — Organic production and labelling - Maté (erva -mate) 
(IMS  ID 52453) 
2.198.   The representative of Brazil  thank ed the EU for the letter of last July providing answers to 
questions about erva mate. Brazil was  also pleased with  the conclusion of the talks among the 
Parliament, the Commission and the Council and the final version of the normative COM/2014/180.  
Nevertheless, Brazil believe d it was important to keep erva mate as a subject of an  STC in this 
Committee so as to stress the importance of this discussion and to reaffirm Brazil's  interest in the 
approval of the new European legislation COM/2014/180, which would  include erva mate in the list 
of organic products.  Brazil asked  when the legislation would  be voted  upon in the Parliament and 
in the Council.  
2.199.   The representative of the European Union  thank ed Brazil for raising this issue and note d 
that a detailed reply to specific questions ha d been recently provided. Erva m até was currently 
excluded from the scope of the E U organic legislation, (Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic 
production and labelling of organic products), as this R egulation was adopted on the basis of 
Article 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community . According to the relevant articles, 
the products under the European Community competence in agriculture were listed in Annex I of 
the T reaty of the European Community, which did not include erva mate . The EU note d that, 
within the framework of the current review of the EU organic legislation,  the European Commission 
had proposed to include maté within the scope of the future EU legislation on organics. However, it 
was difficult to predict the final outcome of the Commission proposal . Inter-institutional 
discussions (trilogues) on the new EU or ganic regulation were on -going with EU co -legislators (the 
European Parliament and the Council) and the final result would not depend only on the 
Commission. The objective was to reach a possible political agreement by the end of 2017. Once 
the final wordi ng on the Commission proposal was agreed, the EU would be pleased to inform the 
Brazilian delegation accordingly.  
2.2.4.44   Oman, Kingdom of Bahrain, State of Kuwait, Qatar, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 
United Arab Emirates, Yemen — Guide for control of imported foods – Certification 
requirements for animal products (IMS ID 54054) 
2.200.   The representative of the United States  welcome d the update provided by  the Kingdom of 
Bahrain on behalf of the GCC during the June 2017 TBT Committee at which point it had been 
noted that the GCC guidance was suspended until further notice , and that GCC members were in 
the process of notifying this to the WTO. It was understood that Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi 
Arabia ha d notified the SPS Committee that they w ould not implement the GCC import guide until 
further notice as had been indicated by Kuwait on 13 June 2017, by Bahrain on 29 June, Qatar on 
4 August  and Saudi Arabia on 26 September . While the United States  appreciate d that the guide 
had been notified as an SPS measure, there were TBT elements to the measure and all GCC 
members States were encouraged to notify them also to the TBT Committee. Also, the United 
States would  appreciate any updates that could  be provided including information on a future 
implement ation date and opportunities for technical experts to meet bilaterally to discuss the 
alternative approaches provision that was not detailed in the guide. The US and GCC member 
countries ha d enjoyed a long history of trade and the US  looked forward to cont inuing to provide 
safe, quality US food and agricultural products to partners in the Gulf region.  
2.201.   The representative of the European Union  also noted that the implementation of the GCC 
Guide had been suspended until further notice as had been stated during  the last Committee . It 
was thus even more important to have transpare ncy on the next steps that GCC m embers 
intend ed to undertake . Full transparency remain ed essential  and require d the continued usage of 
the appropriate notification mechanisms as required  under the TBT and SPS Agreement s to 
announce, at a sufficiently early stage, any possible  upcoming changes in its regime  affecting 
imported foods. Now that the Guide ha d been suspended until further notice, the EU encourage d 
GCC Members to continue to wor k on harmoni zed import conditions in full  transparency .  
2.202.   The representative of the Kingdom of Bahrain , supported by Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  
confirmed that the implementation of the GCC imported food guide ha d been suspended until 
                                                
