RESTRICTED  
  
G/MA/M/64  
 
31 January 2017  
(17-0601) Page: 1/16 
Committee on Market Acce ss   
 
MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE ON MARKET ACCESS   
11 OCTOBER 2016  
CHAIR PERSON : MS HANNA OLSEN BODSB ERG (NORWAY ) 
 
Subjects discussed                    Pages  
 
A. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 1996 ( HS96) CHANG ES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS (L/6905 AND WT/ L/756) – STATUS REPORT  ...................  2 
B. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2002 ( HS2002) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE (WT/L/605 A ND 807) 
– STATUS REPORT  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  3 
C. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2007 ( HS2007) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE (WT/L/673 AN D 
WT/L/830) - STATUS REPORT  ................................ ................................ .........................  3 
D. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2012 ( HS2012) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE (WT/L/831) - STATUS 
REPORT  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................  4 
E. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2017 ( HS2017) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE - DRAFT DECISION 
(G/MA/W/124, G/MA/W/ 124/CORR.1)  ................................ ................................ ...........  4 
F. EXTENSION OF THE HS2 002 WAIVER (G/C/W/728)  ................................ ...............  4 
G. EXTENSION OF THE HS2 007 WAIVER (G/C/W/72 9) ................................ ...............  4 
H. EXTENSION OF THE HS2 012 WAIVER (G/C/W/73 0) ................................ ...............  5 
I. HS2017 WAIVER – DRAFT DECISION (G/MA /W/125) ................................ .............  5 
J. OPERATION OF THE INT EGRATED DATABASE (ID B), INCLUDING STATUS  
OF SUBMISSIONS (G/MA /IDB/2/REV.44 ), AND THE CTS DATAB ASE - REPORT 
BY THE SECRETARIAT  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 5 
K. NOTIFICATIONS PURSUA NT TO THE DECISION O N NOTIFICATION 
PROCEDURES FOR QUANT ITATIVE RESTRICTIONS  (G/L/59/REV.1), REPO RT 
FROM THE SECRETA RIAT (G/MA/QR/4)  ................................ ................................ ..........  6 
(1) 2014 -2016 Notifications  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 6 
(2) 2016 -2018 Notifications  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 9 
(3)  Summary of the Status of Notifications  ................................ ................................ ........... 10 
L. ARGENTINA – NEWLY ADOPTED LAW IN  THE AUTO -PART SECTOR – 
STATEMENT BY THE EUR OPEAN UNION  ................................ ................................ ..........  11 
M. INDIA - CUSTOMS DUTIES ON TE LECOMMUNICATION AND OTHER 
PRODUCTS - STATEMENTS BY THE EU ROPEAN UNION, JAPAN,  KOREA, AND THE 
UNITED STATES  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  12 
N. OMAN - CUSTOMS DUTIE S ON TOBBACO – STATEMENT BY THE UNI TED 
STATES ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........................  13 G/MA/M/64  
 
- 2 - 
 
  O. RUSSIAN FEDERATION – EXPORT BAN ON RAW HI DES AND SKINS – 
STATEMENT BY THE EUR OPEAN UNION  ................................ ................................ ...........  14 
P. DRAFT REPORT (2016) OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRAD E IN 
GOODS (G/MA/SPEC/56)  ................................ ................................ ...............................  14 
Q. ELECTION OF THE V ICE-CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ..... 14 
R. OTHER BUSINESS ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 15 
- CROATIA - REGULATION OF THE IM PORTATION AND SALE O F CERTAIN OIL AND BI ODIESEL PRODUCTS  ............ 15 
- INDIA – MINIMUM IMPORT PRICES  FOR IRON AND STEEL P RODUCTS  ................................ .................. 15 
- KOREA – RECTIFICATION AND MO DIFICATION OF RICE P RODUCTS  ................................ .................... 15 
- DATE OF THE NEXT MEET ING ................................ ................................ .............................. 16 
 
The Committee adopted  the agenda as reproduced in WTO/AIR/MA/ 4 with the inclusion of the 
following items under Other Business: " Croatia: regulation of the import and sale of certain 
biodiesel p roducts ", "India:  Minimum import prices for iron and steel products ", "Korea:  
rectification and modification of Korea's schedule for rice products",  and "d ate of the next 
meeting."  A n annotated age nda was circulated in JOB/MA/127 . 
 
A. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 1996 ( HS96) CHANGES TO SCH EDULES 
OF CONCESSIONS (L/69 05 AND WT/L/756) – STATUS REPORT  
1. The Chairperson  recalled that there were two procedures which had been used by Members 
to introduce HS96 changes to schedules of concessions. The general pr ocedure contained in GATT 
document L/6905 dated October  1991 and the specific one contained in WTO document WT/L/756 
dated 29 May 2009.  It might be recalled that under the first one, Members had to transpose their 
own schedules, whereas under the second o ne the Secretariat  transposed the schedules of 
64 developing countries and LDCs.  
2. There were three Members whose schedules were pending under either one or the other of 
these procedures.  These were the files of Bangladesh, South Africa and Venezuela. The Se cretariat 
and Bangladesh had been making progress . In the case of Venezuela, there had been no change. 
In the case of South  Africa,  the Chairperson recalled that South Africa had announced at the last 
informal meeting the steps that were being taken to sol ve the last outstanding issues .   
3. The representative of Bangladesh  confirmed that his delegation had been working with the 
Secretariat. He also wanted to mention that Bangladesh's HS96 schedule was ready, but some 
procedural issues had to be deal with. His  delegation would be submitting the new HS96 schedule 
as soon as possible, as he was waiting for confirmation from capital.  
4. The representative of South Africa  wanted to provide an update on the process they were 
undertaking towards rectifying the schedule.  She thanked the United States for the questions that 
had been raised, as well as the Secretariat for its continued support in the transposition of their 
HS96 schedule.  She recall ed that the United States had noted that “it appears that tariff bindings 
for some product lines in the HS96 file are eliminated in the draft HS 2002 file and replaced with 
higher rates. The affected HS96 lines are in HS chapters 04, 33, and 35. " The representative of 
South Africa noted that it had been quite a difficult process to  go back into the history of domestic 
tariff changes over the past 20 years, but her delegation hoped that  the process in which they had 
engaged would lead to the verification and certification of South Africa’s HS96 schedule. South 
Africa had agreed to re vert back to the original  HS92 binding lev els as follows. For tariff 
sub-heading 0405.10 (dairy spreads), t he International Trade Administration Commis sion of South 
Africa (ITAC) had  been requested to re -introduce an 8 -digit tariff structure under tariff 
sub-heading 0405.20 in order to distinguish between dairy spreads "containing 39% -79% milkfat " 
that is bound in the WTO at 37% , and "other dairy spreads excluding butter " that were bound at 
79%. Consequently, the applied rate of duty for "dairy spreads with  a milkfat content of 39% " (i.e. 
97%) should be capped at 37%. F or butter and other fats and oils derived from milk , the tariff 
should be capped at 97% to comply with South Africa’s WTO binding obligations.  For the tariff 
lines under HS33, she would like t o inform the  Committee that , during the Uruguay Round  
(hereafter "UR") , South Africa had bound the whole of tariff heading 33.01 at 22%. However, with G/MA/M/64  
 
