INF/IFD/R/ 2 
 
10 May 2019 
(19-3194) Page: 1/4 
  Original: English  
 
 
 
WTO STRUCTURED DISCU SSIONS ON INVESTMENT  FACILITATION FOR DE VELOPMENT  
MEETING HELD ON 11 APRIL 2019  
ELEMENTS AIMED AT STREAMLINING AND SPE EDING UP ADMINISTRAT IVE  
PROCEDURES AND REQUI REMENTS  
Summary of discussions  by the Coordinator1 
1  INTRODUCTION  
1.1.  On 11 April 2019, the Structured Discussions on Investment Facilitation for Development held 
an open -ended meeting, coordinated by H.E. Mr. Juan Carlos González (Colombia). Its main purpose 
was to engage in a concrete, example -based discussion with a view to developing the possible 
elements of a multilateral framework on investment facilitation aimed at streamlining and speeding 
up administrative procedures and requirements.  
1.2.  In total, 9 written submissions  by 37 WTO Members2 containing text examples focusing o n the 
topic under consideration were circulated to all WTO Members prior to the meeting. Examples were 
tabled without prejudice to the submitting Members' position or views regarding both the joint 
initiative and the elements and/or issues addressed thereu nder. The examples submitted drew from 
Members' regional and bilateral trade and investment agreements, WTO text, ongoing domestic 
regulation discussions at the WTO, as well as other text suggestions.  
1.3.  Discussions at the meeting focused on the concrete text  examples submitted by Members, 
complemented, where appropriate, by examples submitted by the Coordinator , under his 
responsibility,  drawing from WTO text.3  
2  ELEMENTS AIMED AT STREAMLINING AND SPE EDING UP ADMINISTRAT IVE 
PROCEDURES AND REQUI REMENTS – EXAMPL E-BASED DISCUSSIONS  
2.1.  The presentations of examples by Members and the Coordinator, as well as ensuing 
discussions, proceeded on an element -by-element basis  in the order in which the elements appear 
in the "Schedule of Meetings January – July 2019"4, namely : 
• Administrative procedures and documentation requirements  
• Time limits for administrative procedures  
• Treatment of incomplete applications  
• Fees and charges  
• Review of administrative procedures and requirements ( APRs) 
• Use of ICT (e -government)  
• One-stop shop/single window types of mechanisms  
                                                
1 This summary, prepared and circulated under the Coordinator's responsibility, is being shared with a 
view to providing delegations with a record of the discussions and assisting them in reporting back to their 
capitals. It provides a non -exhaustive, illust rative review of the issues addressed and questions raised by 
Members at the me eting. 
2 Submissions were made by the following 37 Members : Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; European 
Union; Guatemala; Hong Kong, China; the Russian Federation; and Switzerland.  The submissions were 
circulated as documents INF/IFD/RD/1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11.  
3 The Coordinator's examples were circulated in  document INF/IFD/RD/6.  
4 The latest version of the schedule  is contained in document INF/IFD/W/3, dated 17 April 2019.  INF/IFD/ R/2 
 