53 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 524  (under dates raised and references) . 
54 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 540  (unde r dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 47 - 
 
  further notice and that no new implementation date ha d been set. In the meantime concerns 
would been taken into consideration and Bahrain remain ed ready to engage bilaterally to discuss 
any concerns raised . 
2.2.4.45   European Union — Titanium dioxide: Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP 
Regula tion), Annex VI, Part 2  (IMS ID 53955) 
2.203.   The representative of the United States  voiced strong support for  the objectives of the 
European Community and ECHA to protect the health and safety of its workers, consumers and the 
environment, in the use of chemical s and other substances.  In regards to Titanium Dioxide, her 
delegation  remain ed concerned by ECHA 's review of TiO2 for harmonized classification under the 
CLP Regulation prior to the completion of the REACH Substance Evaluation and the CoRAP 
(Community Rol ling Action Plan) process. She noted that ECHA' s Risk Advisory Committee (RAC) 
had published an opinion recommending that TiO2 be classified as a Category 2 carcinogen by 
inhalation on 13 October 2017 and understoo d that the next step under the CLP Regulat ion was for 
ECHA to provide the Commission with its opinion. The US reiterated that RAC review of the CLH 
classification of Titanium Dioxide prior to the completion of the REACH Substance Evaluation did 
not appear to comport with the typical process set ou t in ECHA' s own guidance on the preparation 
of a Classification, Labeling and Handling (CLH) dossier. In addition, the RAC review under the CLP 
up-ended stakeholder plan ned to prepare evidence and submissions for the CoRAP (Community 
Rolling Action Plan) r eview. Before further Commission consideration of the opinion, she request ed 
that the EU respond to the questions her delegation had submitted on ECHA' s classificat ion process 
of TiO2 via the EU e nquiry point in May  2017 and recalled their focus.  
2.204.   The questions focused on t he interplay between REACH and the CLP Regulation in the 
evaluation and classification of chemicals. Of further concern were t he criteria used by  ECHA in 
reviewing dossiers submitted to the RAC, including their adherence to ECHA guida nce on hazard 
assessment and evaluation of scientific information provided, as well as decisions on which studies 
to include, and the weightin g of the evidence considered. The US requested clarification as to at 
what point in the process the Commission exp ected to notify to the WTO a proposed classification 
action with regard to TiO2.  How would  stakeholder input provided in response to the notification 
be taken into account by the Commission?   
2.205.   The US was of the understand ing, in recent consultations with EC HA, that the final RAC 
opinion for a harmonized classification of TiO2 as a Category 2 carcinogen by inhalation would  be 
discussed at the next CARACAL, which was not typical. Further information was sought on why 
CARACAL would  be taking up TiO2 for discuss ion, and what implications t his may have for the 
Commission's consideration of the opinion. A dditional information was also requested on the 
process and timeline through which the Commission anticipate d considering the RAC opinion.  She 
warned that a n incor rect classification of Titanium Dioxide would be extremely disruptive for the 
many companies and millions of consumers rely ing upon the performance and safety that Titanium 
Dioxide brings to many products, from sunscreens to reflective paint for safety mar kings on 
highways, for which there were no easily available substitutes , and for which there was no 
discernible risk of inhalation.  In view of  the potential impacts on this $20 billion dollar industry, the 
US urged  the EU to consider a review that was procedurally transparent, thorough, and based on 
sound science.  
2.206.   The representative of the European Union  repeated the statement made in the previous 
TBT Committee meeting.  
2.2.4.46   China — Civil Aviation Network Information Security Management Rules  2 
(IMS  ID 53856) 
2.207.   The representative of the United  States  recalled and drew other delegations' attentions to 
the US's detailed comments sent on March 2017 and concerns raised in the last Committee 
meeting regarding  China's suite of "secure and controllable"  measures impos ing such requirements 
for ICT products in the civil aviation sector and beyond. The US asked  China to notify this measure 
to the TBT Committee and allow for stakeholder comments, in accordance with its transparency 
                                                
