RESTRICTED  
  
GPA/M/69  
 
7 November 2017  
(17-6048) Page: 1/7 
Committee on Government Procurement    
 
 
MINUTES OF THE FORMA L MEETING OF 18 OCTOBER 2017  
CHAIRMAN: MR JOHN NEWHAM  (IRELAND)  
The Chairman  said that,  in preparation for the meeting, delegations had  received an Airgram1 
setting out the proposed agenda, in addition to two related faxes. The proposed agenda was as 
follows:  
 
1. Requests for observer  status: Afghanistan and Brazil ;  
2. Current developments concerning buy -national initiatives in the United States ; and  
3. Other Busines s, if any.  
The Chairman said that no item s of other business  had been proposed . 
 
The Committee adopted  the agenda , as proposed by the Chairman.  
 
1  REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER  STATUS: AFGHANISTAN AND BRAZIL  
1.1.  The Chairman  said that Afghanistan's request for observer  status in the Committee had been  
circulated on 17 August 2017.2 This was further to a commitment made by Afghanistan in the 
course of its WTO accession process. Subsequently, on 28 August 2017, Brazil had circulated its 
own request for observer  status in the Committee .3 These  requests were both very significant and 
welcome developments for the Committee . The Committee should take a decision on  the 
respective requests , pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Agreement . 
1.2.  The Committee agreed  to grant observer  status to Afghanistan and Brazil , respectively, 
pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Agreement .  
1.3.  The Chairman  extend ed a warm welcome to  Afghanistan and Brazil  in their new capacities as 
observers  in the Committee.  
1.4.  The representative of Afghanistan  said that it was a pleasure to have the opportunity to 
address the Committee. The year 2016 had been an important one for Afghanistan's  trade and its 
economy . On 29 July 2016 , twelve years after initiating its WTO accession process in 2004, 
Afghani stan had finally reached the milestone to become the 164th member of the WTO, and the 
9th least developed country ( LDC) to join the organization  since its establish ment in 1995 .  
1.5.  Continuing, he said that he wished to take the  opportunity to  thank the relevant countries 
and international organizations for their kind support and assistance throughout the  course of 
Afghanistan's  accession process. This included support received from WTO Members, the 
Secretariat, the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), the 
International Trade Centre (ITC), China, the European Union, India, the Netherlands, and the 
United Kingdom . Afghanistan also deeply appreciated the capacity building programmes that had 
been organized on its behalf and for i ts benefit by agencies including the United States Agency for 
International Development (USAID) and the Commercial Law Development Programme of the 
                                                
1 WTO/AIR/GPA/11, dated 3 October  2017.  
2 GPA/W/343, dated 17 August 2017.  
3 GPA/W/344, dated 28 August 2017.  GPA/M/69  
 