- 3 - 
 
  the HS96 changes, some tariff lines that used to be  contained in HS92 tariff heading 13.02, had 
been incorporated into tariff heading 33.01.  Tariff line 3301.90.20 (ext racted oleoresins from 
opium) was  derived from HS92 item 1302.11.00 , which was bound at 12%. Tariff item 3301.90.30 
(extract ed oleoresins from liquorice) was  derived from HS92 item 1302.12.00 , which was bound at 
12%.   As had been previously mentioned , tariff heading 3301 had been  bound at 22% during the 
Uruguay Round and therefore, the 22% binding had been retained for these lines. However, to 
retain the origin al UR binding, South Africa would  reintroduce the 12% binding on HS96 tariff item 
for the relevant products  to maintain the original binding. The a pplied duty for these lines would 
also be reduced from 15% to 12% ad valorem.   For tariff item 3301.90.40 (extracted oleoresins 
from hops) , it had been derived from HS92 item 1302.13.00 , and was bound duty -free. Tariff item 
3301.90.50 (extracted oleoresins from pyrethrum) , which had been derived from HS92 item 
1302.14.00 , was also bound duty -free. For both  lines South Africa would  reintroduce the 0% 
binding. In any case, she noted that the applied duty for these lines was free of duty. Therefore, 
only the bound rate of free of duty should be reintroduced in order not to exceed South Africa’s 
GATT Article II obligations . Tariff item 3301.90.80  (extracted oleoresins, of a kind used in the food 
industry, obtained from the extraction of paprika ) had been derived from HS92 item 1302.19.10 , 
and was bound in the UR at 21%. Currently tariff line 3301.90.80, was applied at 15% ad valorem. 
The original UR bou nd rate was 21% and therefore, the bound rate of 21% would  be reintroduced 
for HS96 tariff line 3301.90.80.  For the last lines, which were,  HS96 tariff items 3502.11.00 and 
3502.19.00 , which include d albumins, albuminates  and other albumin derivatives, wh ich used to 
be classified under HS92 item s 3502.20.00 and 3502.90.00 , were bound at 22% ad  valorem. With 
the HS96 transposition, HS92 tariff item 3502.90.00 had moved to HS96 3502.20.00 . Therefore, 
the HS96 bound rate for the agriculture product in tariff 3502.20.00 and 3502.90.00 had not been 
affected.   She reported that the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa 
had been  requested to lower the applied rates to the level of the bound rates, and also that the 
South African Constitutio n and the International Trade Administration Act require d public 
consultation before the implementation of such a request. The tariff changes would  be reported to 
the C ommittee when effected , as well as  through the trade monitoring reports that provide d 
information on trade related developments submitted bi -annually to the Trade Policy Review Body.   
South Africa hoped that this clarification would be acceptable to the United States  and other 
interested Members.  
5. The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
B. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2002 ( HS2002) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE (WT/L/605 AN D 807) – 
STATUS REPORT  
6. A member of the Secretariat  (Jurgen Richtering) reported on the status of work on the HS02 
transposition fil es. A revised full report was issued as JOB/MA/42/Rev. 18 on 13 September 2016 . 
The status of the HS02 transposition exercise after th e multilate ral review held on 
26 September  2016 was the following: 11 0 HS02 files were certified; 5  HS02 files were release d 
for multilateral review and had received comments from other Members; one draft HS02 file had 
been completed and sent to the Member for its  first review; one Member had circulated its 
schedule in HS02; 1 8 Members were not affected by the transposition as  eight Members had 
acceded in HS02 , eight had acceded in HS07 , and two had acceded in HS2012 . 
7. The Committee took note  of the Secretariat report.  
C. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2007 ( HS2007) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE (WT/L/673 AND WT/L/8 30) - 
STATUS REPORT  
8. A member of the Secretariat (Jurgen Richtering) reported on the status of work on the HS07 
files.  A revised full report was issued as JOB/MA/104/Rev. 13 on 13  September 201 6.  The status 
of the HS07 transposition exe rcise after th e multilateral review held on 26  September 201 6 was 
the following: 102 HS07 files were certified; three  HS07 files had their transposition approved in 
the multilateral review process; two HS07 files were released for multilateral review and h ad 
received comments from other Members; four draft HS07 files had been completed and sent to 
Members for their first review;  14 draft HS07 files remained to be prepared; ten Members were 
not af fected by the transposition as eight had acceded in HS07 , and two had acceded in HS2012 . G/MA/M/64  
 