55 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 539  (under dates raised and references) . 
56 For previous statements follow the thr ead under IMS ID 538  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 48 - 
 
  obligations under the TBT Agreement. China was requested to delay finalizing this measur e until 
its scope and impact were  better defined, especially given the possible unintended consequence of 
degrading aviation safety.  
2.208.   The representative of the European Union  expressed his delegation's s upport th e 
observations made by  the US.  
2.209.   The representative of  China  said that his delegation had  already offered detailed 
explanations in the last meeting  to the points raised . Since China did not have an y update, it 
kindly invite d interested M embers to refer to th e minutes of previous meetings.  
2.2.4.47   China — Internet of Vehicles Cybersecurity Protection Guideline Rules  
(IMS  ID 53757) 
2.210.   The representative of the United States  expressed her delegation's continued concern 
about the draft Internet of Vehicles Cybersecurity Pro tection Guideline Rules developed by the 
Telematics Industry Application Alliance (TIAA). As communicated at the previous Committee 
meeting, the US continued to believe  that the Guideline might  unnecessarily restrict trade as it 
appear ed to discriminate ag ainst foreign technologies and firms. While compliance with the 
Guideline , technically developed by an industry organization,  was voluntary, the US was concerned 
that compliance would be made mandatory in practice by inclusion in a  mandatory technical 
regulation  or otherwise. Noting  that the Guideline was developed under the guidance and direction 
of Chinese government agencies including MIIT and OSCCA , the US reiterated its request that 
China notify the  Guideline , if and when it became mandatory, with a co mment period of 60 days 
and at least a six -month delay between the close of the comment period and the date of 
implementation for industry to adapt to the new requirements. She concluded by asking for an 
update with regard to the status of the guideline.  
2.211.   The representative of China  said that the  Telematics Industry Application Alliance  (TIAA) 
was a third party, non -governmental organization  and that the  Internet of Vehicles Cybersecuri ty 
Protection Guideline Rules was  the outcome of TIAA 's voluntary and se lf-disciplined work. She 
underlined that t he drafting of the Guideline respected the principle s of openness and 
transparency . 
2.2.4.48   European Union — Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 - non-renewal of approval of 
the active substance picoxystrobin G/TBT/N/EU/437 (IMS ID 53558)  
2.212.   The representative of Brazil  repeated concerns raised in the previous meeting on this 
measure. In addition he raised concerns on recent European regulations that banned certain 
substances using only a hazard based approach. The non -renewal o f its authorization for 
picoxystrobin  did not enjoy scientific consensus as the Standing Committee on Plants Animals, 
Food and Feed and the appeal committee had ruled "no opinion " on the subject. Brazil therefore 
asked that the EU  reconsider its position and de clare picoxystrobin as safe for the protection of 
crops and thus renew the licensing of products trea ted with the substance.  
2.213.   The representative of Canada  also voiced concern with the EU's non -renewal of  its 
authorization for picoxystrobin , an active ingred ient used as a fungicide on a wide variety of crops 
cultivated in Canada and exported to the EU. Canada flagged  concerns that the EU only notified 
this measure through the TBT Committee . Canada interpreted  this to mean that no changes would  
be made to exis ting import tolerances for picoxystrobin. In light of the reviews undertaken 
internationally, and strong evidence for the safety of this active ingredient when used as directed, 
Canada sought  confirmation that import maximum residue limits for this active ingredient would  
be maintained in order to minimize trade disruptions. If not, Canada asked  that any proposal for 
changes to existing MRLs would be notified to the SPS Committee, so as to give SPS Committee 
Members the opportunity to provide comments. In addition, Canada encourage d the EU to base its 
scientific review process on international standards and to consider all data that is made available 
for the purpose of a review, including after receipt of an inconclusive opinion from the European 
Food Safet y Authority. Canada would  continue to follow this issue closely.  
                                                
57 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 537  (under dates raised and references) . 
58 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 535  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 49 - 
 