- 2 - 
 
  United States Department of Commerce (CLDP), under a CLDP project.  Afghanistan  looked forward 
to the continu ed support of its partners in building its technical capacity and in establishing the 
proper institutional mechanisms for the handling of post-accession matters .  
1.6.  He emphasized that j oining the WTO was not just the end of a negotiation  process , it was the 
beginning of a process of reform . And s igning an agreement on paper was very different from 
putting it into practice. Afghanistan had made many specific commitments to the WTO and its 
Members. And now, like all other WTO M embers , it had to abide by the who le complex body of 
WTO law . His Government recognized  the important role that public procurement play ed in a 
country 's socio -economic development. Government procurement represented some  15 percent of 
Afghanistan 's GDP , and approximately 50% of its nationa l budget ( around USD 3 billion) was spent 
through public procurement. Accordingly , since 2014 , the Government of Afghanistan  had taken a 
number of measures and reforms with the aim to create  an effective, accountable, transparent and 
efficient public procurement system in the country that was  compatible with internationally 
accepted standards and best practices .  
1.7.  As part of this reform process, under a 2014 presidential decree , a National Procurement 
Authority (NPA) had been established . The NPA was under the supervision of the National 
Procurement Commission , chaired by the President. Subsequently, a new Procurement law and 
relevant regulations had been adopted. As a result of these developments, the government 
procurement regime in Afghanistan w as currently open to international competition by all 
providers of goods and services , including international businesses . 
1.8.  Continuing, he said that, in order to promote a culture of transparency and accountability, 
national and international observers, rep resenting various national and international watchdog and 
oversight agencies, actively participated in the meetings of the National Procurement Commission. 
The National Procurement Commission had, hitherto, held around 119 weekly sessions and had 
approved in excess of 2,300 contracts, delivering savings in the region of USD 240 million. 
Furthermore, during its accession negotiations, Afghanistan had made  a commitment to accede to 
the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). The key driver behind this was to build 
on the previous reforms with the goal of developing and implementing a more reliable and robust 
public procurement system that provided reciprocal, non -discriminatory access to Afghanistan's 
government procurement market for foreign suppliers,  and to the USD 1.7 trillion GPA covered 
procurement markets for Afghan suppliers. It was in this overall context that on 15  August 2017, 
the Government of Afghanistan had submitted its request for observer status in the Committee.4 
1.9.  In conclusion,  Afghanis tan offered its  sincere appreciation to the C ommittee for accepting its 
request for  observer  status in the Committee. Afghanistan  looked  forward to a constructive 
engagement with all Parties in the Committee.  
1.10.   The representative of Brazil  said that it was a pleasure for his country  to participate for the 
first time  in the Committee as an observer. To begin with , it was important not to take Brazil's 
interest in the work of the Committee in isolation. The decision to request observer status reflected 
a broad er desire and goal of Brazilian society to modernize its economy and improve the 
management of public resources; for that purpose, it was important to know and have access to 
the best international practices, on the multilateral and regional levels.  
1.11.   In rec ent years , Brazil had been engaged in the negotiation of government procurement 
chapters in regional and bilateral free trade agreements . Examples included one with Peru,  which 
had been concluded in April 2016 , and others  with Mexico and Chile , which were ongoing . There 
were also ongoing negotiations within Mercosur , as well as  between Mercosur and the European 
Union. As the GPA remained a reference  to government procurement commitments in numerous 
bilateral and regional FTAs, it was expected that Brazil w ould be better positioned to develop a 
deeper understanding and perspective on the matter  by becoming an observer to the Committee . 
1.12.   On the domestic front, Brazil's main public procurement legislation was Law 8.666 of 1993, 
which cover ed the three levels of government. Subsequent to that Law,  Brazil had made important 
strides  in terms of regulatory evolution including , to single out one aspect, in the use of electronic 
tools in public procurement. One example was Law 10.520 of 2002, which had inaugurated 
electronic auctions  for acquisitions by entities from the federal, state and municipal levels. 
                                                
4 Subsequently circulated as GPA/W/343, dated 17 August 2017.  GPA/M/69  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Similarly, a series of legal instruments were in place to promote transpa rency in public 
administration and government procurement, including through the Law on Access to Information 
of 2011. Moreover, several bodies share d the competence to oversee and control public bidding 
processes, such as the Ministry of Transparency, Cou rts of Auditors and the Public Prosecutor's 
Office.  
1.13.   The consolidation of a common regime for the regulation of government procurement 
applicable for all public sector entities in Brazil was a signal of a gradual but consistent search for 
greater efficiency on the part of the government. Nonetheless, t here remained  challenges 
regarding efficiency and accountability in Brazil's  public procurement framework . Brazil, therefore, 
attached great relevance , as part of a learning curve , to its new status as an Observer  in the GPA 
Committee.   
1.14.   The representatives of th e United States of America , the European Union , the Republic of 
Korea , the Republic of Moldova , Japan , Norway , Switzerland , Montenegro , Singapore , 
New Zealand , Canada , Chinese Taipei  and Ukraine  warmly welcomed Afghanistan and Brazil as 
observer s to the GPA.  
1.15.   Continuing, the representative of the United States of America  said that both Afghanistan 
and Brazil were important additions to the list of WTO Members with observer status in the 
Committee. It was the United States' belief that observer st atus provided interested WTO Members 
unique opportunities. The United States  encouraged both countries  to take full advantage of their 
observer status by attending Committee meetings and learning more about the benefits of the 
Agreement.  
1.16.   The representative  of the European Union  said that his delegation looked forward to 
Afghanistan's initiating its accession process in the very near future. The European Union stood 
ready to assist and work with the delegation of Afghanistan in this regard. Based on experien ce 
from the most recent accessions, becoming a fully -fledged Party to the GPA on mutually 
satisfactory conditions was achievable in a swift and efficient manner. With respect to Brazil, the 
European Union had had a brief but fruitful bilateral meeting the day prior to the Committee's 
current meeting. The European Union encouraged Brazil to take the opportunity of its observer 
status to familiarize itself with the GPA procedures and rules. The European Union  looked forward 
to active participation by Brazil i n the work of the Committee, and  to Brazil's readiness to become 
a full-fledge d member of the GPA  in due course . 
1.17.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  said that observer  status offered  a good 
opportunity for both Afghanistan and Brazil  to gain an imp roved understand ing of  the GPA. This 
would support their respective efforts to  improve their domestic law and regulations related to 
government procurement, and thus contribute to their becoming  full-fledged  Parties  to the GPA as 
soon as possible.  
1.18.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  congratulated Brazil on its becoming  an 
observer to the GPA . Her delegation  looked forward to welcoming Brazil as a fully committed Party 
to the Agreement, in due course . With respect to Afghanistan, a delegation f rom that country had 
recently paid a visit to the Republic of Moldova. Her Government reiterated its full support to 
Afghanistan in its first steps toward s becoming a GPA Party.  As a newly acceded GPA  Party,  the 
Republic of Moldova stood ready to share its  experience with the new observer delegations. It 
looked forward to the two new observer governments initiating their respective accession 
processes in the foreseeable future . 
1.19.   The representative of Japan  said that her delegation  appreciate d the active participation of 
Afghanistan in the context of its WTO accession negotiations. Her delegation equally appreciated 
the GPA accession commitment that Afghanistan had taken as part of its WTO accession  protocol . 
Japan looked forward to working closely  with Afghanistan in the Committee. With respect to  Brazil, 
given the country's important role in the WTO, Japan hoped that its observer status in the 
Committee would give further impetus to the Committee's work.  
1.20.   The representative of Norway  said that obse rver status in the Committee was an important 
way to strengthen the public procurement systems in both Afghanistan and Brazil. Norway GPA/M/69  
 