- 2 - 
 
  • Focal point/contact point/ombudsperson type of mechanisms (including relations with 
relevant stakeholders and dispute prevention)  
• Other issues related to streamlining and speeding up administrative procedures and 
requirements  
• Any other investment facilitation -related issues  
2.2.  There was broad agreement among the participating Members that  administrative procedures 
and requirements (APRs), together with transparency and predictability  of measures, constituted 
the core of any investment facilitation framework. The xamples  submitted  showed a significant 
degree of convergence, which was a positive signal and a good basis to build upon. Delegations 
noted however that it was difficult  to find directly applicable provisions on i nvestment facilitation in 
bilateral investment treaties (BITs)  – rather, examples found came from the services chapter , or 
other chapters  (e.g. on trade facilitation or horizontal issues) addressing regulatory matters in free 
trade agreements (FTAs).  In that connection, one  delegation further explained  that BITs had been 
designed for the protection of investment, while investment facilitation was in fact a different matter 
altogether , i.e. how governments should deal with the regulation of investment. He fu rther added 
that the discussion at this meeting showed that in addressing the facilitation of investment this 
initiative was breaking new ground in discussing rule-making.   
2.1  Administrative procedures and documentation requirements  (issues 34-37 o f the 
checklist)  
2.3.  Participating Members generally agreed that one key objective should be the promotion of a 
predictable regulatory environment and efficient procedures. A delegation observed that a key 
principle in that regard, and a cross -cutting concern for in vestors, was that measures of general 
application were administered in a consistent, objective, impartial, reasonable and non -
discriminatory manner – stressing that these kinds of concepts were already well -established in the 
WTO. Examples submitted by Mem bers addressing issues under this element pointed inter alia  to 
ensuring that administrative procedures were simple, clear, reasonable and impartial; ensuring that 
requirements were based on objective and transparent criteria; minimising the incidence and 
complexity of documentation requirements and formalities; and promoting the acceptance of 
authenticated copies in place of original documents. One example foresaw the possibility for any 
person to submit comments for improvements of regulatory measures, in cluding suggestions for 
simplification or reduction of unnecessary burdens.  Finally, one delegation orally shared some 
suggestions based on its domestic law at the meeting . 
2.2  Time limits /timeframes  for administrative procedures (issues 44 and 46 of the 
checklist)  
2.4.  Examples submitted by Members generally called for competent authorities, w here an 
authorization to invest was required, to permit the submission of applications  at any time  throughout 
the year , and to allow a reasonable period for the submissio n of applications  where specific time 
periods for applications existed. Text-examples also  included the requirement that both the 
ascertainment of the completeness of applications as well as the initiation of the processing of 
applications happen without u ndue delay. Also, indicative timeframe s for the processing of 
application s should be established. Examples also provided that the completeness of an application 
be ascertained without undue delay under a Member's domestic laws and regulations, that  decisio ns 
on applications should be reached within a reasonable period of time from the submission of a 
complete application, and that applicants shall be informed, upon request  and without undue delay , 
of the status of their applications  as well as of the final decision concerning the applications, generally 
within a reasonable period of time. In addition, once granted, authorizations should enter into effect 
without undue delay.  
2.3  Treatment of incomplete applications  and rejection of applications  (issues 47-49 of 
the checklist)  
2.5.  In the case the application was considered incomplete, the  examples submitted by Members 
referred to obligations to inform applicants without undue delay , to identify the information required 
to complete the application and to provide the opportunity for the submission of additional 
information to complete the application  or correct deficiencies , and, in case of rejection of the 
application, to inform the applica nts of the reasons for rejection and provide opportunity to resubmit INF/IFD/ R/2 
 
- 3 - 
 
  an applica tion. Some examples also pointed to the avoidance of substantial penalties for minor 
breaches of regulations or procedural requirements.  
2.4  Fees and charges (issues 56 -57 of the checklist)  
2.6.  Examples submitted by Members referred to provisions aiming at ensurin g that fees charged 
by competent authorit ies in relation to an application or authorisation  were reasonable, transparent 
and do not in themselves restrict the investment . Furthermore, some examples drew from provisions 
mandating competent authorities to limit the amount of their fees and charges to the approximate 
cost of services rendered.  Some examples also advocated that an up -to-date list of fees and charges 
be published/made available over the internet.  
2.5  Review of APRs (issue 58  of the checklist)  
2.7.  Two of  the examples submitted on this element pointed towards periodic reviews of APRs to 
either simplify them or determine whether they should be modified, streamlined, expanded or 
repealed. Two examples submitted by one Member called for periodic impact assess ments of major 
regulatory measures in preparation, as well as the maintenance of mechanisms to promote periodic 
retrospective evaluation of regulatory measures in force.   
2.6  Use of ICT (issues 40 -43 of the checklist)   
2.8.  Several examples were submitted on these  issues. They generally pointed to the acceptance 
of applications in electronic format, and of authenticated copies in place of original documents. A 
few examples foresaw the implementation by Members of mechanisms allowing for the payment of 
fees through electronic means.  
2.7  One-stop shop/single window types of mechanisms (issues 29, 30, 50 -52 of the 
checklist ) 
2.9.  Some examples submitted on this element contained provisions encouraging or mandating the 
establishment of single entry points for the submission of documents required by the agencies or 
regulatory bodies involved in the admission, establishment, acquisition and expansion of 
investments.  Another example contained a provision requiring Members to avoid, to t he extent 
practicable, req uesting an applicant to approach more than one competent authority for each 
application for authorisation , but if the investment was within the jurisdiction of multiple competent 
authorities, multiple applications for authorization m ight be required . One delegation made a 
presentation (through video link) of its system of legal procedures for foreign investment , which, 
while not constituting a single window stricto sensu , allows fo reign investors to carry out legal 
procedures before th is Member's Foreign Investment National Commission (FINC) through its 
website . 
2.8  Focal point/contact point/ombudsperson type of mechanisms  (issues 28, 53 -55, 67, 
69 of the checklist ) 
2.10.   Examples submitted in this area focused on issues 53 -55 (a few examples on issue 28 were 
submitted in the previous meeting). Those examples called for the establishment of national focal 
points to provide information to, and assist, investors. In addition, a couple of examples foresaw the 
possibility of addressing complaints or grievances regarding measures affecting i nvestors with a view 
to preventing disputes.   
2.9  Other issues related to streamlining and speeding up of APRs (issues 59 -63 of the 
checklist)  
2.11.   Several examples pointed to provisions requiring the consistent, objective and impartial 
administration of measures , as well as to allow applicants to present facts and arguments in support 
of an application prior to any final administrative decision . A few examples referred to review and 
appeal mechanisms. Other individual examples included provisions requiring, respe ctively, the 
respect of due process in the application of measures, non -discriminatory access to public 
infrastructure, and the facilitation of entry and sojourn of investment personnel.  INF/IFD/ R/2 
 