  2.214.   The representative of the European Union  repeated responses provided in previous 
meetings. In addition he recalled that detailed written information  on this issue  had been  provided  
on this i ssue on 19 July 2017.  He informed the Committee that on 18 May 2017, Member States 
voted on the proposal for non -renewal of approval of picoxystrobin at the Standing Committee on 
Plants, Animals, Food and Feed. The proposal was not supported by a qualified  majority of Member 
States and a "no opinion" was delivered by the Committee. Subsequently, on 12 July 2017, an 
Appeal Committee was held where a vote was taken on the proposal to non -renew the approval. 
Member States failed to deliver an opinion and subse quently the Commission adopted the 
measure, which was published on 10 August 2017 (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 
2017/1455). He highlighted that the non -renewal decision did not prejudice the submission of a 
further application for the approval o f picoxystrobin in accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EC) 
No 1107/2009, provided that the necessary data was submitted to address the concerns and 
issues identified.  
2.215.   The EU notified third countries of the proposed action  through a notification to th e TBT 
Committee. The measure did not lead to immediate disruptions in trade, as the measure itself did 
not amend the maximum residue levels (MRLs) and provide d a grace period for use of products 
containing picoxystrobin.  Any action to reduce MRLs would take into account the  grace  period 
allowed for and would  be subject to a notification under the WTO/SPS procedure. Given the issues 
identified by EFSA, it was likely that a proposal to lower MRLs would  be made. Import tolerance 
requests would remain possible only if safety for consumers could  be demonstrated, addressing 
the issues identified by EFSA.  
2.2.4.49   China — Draft revised Encryption Law of the People's Republic of China by the 
Office of State Commercial Cryptography Administration (OSCCA)  (IMS ID 53459) 
2.216.   The rep resentative of Japan  repeated the concerns expressed in the previous TBT 
Committee meeting and recalled China's statement that the comments received by the relevant 
authorities would be carefully studied and taken into consideration during the draft revisi on 
process. Her delegation therefore sought confirmation, whether or not the following four points 
that Japan had included  in its comments were reflected in the modified draft: (i) clarification on  
the definitions of regulating terms, the concrete requirem ent for review, and the scope of the 
regulation; (ii) clarification on the relevance of this Law to existing security regulations such as 
"Regulation on the Administration of Commercial Cipher Codes (promulgated on 7 October 1999)" 
and "the Cybersecurity Law (enacted into force on 1 June 2017)"; (iii) assurance that market 
access to China of foreign companies dealing in cryptography -utilizing products should not be 
hampered or confidential technology should not leak out; (iv) assurance that the relevant 
regulations and procedures be consistent with international standards and practices.  
2.217.   The representative s of the United States  and the European Union  repeated concerns raised 
in the previous TBT Committee meeting.  
2.218.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  supported the comments of the US, EU, and 
Japan. In addition, his delegation explained that while Article 11 introduced a license system of 
commercial cryptographic products, many other countries such as the EU, US, and Korea did not 
regulate common ICT p roducts as the license system. She requested that common ICT products 
with commercial cryptographic technology be exempted from the subject of this requirement. 
Further, Article 17 dealt with development and implementation of cryptography testing and 
certification. Korean comp anies were concerned that it might cause infringement of intellectual 
property and sensitive information during a certification process. Therefore, China was requested 
to prepare a clause to protect the intellectual property and sensit ive information such as source 
code and confidential business information.  
2.219.   The representative of Canada  supported the concerns raised by other Members and 
reiterated its statement expressed in the previous TBT Committee meeting . Her delegation  
welcomed t he opportunity to continue discussions and explore areas of cooperation on 
cybersecurity -related regulations and best practices  and looked forward to continued cooperation 
and dialogue on these issues in a broad range of multilateral, regional , and bilateral  fora. 
                                                
59 For previous statements follow the threa d under IMS ID 534  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 50 - 
 