- 4 - 
 
  9. The Committee took note  of the Secretariat report.  
D. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2012 ( HS2012) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE (WT/L/831) - STATUS 
REPORT  
10. The Chairperson  informed th e Committee that, a fter making considerable progress in the 
transposition of schedules into HS2 002 and HS2007, the Committee was  now in a position to begin 
working on the HS2012 transposition. To this end, the Secretariat had  prepared a technical 
document entitled "Tr ansposition of Members' CTS Files to the HS2012 nomenclature: Notes on 
methodology". This document had been circulated as JOB/MA/126 and was  similar in nature to the 
one that had been prepared by the Secretariat for HS2007 (G/MA/283), and had been approved  by 
the Committee on 26 April 2012. The notes on methodology for HS2012  had been presented 
before the Committee for adoption . 
11. The representative of the United States  thanked the S ecretariat for the  note on 
methodology , as well as for its work in preparing the HS2012 transposition files for many 
Members . On the proposed methodologies for simplifying complex correlations , her delegation 
generally supported the approach .  However, she recalled that following a formulaic approach 
could sometimes lead to odd res ults, like it had sometimes happened with the HS2007  
transposition . For this reason, the United States  reserve d its right to make comments a t the 
multilateral review of HS2012 transposition files .   
12. The Committee took note  of statements made, and adopted  the notes on methodology in  
JOB/MA/126.1 
E. INTRODUCTION OF HARM ONIZED SYSTEM 2017 ( HS201 7) CHANGES TO 
SCHEDULES OF CONCESS IONS USING THE CTS D ATABASE - DRAFT DECISION 
(G/MA/W/124, G/MA/W/ 124/CORR.1)  
13. The Chairperson  recalled that, a t the formal meeting of t he Committee that had taken place 
in April, the Secretariat had been asked to prepare a draft procedure for the introduction of 
HS2017 changes to schedules of concessions using the CTS database, basing itself on the 
previously agreed procedures. The Secret ariat had prepared  a first draft, which had circulated  on 
1 August 2016  in document G/MA/W/124 . Small corrections were subsequently circulated in 
document G/MA/W/124 /Corr.1 ( English only ). 
14. The Committee agreed  to forward the draft decision in document s G/MA/W/124 and 
G/MA/W/124/Corr.1 to the General Council, through the Council for Trade in Goods,  for 
appropriate action.  
F. EXTENSION OF THE HS2 002 WAIVER (G/C/W/728 ) 
15. The Chairperson  recalled that a number of Members had been given an extension, through 
the form of a "collective decision", in order to introduce HS2002 changes domestically and to 
subsequently introduce these changes in their respective schedule of concessions, as well as to 
undertake negotiations if required. The last waiver decision was conta ined in document WT/L/9 67 
which would expire on 31  December  2016. She proposed that the Committee agree to extend the 
waiver for anot her year, until 31 December 2017 , so that interested Members could finalize their 
HS2002 procedures.  
16. The Committee agreed  to forward the draft waiver decision granting the extension as 
contained in document G/C/W/7 28 to the Council for Trade in G oods for appropriate action.  
G. EXTENSION OF THE HS2 007 WAIVER (G/C/W/72 9) 
17. The Chairperson  recalled that a number of Members had be en given an extension, through 
the form of a "collective" decision, in order to introduce HS2007 changes domestically and to 
                                                