- 4 - 
 
  believed that their observer status would enrich the work of the Committee, and hoped that this 
would also lead to full me mbership in the Agreement, on the part of both Members, in due course.  
1.21.   The representative of Switzerland  said that participation in the Committee in an observer 
capacity provided an opportunity for Afghanistan and Brazil to enhance their understanding of t he 
rules and the functioning of the GPA. In this regard, Switzerland was ready to share any 
experience that might be useful for the two delegations to better appreciate the benefits of 
accession to the Agreement. The GPA was a tool to promote open and tran sparent rules and trade 
in government procurement markets, which would foster economic growth and job creation. 
Switzerland stood ready to work together towards this objective with both delegations.  
1.22.   The representative of Montenegro  said that her delegation  looked forward to constructive 
engagement with the delegations of Afghanistan and Brazil. Montenegro encouraged both 
delegations to initiate the process for full -fledged membership in the GPA. Montenegro stood ready 
to share its experience with both deleg ations  in this regard . 
1.23.   The representative o f Singapore  said that his delegation looked forward to working closely 
and constructively together with both Afghanistan and Brazil. Singapore looked forward to the two 
delegations initiating their respective acce ssion processes in the foreseeable future.  
1.24.   The representative of New Zealand  echoed the statements by other Parties. It was his 
government's hope that observer status for Afghanistan and Brazil would lead to their accession to 
the Agreement, in due course.  
1.25.   The representative of Canada  said that her delegation looked forward to Afghanistan and 
Brazil taking full advantage of the benefits associated with their observer status, and eventually 
becoming Parties to the Agreement.  
1.26.   The representative o f Chinese Tai pei said that his delegation stood  ready to share its 
experience, and looked forward to working closely, with Afghanistan and Brazil.  
1.27.   The representative of Ukraine  said that, as a recent member of the GPA, Ukraine would be 
happy to share its GPA accession  experience with the two observer governments. There had 
already been an opportunity, in this regard,  with Afghanistan. Ukraine looked forward to  further 
such opportunities to share experience , including with regard to Brazil.  
1.28.   The Chairman  said that the two new observerships not only were significant for the 
Committee, but also reflected the growing importance of the Agreement and the increasing 
attention that the Committee was giving to the two regions represented by Afghanistan and Brazil . 
He looked forward to the effective participation of both delegations in the work of the Committee. 
He encouraged the two delegations to avail themselves of technical assistance from the 
Secretariat, subject to their needs and following the usual procedur es. 
2  CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS  CONCERNING BUY -NATIONAL INITIATIVES  IN THE UNITED 
STATES  
2.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the  matter of  current developments concerning buy -national 
initiatives in the United States had been  requested to be placed on the agenda for today 's meeting 
by the delegation of the European Union, in the course of the Committee's informal sessions in 
June 2017.  
2.2.  The representative of the European Union  said that recent developments in the United States  
could  potential ly lead to the strengthening of Buy American obligations and of the implementation 
of such obligations. This could a ffect the rights of foreign bidders.  Continuing, he recall ed that the 
Executive O rder on "Buy American, Hire American" that the President of the United States  had 
signed on  18 April 2017 called explicitly for measures to maximiz e the use of goods, products and 
materials produced in the U nited States . This Executive Order ha d also given the US states a clear 
boost to consider Buy American laws, as evidenced by developments in  New York and in Texas.  
The European Union consider ed that these developments in the United States  might raise issues of 
compatibility with the United States'  commitments and obligations under  the GPA. The European 
Union  continue d to be concerned  by the increase of protectionism against foreign bidders, GPA/M/69  
 