- 4 - 
 
  3  FOLLOW -UP ON ELEMENT S AIMED AT IMPROVING  THE TRANSPARENCY AN D 
PREDIC TABILITY OF INVESTME NT MEASURES  
3.1  Presentation by the Secretariat on the ePing notification alert system  
3.1.  Responding to the interest expressed by delegations at the previous meeting, an expert from 
the WTO Secretariat presented the ePing SPS and TBT notificat ion alert platform and underlying 
notification system at the meeting . The presentation was followed by an inte ractive  discussion 
among Members  on the possible role of notification provisions within the investment facilitation 
framework.  
3.2  Compendium of examp les 
3.2.  As agreed at the  previous meeting, th e Coordinator prepared under his responsibility a 
compendium of the text -based examples submitted for discussion  (INF/IFD/RD/5).  This compendium 
aims at organizing the examples submitted in a coherent and user -friendly manner. It is a tool 
intended to facilitate open, transparent and inclusive discussions. The content, structure, and 
wording of the compendium do not, in any way, prejudge the position or views of Members on any 
of the elements and issues under discuss ion.  
3.3.  Participating delegations supported the Compendium . They viewed it as a very useful tool to 
organize the issues under the different elements and show areas of convergence, with a view to 
advancing towards a more outcome -oriented phase of the discussi ons. It was also pointed out that 
that the compendium would prove useful for the consultations conducted in capital. One delegation 
further considered that – investment facilitation being a new topic – the Compendium allowed 
Members to better visualize the main elements of a framework. He further encouraged Members – 
in developing the possible elements of the framework – to think on the value added for investors.  
3.4.  The Coordinator indicated that a n updated version  of the document, including the elements 
discussed  at this meeting, would be prepared and circulated ahead of the next meeting.  
4  ANY OTHER INVESTMENT  FACILITATION -RELATE D ISSUES  
4.1.  No issue was raised under this agenda item.   
5  OTHER BUSINESS  
5.1.  A representative of the OECD5 made a short stateme nt under this agenda item. From the 
OECD’s perspective, investment facilitation need ed a whole -of-government approach and 
policymakers, regulators, investment promotion agencies all ha d a key role to play to streamline 
and speed up administrative procedure s and requirements for investors. He further indicated that 
the OECD stood ready , through inter alia  analytical work,  to support the WTO and its Member s as 
the initiative progresses towards a possible multilateral framework for investment facilitation.  
_________  
                                                
5 The following organizations were invited to attend the meetings as observers: the IMF, the ITC, the 
OECD, UNCTAD and the World Bank G roup.