RESTRICTED  
  
G/VAL/M/58  
 
24 September 2014  
(14-5365)  Page: 1/3  
Committee on Customs Valuation    
 
 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 27 JUNE 2014 AND 
THE RESUMED MEETING OF 23 JULY 2014 
CHAIRPERSON:  MS. JOANNA K.Y.  CHEUNG (HONG KONG, CHINA) 
  
The agenda proposed for the meeting, circulated in  WTO/AIR/4306, was adopted as follows:  
  
1   PROPOSAL TO HOLD AN INFORMAL WORKSHOP ON THE USE OF CUSTOMS 
VALUATION DATABASES (G /VAL/W/231/REV.1) ............................................................ 1  
2   OTHER BU SINESS ........................................................................................................ 3  
 
The agenda was adopted by the Committee on 27 June 2014.  The discussion of item 1 was 
suspended and subsequently resumed on 23 July 2014.  
_______________ 
 
 
1  PROPOSAL TO HOLD AN INFORMAL WORKSHOP ON THE USE OF DATABASES TO SET 
REFERENCE PRICES (G/VAL/W/231/REV.1) 
1.1.1  Meeting of 27 June 2014 
1.1.  The Chairperson began by noting that there had been an error in the name of the first 
agenda item, which should read "Proposal to hold an informal workshop on the use of customs 
valuation databases".  The proposal in document G/VAL/W/231/Rev.1 had been discussed at the 
formal meeting which had taken place on 12 May 2014, but some delegations had requested 
additional time to assess the proposal. For this reason, Members had agreed to discuss it again by organizing a formal meeting before the end of June. 
1.2.  A first informal consultation had been held on 21 June 2014 where all interested delegations 
had been invited.  At that meeting, the delegations of Argentina and India had made textual 
suggestions and comments on the proposal.  The delegations of Argentina; China; and India had subsequently deliberated upon the possible revision  of language of the paragraph on the "purpose 
and objective" of the workshop, and submi tted comments and suggestions which had been 
circulated to Members in a fax dated 23 June 2014.  French and Spanish translations had been faxed to delegations on 25 June 2014.  On 26 June, the delegations of Australia; Canada; Chinese 
Taipei; the European Union; and the United Stat es had proposed changes to the suggestions and 
comments made by the delegations of Argentina, China and India, which had been faxed to Members on the same day. 
1.3.  A second informal consultation had been convened by the Chairperson on 27 June with a 
view to exploring preliminary reactions to the different textual proposals that had been circulated.  
Members present at that informal consultation had expressed divergent views and had not been able to agree on a common understanding.  The differences revolved mainly around two issues. 
Firstly, the purpose and objective of the workshop . Secondly, the question of how best to reflect 
the fact that there would be no recommendations, outcomes, next steps, or automatic inclusion of any item on the agenda of the Committee, while at the same time ensuring that Members' 
individual right to request the inclusion of an  item in the agenda would not be affected.  G/VAL/M/58 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.4.  Because delegations had not had enough time to discuss the issue with their capitals, the 
Chairperson proposed to suspend the meeting afte r dealing with the "other business" item. She 
also requested delegations to submit textual proposals or amendments to the text no later than 30 June 2014. Any submission would be translated, if necessary, and circulated in the same 
manner as the previous texts.  The Chairperson would then convene further informal consultations 
with interested delegations, and send a fax reconvening the formal meeting once a clearer picture had emerged.  In case delegations present at the consultations could reach a common 
understanding on a text, it would be circulated to Members in the three official languages at least 
one week before reconvening in a resumed meeting. She stressed that the Committee would only adopt it in the formal meeting, so Members would retain their right to make comments or propose modifications at the resumed session. 
1.5.  The representative of Argentina requested the Chairperson to circulate in writing the 
proposed course of action, through fax or email, to all Members.  
1.6.  The Chairperson confirmed that the Secr etariat would circulate a fax and proposed to 
suspend the discussions on this agenda point as proposed. 
1.7.  The Committee so agreed.   
1.1.2  Resumed meeting of 23 July 2014 
1.8.  The Chairperson recalled that, at its meeting of 27 June 2014, the Committee had agreed to 
suspend the discussion on this agenda item.  A fax had been circulated to Members with an extract 
of her statement, which included the agreed steps to be taken.   
1.9.  On 7 July 2014, a new fax had been circulated with details on the manner in which informal 
consultations would be conducted.  With a view to ensuring the maximum degree of transparency, 
a number of additional faxes had been sent with comments and suggestions submitted by Members.  These had been discussed at informal consultations which had taken place on 11 and 
15 July, where all interested Members had had the opportunity to participate.  She was happy to 
report that Members present at the informal consultations had done an excellent job in accommodating the concerns that had been expressed, and had managed to produce a revised 
draft of the terms of reference.  This compromise text had been faxed to Members, in the three 
official languages, on 16 July 2014.  On this basis, the Chairperson proposed the Committee to adopt the terms of reference, as contained in th e text that had been faxed to all Members on 
16 July 2014.   
1.10.  The representative of India thanked the Chairperson for her efforts and for having held 
informal consultations, which had certainly produced an excellent result in the form of an agreed 
text.  Although India could go along with the propos ed text, his delegation felt that the provisional 
agenda had not matured enough.  India could agree with the incorporation of the draft agenda in 
the text, but considered that further consultations were required to finalize it.  He concluded by reiterating that India was ready to join the consensus on the text.   
1.11.  The Chairperson drew Members' attention to the last paragraph in page 4 of the 
compromise text, which stated that "any changes or clarifications to the provisional agenda and 
details listed above will be determined by Member s through subsequent informal consultations of 
the CCV".  On this basis, the Chairperso n proposed the Committee to adopt the text. 
1.12.  The Committee so agreed.   
1.13.  The Chairperson requested the Secretariat to  circulate the compromise text as an official 
document.  She also drew Members' attention to the fact that there was not much time available 
to conclude the preparations of the workshop, which would take place the morning of Friday, 
24 October.  The workshop would take place im mediately after the meeting of the Technical 
Committee on Customs Valuation in Brussels, and before the next formal meeting of this 
Committee, which was scheduled for the afternoon of 24 October.  She announced that the 
invitation letters would be sent to the organizations listed in the terms of reference which had been adopted, and recalled that Members still needed to agree on the speakers for the public sector session.  She invited Members wishing to nominate a capital-based expert to contact her or G/VAL/M/58 
 