1 The document was subsequently circulated as G/MA/330.  G/MA/M/64  
 
- 5 - 
 
  subsequently introduce these changes in their respective schedule of concessions, as well as to 
undertake negotiations if required . The last waiver decision was contained in document WT/L/9 68, 
which would expire on 31  December  2016. She proposed that the Committee agree to extend the 
waiver for another year, until 31 December 201 7.   
18. The Committee agreed  to forward the draft waiver de cision granting the extension as 
contained in document G/C/W/7 29 to the Council for Trade in Goods for appropriate action, and to 
instruct the Secretariat to remove from the annex the Members with a certified file.  
H. EXTENSION OF THE HS2 012 WAIVER  (G/C/W/ 730)  
19. The Chairperson  recalled that a number of Members had been granted an extension, 
through the form of a "collective" decision, in order to introduce HS2012 changes domestically and 
to subsequently introduce these changes in their respective schedule of  concessions, as well as to 
undertake negotiations if required . The last waiver decision was contained in document WT/L/9 69 
and would expire on 31  December  2016. She proposed that the Committee agree to extend the 
waiver for a year, until 31 December 201 7.   
20. The Committee agreed  to forward the draft waiver decision granting the extension as 
contained in G/C/W/7 30 to the Council for Trade in  Goods for appropriate action.  
I. HS2017 WAIVER – DRAFT DECISION (G/MA /W/125)  
21. The Chairperson  recalled  that the Secreta riat had been requested , at the last formal meeting 
of the Committee , to prepare a draft waiver decision for HS2017 changes. The Secretariat had 
prepared a draft decision that closely followed the waivers for previous HS amendments, which 
had been  circulat ed on 1 August 2016 in document G/MA/W/125.   
22. The Committee agreed  the text of the draft waiver decision in G/MA/W/125 . 
23. The Chairperson  proposed that Members wishing to be included in the annex of the waiver 
should get in contact with the Secretariat no la ter than Thursday, 27 October 2016. She stressed 
that such requests should also indicate the dates in which the tw o sets of HS2017 amendments by 
the WCO would  be implemented. Following this, the Secretariat  would  prepare a revised version of 
the draft HS20 17 waiver , including the Members having made the request and the dates they have 
indicated . The revised document  would  then be forwarded to the CTG for appropriate action.  She 
also recalled that, as provided in the draft waiver decision, any Member not lis ted in the Annex 
could  still be included at a later stage, simply by making the request to the Committee through the 
Secretariat . 
24. The Committee agreed  to proceed as proposed by the Chairperson.  
J. OPERATION OF THE INT EGRATED DATABASE (ID B), INCLUDING STAT US OF 
SUBMISSIONS (G/MA/ID B/2/REV.4 4), AND THE CTS DATAB ASE - REPORT BY THE 
SECRETARIAT  
25. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to document G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.4 4 which 
contained the status of submissions to the IDB.   
26. The representative of Switzerland  indicated that he had received a comment from capital 
concerning page 6 of the document. For Switzerland, the document indicated that the last 
notification was  the tariffs  from 2015, but his delegation had submitted more recent information in 
April 2016.  
27. A member of the Secretariat  (Jurgen Richtering) indicated that the issue would need to be 
checked. In addition, he recalled that the deadline for notificat ion of 2015 imports had been 
30 September 2016. He thanked the delegations that had submitted the inf ormation within the 
deadline and noted that additional ones were expected. As had been mentioned during the last 
meeting of the Committee, the status of submission s with all years from 1996 had been uploaded , 
and were available at the IDB File Exchange Fac ility. As of the cut -off date of the report in 
G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.4 4, the Secretariat had received the following additional submissions:  Argentina G/MA/M/64  
 
- 6 - 
 
  (imports 2014 and 2015); India (MFN tariff and LDC preference s for 2016 and imports for 2015 ); 
Israel (MFN tarif fs with preferences for 2016 ); Japan (MFN tariff s with preferences for 2016 and 
imports for 2015); South Africa (imports for 2015 ); and Thailand (MFN tariff s for 2015 and imports 
for 2014 ). On IDB dissemination, the database contained 2125 country -periods covering all WTO 
Members , except Afghanistan wh ich had acceded on 29 July 2016 , and five acceding countries 
(Algeria, Bahamas, Belar us, Iran, Liberia and Serbia), which  were now available on the IDB 
website. On the Tariff Analysis Online facility (TAO), t he Secretariat was happy to report that a 
faster and more dynamic version of the report entitled  "Duties Faced in Export Markets" had  been 
deployed and was  available to users. There was  also another report , which was  available only to 
official users (i.e., those logging -in using official IDs) , concerning  imports by tariff line and by 
preferential duty scheme. The data used for this report are based on notifications received through 
the PTA Transparency Mechanism.  On the IDB historical data, the Secretariat h ad successfully 
processed historical applied tariffs information available in  the Secretariat which pre -dated  the IDB 
for some country periods. Some of these data refer red to years as ear ly as 1988. The Secretariat  
planned to integrate these data into the database and to make  them available at HS 6 -digit 
statistics in the tariff download facility  for public dissemination.  On the new facility to submit 
notifications through the IDB File Exchange Facility, he was glad to note that some delegations 
were making  use of this facility  to notify their tariffs and imports. He encourage d other Members 
to start using  this facility instead of e -mailing big files. He also reminded delegations that there 
were two folders available to each delegation : a "WTO documents fold er", which included inter alia  
the complete status of submissions report, and the respective " country folder ". He asked 
delegations to ensure they were uploading the file in their own country folder by double clicking on 
the respective country folder. In addition, the upload document icon was  only acti vated when the 
current folder was  the folder with the proper country name.   
28. Concerning technical assistance missions, since the last meeting of the Committee in 
April 2016, the following  technical assistance a ctivities had been delivered by the Secretariat:  
Advanced Trade Policy Course (English) in Geneva; Regional Trade Policy Course (RTPC) for 
English speaking countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia . On the Consolidated Tariff Schedule 
(CTS) database, t he Secretariat had made available through the website electronic bound 
schedules (CTS files) for all Members. Out of these 135 schedules: 2 of which were in HS2012, 
110 in HS2007, 16 in HS2002, and 7 remained in HS96.  All the relevant files had been inclu ded in 
a new release of the CTS DVD , of which two copies had been sent to each delegation in October.   
This new release also included  a compilation of all the original legal instruments for each  Member.  
29. The Committee took note  of the report and of the statements made . 
K. NOTIFICATIONS PURSUA NT TO THE DECISION O N NOTIFICATION PROCE DURES 
FOR QUANTITATIVE RES TRICTIONS (G/L/59/RE V.1), REPORT  FROM THE SECRETARIAT  
(G/MA/QR/4 ) 
30. The Chairperson  recalled that there were two issues under this agenda item: the review o f 
notifications received and the report on the status of notifications.  
(1) 2014 -2016 Notifications  
31. The Chairperson  indicated there were eight  notificati ons which stemmed from the 
2014-2016 biennial period, and five for the 2016 -2018 biennial period. She had been  informed by 
the Secretariat that new notifications for the 2016-2018 period ha d been received from Japan and 
the United States after the Airgram had been issued, so they would be considered at the next 
formal meeting .  
- Afghanistan (G/MA/QR/N/AFG /1) 
 