  2.220.   The representative of China  stressed that  the Law on Cryptography was  an important 
legislation project that was set up according to the needs of comprehensively deepening reform 
and the rule of law.  China would  press forward with the legislation of the Law on Cryptography in 
accordance with the Legislative Law and adhere to the principles of law -making in a well -conceived 
and democratic way  and in accordance with law . Scientific verification and public consultation  
would be carried out to ensure the participation of stakeholders in the legislative activity  through 
legal ways . The Law on Cryptogra phy (Draft for consultation) had  been released in April 2017 for 
public consultation  and many constructive suggestions  had been received from domestic and 
foreign parties . China was actively researching and adopting the relevant suggestions from all 
parties and pressing ahea d with further revision of the d raft.  
2.2.4.50   China —Cybersecurity Review of Network Products and Services (CAC) 
(IMS  ID 53360) Check the title not same in IMS  
2.221.   The representative of the European Union  had provided written comments on the draft 
implementing measures for the Cybersecurity Review of Network Products, released for public 
consultation on 4 February 2017. His delegation reiterated conce rns expressed during the last 
Committee meeting in June 2017. The EU appreciated that the final version seemed to have partly 
addressed some of the concerns raised (e.g. slightly narrowed scope, removal of the priority 
procurement requirement, introduction  of an appeal mechanism, clearer review focus, and 
triggering mechanism). However, many concerns remained, notably  the general nature of the 
measures and the very broad discretionary powers left to the authorities in charge of the security 
review, causing uncertainty for foreign ICT operators. The EU urged China to ensure the clarity, 
transparency, and objectiveness of the security review. He further recalled the importance of 
clarifying the designation and work mechanisms of the Cybersecurity Review Commit tee, the 
Cybersecurity Review Expert Committee, and third -party assessment bodies. Clear definitions and 
clearly specified detailed standards and other technical requirements should apply. Moreover, 
confirmation was sought that foreign vendors' intellectua l property and trade secrets (in particular 
source code) would not need to be disclosed to third parties and that it would provide for credible 
sanction and redress mechanisms for addressing information leaks to third parties and 
competitors.  
2.222.   The represent ative of Japan  reiterated her delegation's concern and strong interest with 
regard to the Network Product and Services Security Review Measures issued as measures on trial 
on 2 May 2017. Japan noted that China had given an explanation at the Committee meet ing in 
June 2017 but there were still lack of clarity of in articles regulating, inter alia , terms' definitions, 
the concrete requirement for review and evaluation, and the scope of regulation. Japan was 
concerned that the measure might hamper market acces s of foreign companies to China or cause 
the leakage of confidential technology, depending on concrete details of rules or implementation 
thereof. China was therefore requested to implement the measure in a non -discriminatory manner 
and not to make it more  trade -restrictive than necessary, in line with the TBT Agreement. In 
addition, China was asked to clarify the terms' definitions, the concrete contents of requirements, 
and the scope of the regulation, to ensure transparency and consistency with internati onal 
standards and practices. With respect to the Security Review Measures, she asked China to clarify 
the designation criteria for the third party organizations undertaking cybersecurity reviews and 
"related standards" (Article 7 and 11), and the concrete  meanings of the terms "critical industry 
management agencies" (Article 9) and "departments responsible for critical information 
infrastructure protection work" (Article 10). In addition, she asked China to clarify whether the 
implementation systems and re quirements for cybersecurity review in Article 9 and 10, and those 
conducted by government in Article 2, were the same. Regarding cooperation in Article 12, she 
asked China to clarify the scope and implementation scheme of cooperation in order not to requi re 
the disclosure of technical information more than necessary. Japan therefore requested that the 
regulation would be implemented transparently and in full consideration of the views held by Japan 
and other countries.  
2.223.   The representative of the United Stat es, in echoing the concerns raised by other Members, 
remained troubled by what seemed to be a widespread effort by China to impose "secure and 
controllable" requirements on ICT products, especially as the term remained undefined. Her 
delegation was also co ncerned that the final version of the Measure did not seem to take into 
                                                
60 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID  533 (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 51 - 
 