- 3 - 
 
  the Secretariat no later than 6 August 2014.  She concluded by informing Members that the 
Secretariat would finance the participation of up to four speakers from developing countries or LDCs.  The Chairperson proposed to proceed as described.  
1.14.  The Committee so agreed.   
2  OTHER BUSINESS 2.1.  The Chairperson reported on the status  of the proposal by Uruguay concerning the 
"rectification of the Spanish and English versio ns of Article 8.1(b)(iv) of the Agreement on 
Customs Valuation", which had been circulated in G/VAL/W/240.  She recalled that, at the formal 
meeting of 12 May 2014, Members had agreed that: 1) there was a lack of concordance in the three official versions of Article 8.1(b)(iv) of the Agreement; 2) the text of the Spanish version should be amended as proposed by Uruguay; and 3)  that the Chairperson should submit a letter to 
the Director-General requesting him to follow the "procès verbal de rectification" procedure. 
Delegations had also agreed, on an ad referendum  basis with one month for comments, to request 
the rectification of the English version in line with the Uruguayan proposal.  The Chairperson noted 
that no objection had been received by 12 June 20 14.  Therefore, she would submit a letter to the 
Director-General requesting the rectification of the Spanish and English versions of Article 8.1(b)(iv) through a "procès verbal de rectification" procedure.  She noted that the normal 
period for comments and/or objections under this procedure was of 30 days, and not 90 days as it 
had been mentioned at the last meeting.  
2.2.  The delegation of India sought a clarification on the procedure to be followed, because he 
understood that any amendment to the WTO Agreement had to follow a specific procedure set out 
in the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the WTO. 
2.3.  The Secretariat (Mr. Roy Santana) confirme d that, in case of an amendment, the specific 
procedures contained in the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO would have to be 
followed.  However, as it had been explained by the Legal Affairs Division at the Committee 
meeting of 27 September 2013, this could be considered a technical error in the official translation.  Thus, to the extent that Members ag reed, a "procès verbal de rectification" procedure 
could be followed.  If that case, the Director-Gen eral of the WTO, who is the depositary of the 
Agreement, would circulate a document explaining the technical corrections to be introduced and would set a 30-day period for comments or objections.  In case no objections were raised, the Director-General would then proceed with the rectification of the official text. 
2.4.  The Chairperson proposed to proceed as described. 
2.5.  The Committee so agreed. 
_________