- 5 - 
 
  including from the European Union  and other GPA Parties. It was the belief of the European Union 
that the extension of Buy American rules would have a negative impact on international trade and 
investment. The European Union had actively followed the public consultation  that had been 
organized , through the Federal Register , regarding  the Buy American Executive Order. The 
European Union had, in this context, noted that the majority of the submissions  appear ed to be 
critical of further  enhancement of Buy American policies , and that they rather gave support to the 
GPA and other trade agreements in the government procurement field.  
2.3.  Continuing, he said that c ompanies, including United States  companies, be nefitted from 
stable  and reliable global supply chains. The European Union had noted that this ha d been pointed 
out also in various submissions responding to the public consultation, including, for instance , by 
the United States  defence  technology  industry  sector . Other submissions in the public consultation 
had specifically stated that decreased access to US procurement markets for foreign suppliers  
could  actually lead to retaliatory effects on the US economy. Such fears had been expressed for 
instance by the telecommunications sector.  There was no doubt that  such developments would 
also be costly to US taxpayers and reduce the potential for spending in key areas of the economy , 
such as  infrastructure.  Further restricting acc ess to the US market would also carry the risk that 
other countries would emulate the U nited States . While the European Union did not  itself currently 
apply Buy European policies, there  was consideration to introduce measures against trading 
partners that applied restrictive procurement policies against European Union  bidders. European 
leaders had recently tasked the European Commission to take this debate further with the m ember 
States  of the European Union . 
2.4.  In general,  in the view of the European Union,  there were good reasons to support reciprocal 
market opening in the public procurement  sector . While the E uropean Union fully sympathi zed with 
the goal of creating manufacturing jobs, more stringent Buy American policies were likely to lead 
to increased cos ts, more bureaucracy and additional delays, with no net benefits in terms of jobs 
created. They c ould also impose extra costs on US companies and disadvantage them globally by 
disrupting their  cross-border supply chains. The European Union  believe d that th is kind of policy 
would reduce competition and raise the price s of goods and services. In many cases, both the 
quality and the price s of goods and services w ould actually deteriorate.  
2.5.  The European Union was  carefully following the actions by the U nited States in the area of 
government procurement. It called on the United States,  as well as all its GPA trade partners , to 
abide by and uphold the international rules and measures that they had committed to under the 
GPA. His delegation invited the delegation of  the United States  to share information on upcoming 
developments in this respect. The European Union also trusted that the final report to be 
submitted to the President of the United States would take full account of the benefits that 
procurement market op ening under the GPA and other agreements had generated. It was the view 
of the European Union that the report should consider , as well, the costs which the US economy 
and the taxpayer would suffer in the absence of  such agreements.  
2.6.  The representative of Japan said that, similarly to the European Union, Japan had  concerns 
about the development s in the United States  pertaining to the expansion  or incorporation  of Buy 
American provisions  and their consistency with the GPA . Japan took note that a final report 
providing an  assessment o f the impact of all the free trade agreements of the United States and of 
the GPA on the operation of Buy American laws , as well as  on the implementation of domestic 
procurement preferences , was due on 24 November 2017. Japan was aw aiting the issue of this 
report, and meanwhile monitoring the situation closely.  
2.7.  The representative of Canada  said that Canada had had concerns regarding  domestic content 
requirements associated with government procurement in the United States for a long time. In this 
context, Canada t ook the opportunity to express its concerns with the Presidential Executive Order 
on Buy American and Hire American, which had been  signed on 18 April 2017. The Executive 
Order contain ed several instructions, including direct ing agencies to ensure strict enforcement of 
Buy American laws and to minimize the use of waivers. It also call ed for an assessment of the 
impact of all United States trade agreements, including the GPA, on Buy American laws.  Moreover, 
the Executive Order instructed the Secretary of Commerce to provide a comprehensive report to 
the President by 24 November 2017, which should include specific recommendations to strengthen 
the implementation of Buy American laws, including domestic procurement preference poli cies and 
programs.  GPA/M/69  