  account many stakeholder concerns, including those of the US. As the measure appeared to lay 
out a process for conformity assessment that would extend the "secure and controllable" 
requirement to services and supply chains, she asked how this was consistent with China's WTO 
TBT commitments. The US remained very concerned about China 's approach to cybersecurity and 
its suite of measures that appeared to be inconsistent with China 's natio nal treatment obligations 
and to discriminate against foreign technologies and firms in the name of information security.    
2.224.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  expressed support for the comments of US, 
EU, and Japan. First, he understood that Artic le 23 of the law required safety certification for core 
network devices and network safety products while Article 28 dealt with network businesses ' 
obligation to cooperate with matters of national security and criminal investigations. However, 
there was no  clause to protect intellectual property on the law, which created a possibility of an 
infringement of intellectual property if a certification by a third party was conducted according to 
Article 23. Besides, Article 28 provided an opportunity for governme nt to ask for businesses ' 
sensitive information. He therefore requested China to add clauses on Articles 23 and 28 to protect 
intellectual property and prevent leakage. Second, Article 35 of the law stated that operators of 
infra-facility for core informat ion should be screened when they purchased internet products and 
services which possibly affected national security. This procedure might place an unnecessary 
burden on companies in case designation of infra -facility for core information was over -issued. H is 
delegation requested China to specify the designation criteria of core infra -facility in order to 
prevent excessive designation of infra -facility for core information. Third, while Article 24 required 
a verification of users' identification information,  the provision about the management of collected 
identification information was insufficient. In this regard, Korea asked China to inform the 
Committee of its method for keeping and discarding data related identification -information. Lastly, 
Article 58 dea lt with temporary measures, such as restriction of network communication. Korean 
companies might need to stop their services and therefore be disrupted if the government 
frequently restricted network communication. He therefore requested that a reasonable and clear 
basis be applied to govern restriction of network communication.  
2.225.   The representative of Canada  supported the comments of the previous WTO Members and 
reiterated its statement found in paragraph 3.8 of G/TBT/M/72.  
2.226.   The representative of China  stated  that to improve secure and controllable level of network 
products and services to safeguard cyber security was common international practice, and many 
members had adopted similar reviews. The aim of the Cybersecurity Review of Network Product 
and Services  was to improve the secure and controllable level and to prevent the security risk, 
safeguarding national security and public interests. The measure did not target specific members, 
made no difference between members, and would not discriminate against pro ducts and 
technologies from abroad. It also would not restrict the market access of foreign technologies. His 
delegation emphasized that China effectively protected intellectual property, and was against all 
behaviours that would impair the intellectual pr operty of enterprises. In addition, China would not 
require enterprises to hand in their source code to the government.  
2.2.4.51   Plurinational State of Bolivia — Technical regulations on the labelling of foods 
and products destined for human consumption that consis t of, contain or derive from 
genetically modified organisms  (IMS ID 51761) 
2.227.   The representative of Mexico  was concerned that this measure, which had the  purpose of 
"establishing the technical requirements for the labelling of all food and/or products directly or 
indirectly destined for human consumption that consist of, contain or derive from genetically 
modified organisms, with a view to guaranteeing the  right of users and consumers to information, 
for the purpose of protecting human health", required the inclusion of messages on the labelling of 
processed foods that could mislead the consumer.  Mexico reiterated that "conventional products" 
and GMOs, and products that contain them, are in principle substantially equivalent, since there 
was no difference in their protein, nutritional, toxicological or allergenic composition. Nor was  
there any evidence to confirm that the consumption of GMOs pose d a risk for  human health, and 
as such there was no justification for treating them differently from conventional products.  
                                                
61 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 517  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 52 - 
 