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.8.  Continuing, she said that, w hile Canada had significantly expanded its market access 
commitments for government procurement in recent trade agreements, such as  in the Canada -EU 
Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement  (CETA) , it was co ncerned that the United States 
was considering increasing protectionist measures on procurement, including through new or 
expanded Buy American laws.  The United States, like Canada and several Members  in the 
Committee , were original Parties to the GPA. Sin ce 1979, GPA Parties  had taken on commitments 
on the core principles of transparency and non -discrimination in government procurement. 
Furthermore, o ver the past several decades, Parties had worked together to create and improve 
the rules and principles of the Agreement  and had provide d increasingly open, fair and transparent 
conditions of access to each other 's procurement markets.  The 2014 revised GPA  had, in this 
context,  included the most ambitious commitments at that time for Canada, the United States and 
other GPA Parties. These commitments had resulted in new and assured commercial opportunities 
for manufacturers and suppliers in all GPA Parties . Currently , the GPA provided access to covered 
procurement markets estimated at USD 1.7 trillion annually. The value of the GPA was further 
demonstrated by its growing membership, including new observers, as witnessed at the present 
meeting of the Committee , and ongoing accession negotiations.  
2.9.  She said that, in this context, n ew or expanded Buy American measure s discriminating 
against Canadian and GPA Parties ' goods and suppliers were counterproductive  and would 
negatively impact the mutually beneficial trading relationship that exist ed among GPA Parties. 
Furthermore, such measures would be contrary to the work that the Committee and all GPA 
Parties had undertaken since 1979 to expand international trade, investment and procurement 
opportunities.  
2.10.   If the United States decided to implement new or enhanced Buy American laws, there would 
be increased pressure from st akeholders in Canada and elsewhere in the world to impose similar 
protectionist measures. New protectionist measures on procurement would have a significantly 
negative impact on the competitiveness of United States manufacturers, suppliers and exporters, 
who would be faced with decreased efficiencies, increased administrative costs and possibly 
reduced access to international markets. Additional regulatory hurdles, compliance costs and 
potentially reduced access to procurement markets would be particularly onerous for small and 
medium -sized enterprises.  Canada, thus, had  significant concern s regarding the possibility of new 
or expanded discriminatory measures on government  procurement . It truly hoped that the United 
States would reconsider these measures and instead focus its efforts on finding ways to increase 
procurement opportunities among GPA Parties.  
2.11.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  said that his  government also had concerns  
regarding current development s relating to Buy National Initiatives in the United States . Hong 
Kong, China was interested to know how this initiative would be applied and what impact it might 
have on the United States'  commitments  under the GPA . Hong Kong,  China shared the concerns 
expressed by the European Union regardin g the possible imposition of similar trade restrictive 
measures  by other GPA Parties, which might affect Hong Kong, China's market access rights.  
2.12.   The representative of  the Republic of Korea  also expressed his government's  concerns 
regarding  the Buy American Executive Order that was the subject of the present discussion . 
Korea's expectations were that any measure s related to the Buy American Act should fully comply 
with the United States' obligations  under the GPA without undermining the spirit and principle of 
the Agreement . The Republic of Korea was closely monitoring  the development s in this respect . 
2.13.   The representative of Switzerland  said that his delegation,  similarly to  other  Parties, had 
concerns regarding the recent development s regarding  Buy National initiatives in the United 
States. These developments  were, accordingly, being closely followed. Switzerland took careful 
note of  the high value of the GPA as an international ly agreed standard in the field of government 
procurement. Switzerland was convinced that open and transparent rules and trade in the area of 
government procurement contribute d to increase d competition and export opportunities, thereby 
fostering economic gro wth and the preservation and creation of jobs.  
2.14.   Continuing, he said that Switzerland and the United States enjoyed close and intens ive 
trade and investment relationship s. Swiss investors and business operators continued to attach 
high importance to GPA sta ndards and the reciprocal market access opportunities that were 
provided by the Agreement, even though  there might be  a lack of statistics to demonstrate it. 
Switzerland acknowledged each GPA Party's particular interest and sensitivity in the area of GPA/M/69  
 