  2.228.   On reviewing the draft regulations, her delegation  noted a technical and economic 
impracticability in relation to the traceability of the produc t. If these regulations were to be 
applied, it would be necessary to establish traceability systems for foods containing GMOs in order 
to establish, on a "time line" basis, the conditions and processes to which the processed food had 
been subject, from bei ng grown to manufacturing and transport (distribution and delivery to the 
end consumer).  Mexico explained that i f these traceability processes, which would also involve a 
substantial economic investment, were not implemented, the information on t he process ed food 
would be non -transparent and the labelling would fail to achieve its primary objective.  Mexico 
asked  Bolivia for an update on  the present status of its technical regulations , and on whether it 
had examined the possibility of carrying out a review n ot only of the provisions relating to the 
labelling of the product , but also of those relating to its traceability.  Furthermore, Mexico  
request ed the consideration of a transition period that would enable industries of other countries 
to review their optio ns for satisfactorily achieving the objective sought without adversely affecting 
their production, both present and future.  
2.229.   The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia  thanked Mexico for their interest in 
its system , which was v ery similar to those applied in the region and across the world.  The system 
aimed at providing information , and treated national and foreign products alike . He noted that 
GMOs was a  subject  without  international scientific consensus.  As there wa s a lack of scientific 
evidence on the impact on human health, he reiterated that the measure was about ensuring  the 
right of consumers to have timely and complete information.  He did not  have any further 
information on the possible review of the regu lation or the transition period , but would  
communicate Mexico's concern to his capital and hope d to have more detailed responses as soon 
as possible.  He further suggested that the delegation of Mexico approach the Enquiry Point of 
Bolivia for further information.  
2.2.4.52   China — Interim Measures for Quality Management of Commercial Coal  
(IMS  ID 47762) 
2.230.   The representative of Australia  thanked China for continued bilateral discussions over the 
last 18 months on its coal standard and conformity assessment measures. China was Australia 's 
second largest coal export market and there continued to be great interest from Australian 
industry and exporters regarding the implementation and application of these measures. Australia 
supported China's environmental objectives of improving air quali ty and promoting the efficient 
and cleaner use of coal. Nevertheless, retesting of coal in China was causing significant delays for 
Australian exports and adding greatly to trade costs. Australia was confident that its own domestic 
testing facilities were equipped to accurately test for quality and purity standards, and that 
Australian coal was exceeding these high standards. Australia sought early action from China so 
that the coal test results from the independent, internationally recognised coal test lab oratories in 
Australia could be accepted in China. Australia was also seeking urgent action to facilitate efficient 
and timely clearance of coal cargoes at Chinese ports, noting delays of up to 60 days to clear a 
cargo following the banning of coal imports  into a number of ports in July 2017.  
2.231.   The representative of Canada  supported China's environmental goal of improving air 
quality. But as had been stated by Australia, retesting of coal once shipments reached China was 
causing important delays which could b e avoided as it was possible to demonstrate that the 
Chinese requirements were met by way of tests conducted in Canada by internationally recognized 
laboratories. Use of such labs could help reduce high costs and high risk levels currently facing 
foreign e xporters. Canada sought to work towards an outcome to allow China to fully meet its 
regulatory objective while lessening unnecessary impacts on trade.  
2.232.   The representative of China  noted that adequate responses had already been provided at 
previous meetings of the Committee. China emphasize d that all the requirements in this measure 
would be applied in a non -discriminative way, and would  treat foreign and domestic entities  
equally.  
                                                
62 For previous statements follow the thread under IMS ID 477  (under dates raised and references) . G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 53 - 
 
  2.3  Exchange of Experiences  
2.3.1   Eighth Triennial Review  
2.233.   The Chairman  delivered his re port on the informal meeting that took place on 7 November 
2017.63 He thanked Members for the fruitful meeting and encouraged the early submission of 
proposals in advance of the next meeting . 
3  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ACTIVITIES  
3.1.  The representative of Sweden  updated the Committee on  Sweden's National Board of Trade  
TBT related technical assistance programme - Enhancing TBT Capacity through Development 
Cooperation and Technical Assistance .64 
3.2.  The representative of the United States  updated the Committee on its t echnical assistance 
acitivities .65 
3.3.  The WTO Secretariat updated the Committee on ePing  – the SPS/TBT Notification Alert 
System.66 
4  UPDATING BY OBSERVER S 
4.1.  The representatives of the WHO, IEC UNECE,  BIPM, OIML, Codex and ARSO updated the 
Committee on activities related to the TBT Committee.67  
4.2.  The representative of the United States  thanked WHO for bringing the Committee's attention 
to the important developments on nutrition in the on -going work of WHO and Codex. The US 
valued and appreciated the Codex member -driven process and its adherence to science based and 
transparent approach to standards development. As had been done earlier in the SPS Committee, 
the US brought Members attention to discussions that had taken place in  Codex in July 2017 
regarding the relation of the WHO and FAO to the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The US 
acknowledged the critical importance of the institutional support provided to Codex by WHO and 
the FAO through the scientific advisory bodies that pr ovided independent and expert scientifically 
views that underpinned Codex standards. By acknowledging this relationship, the US also knew 
the importance of recognizing the differences in the mandates and procedures in the three 
organizations. These differe nces in mandates and procedures influenced the appropriateness of a 
standard or guideline for a given purpose or use. The US also noted concerns with recent 
statements by WHO officials that suggested that Codex must reflect and support WHO policies in 
guidelines in the development of Codex standards as this could otherwise impact WHO support for 
Codex. As had been noted during the SPS Committee and at the Commission, the US believed that 
by fulfilling its mandate, Codex did support and contribute greatly to  the work of WHO and FAO 
and that this should continue. Codex must remain a member driven science based transparency 
and inclusive organization in order to ensure the appropriateness of standards for use and 
purpose. On follow up formula and at the upcomin g Codex Committee on Nutrition in Food for 
Special Dietary Uses, there would be discussion on proposed language developed by the Codex 
secretariat and the WHO where they would recommend incorporating into the preamble of the 
follow up formula standard. Thi s proposed language included references to marketing and sales of 
these products as well as broad references to WHO resolutions and guidance. The Committee had 
not yet made a decision regarding the incorporation of these references. The US emphasized that 
that Codex had the dual mandate to protect health of consumers and ensure fair practices in food 
trade. Codex standards should reflect the scope within the mandate in Codex and should not 
                                                