- 7 - 
 
  gover nment procurement . Switzerland was, however, of view  that Parties  should  continue to work 
towards improving the functioning and implementation of the GPA standards, for example, in the 
Committee's different Work Programmes, with the aim of  improving transp arency  and mutual 
understanding , and reducing  or eliminating outstanding obstacles, rather than  imposing more rigid 
provisions or rules. Switzerland looked forward to working together with the United States and 
other GPA Parties towards this objective , and to further e nhancing  the benefits that all GPA Parties 
could obtain from the Agreement.  
2.15.   The representative of Norway  said that his delegation shared the concerns that had been  
expressed  by other delegations. The GPA was in place to ensure non -discrimination, transparency 
and procedural fairness in the covered government procurement markets of the  Parties to th e 
Agreement. Legislation or provisions that r an counter to these principles should be avoided. 
Norway had concerns that policies and provisions discriminating against providers from other 
Parties would have detrimental effects for trade, for businesses and workers and not the least for 
the government budget s and tax payers who finance them. Similarly to  other delegations, it was 
Norway's expectation that all Parties would honour their obligations under the Agreement . 
2.16.   The representative of Israel  said that his government had received  several complaints from 
Israeli companies regarding some of the measures that had been mentioned in  the previous 
statements. Israel had concerns that some of the measures and requirements would  become even 
stricter, when the tendency should be in the opposite direction, namely,  the liberalization of trade. 
Israel was follow ing the  matter  closely.  
2.17.   The representative of New Zealand  said that,  as a matter of principle , his government had 
concerns about policies or initiatives which provided preference to domestic suppliers over non -
domestic suppliers. It was New Zealand's view that th ese policies or initiatives were contrary to 
the national treatment and non -discrimination provisions  of the GPA , and were not appropriate in a 
multilateral framework on government procurement . 
2.18.   The representative of Singapore  said that his delegation share d the concerns that had been 
expressed by the delegations that had spoken . His government would continue to monitor closely 
the related development s. 
2.19.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  said that his government similarly had concerns as 
expressed by other Parties, and was monitor ing the issue closely . 
2.20.   Responding, the  representative of the United States of America  said that his delegation took 
note of all the comments  that had been  made by the Parties  that had spoken . Since the Executiv e 
Order was issued, the relevant Federal Agencies had been implement ing its terms . These terms 
included: ( 1) preparing a report assessing the impact of the United States'  free trade agreements 
and the WTO GPA on domestic procurement preferences; and ( 2) insuring that public interest 
waivers relating to  these preferences were used judiciously.  
2.21.   Continuing, he said that, o n 21 August  2017, the Department of Commerce and the Office 
of the United States  Trade Representative issued a Federal Register notice requ esting comments 
from the public to better understand how the United States' government procurement  obligations 
affected US manufacturers and suppliers ' access to, and participation in , the domestic government 
procurement  process; and the costs and benefits  of government procurement obligations to the US 
manufacturers and suppliers competing in US trading partners' government procurement markets. 
The United States had received 45 submissions reflecting a wide range of views. The United States 
thanked the GPA  Parties that took the time to make comments.  
2.22.   Continuing further, he said that, in  terms of next steps, the Secretary of Commerce , in 
consultation with other Agencies , had until 24 November  2017 to submit the required report to the 
President. That report would include recommendations to strengthen the implementation of Buy 
American laws. While the Executive Order call ed for recommendations, the Executive O rder itself 
did not change any statutory or regulatory requirements. In fact, it specifically required  that the 
Order not impair or affect the existing rights or obligations of the United States under international 
Agreements such as the GPA. Since the work on the report was ongoing , his delegation was  not in 
a position to discuss what recommendations might be included. However, he wished to assure 
delegations that the Administration would take into account all the comments  received.  
__________