63 The report was subsequently circulated in JOB/TBT/240.  
64 https://www.kommers.se/In -English/Publications/2017/Enhancing -TBT-Capacity -through -
Development -Cooperation -and-Technical -Assistance -/ 
65 G/TBT/GEN/242.  
66 The statement was circulated in the document G/TBT/GEN/240. ePing www.epingalert.org   
67 G/TBT/GEN/236, G/TBT/GEN/237, G/TBT/GEN/238, G/TBT/GEN/ 239 
http://www.iec.ch/about/globalreach/partners/international/pdf_wto/iec_wto_2017_11_en_iec.pdf  
https://www.bipm.org/en/worldwide -metrology/liaisons/wto -tbt.html  
 G/TBT/M/73  
 
- 54 - 
 
  reference documents in the manner that would appear to expand the sc ope of Codex. The US 
encouraged TBT Committee Members to continue active engagement in the work of Codex and 
WHO as they involved important topics related to public health and trade concerns being discussed 
in the TBT Committee.  
4.3.  The representative of ISO updated the Committee on the WTO ISO Standards information 
gateway . This website, available in English, French and Spanish contains updated notification s of 
the existence of work programmes. There had been a very positive uptake in using the website 
since its launch in November 2016, with 59 different organizations providing 79 notifications , 
especially when compared to the previous year where only 33 changes  had been provided. He 
reminded Mem bers that if organizations could not host their work programmes on their own 
website, they could email it to ISO for it to be hosted on their server . 
4.4.  The Chairman  informed the Committee that two requests for observer status had been 
received , one from COME SA and the  other from the  Standards and Metrology Institute for Islamic 
Countries (SMIIC).  
5  REPORT (2017) OF THE  COMMITTEE ON TECHNIC AL BARRIERS TO TRADE  
5.1.  The Committee adopted its 201 7 Report to the Council for Trade in Goods (G/L/1 203). 
6  OTHER MATTERS  
6.1.  The delegation of Chile informed the Committee that his delegation would be organizing an 
event on 19 March 2018 on the topic of International Regulatory Cooperation (IRC). IRC was 
growing in importance, particularly in certain sectors where regional and plur ilateral initiatives 
were under development and at different levels of progression. The aim of the Side Event  would be 
to raise awareness, and to promote a better and more effective implementation of the TBT 
Agreement in the area of regulatory co -operation  between Members. The side event would be held 
back-to-back with the Committee in the afternoon of Monday, 19 March 2018. The delegation of 
Chile looked forward to welcoming delegates to the event and also encouraged Members to 
provide suggestions for spea kers, not just from government, but also from academia and the 
private sector.68  
7  DATE OF NEXT MEETING  
7.1.  The next regular meeting of the Committee will be held on  21-22 March  2018. This will be 
preceded by an informal meeting on the Eighth Triennial Review on 20 March 2018. 
__________  
                                                
68 A draft programme was subsequently circulated in JOB/TBT/241/Rev.1