32. The Chairperson  welcomed the accession of Afghanistan to the WTO on behalf of the 
Committee,  and congratulated them for being  able to submit a notification, which was circulated in 
G/MA/QR/N/AFG/1 . 
33. The Committee took note  of this notification.  G/MA/M/64  
 
- 7 - 
 
  - Brazil (G/MA/QR/N/BRA /1) 
 
34. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to Brazil's notification . 
35. The representative of the United States  thanked Brazil for its notification. Brazil had 
indicated that it did not maintain any import quantitative restriction. However, according to their 
information, Brazil impose d certain restrictions in its markets that f ell under the scope of the QR 
decision.  For example, non -automatic license  requirements were explicitly covered by this decision 
and Brazil maintained a number  of these measures. Therefore, they should also be notified under 
the QR Decision . In addition, she understood that Brazil maintained prohibitions on the importation 
of certain types of goods , such as  some used goods and remanufactured goods, which also fell 
within the scope of the Decision and should be notified. She requested  Brazil to revise the  
notification and include all relevant measures as soon as possible . 
36. The representative of Switzerland  noted that his delegation shared the view of the United 
States, and in particular with respect to non -automatic licenses. Switzerland requested Brazil to 
revise its notification and offered to meet bilaterally to discuss the issue.  
37. The representative of Brazil  thanked the United States and Switzerland for their c omments, 
and indicated that their reservations had been duly noted. Brazil was committed to providing 
transparency .  In this regard, he wanted to clarify that Brazil's  first QR notification was aligned to 
Brazil's most recent notification  to the Committee on Import L icensing. Comments received would 
be submit ted to capital for consideration  in the context of their notification process . On import 
licensing, it appeared  that the measures that should be notified were the  import licensing 
procedures  that implie d quantitative restrictions, which was not the case for all import licensing 
measures . As regards used goods and remanufactured  products , his delegation would  need to 
assess how these measures are covered by the WTO obligations .  The comments regarding the se 
measures would also be forwarded to capital to see what would be Brazil's take on the issue.  
38. The Committee  took note  of the statements , and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
- China ( G/MA/QR/N/ CHN/3) 
 
39. The Chairperson  recalled t hat, at its last meeting, the Committee had agreed to revert to 
this notification . 
40. The representative of Canada  indicated that  he had received a question from capital.  His 
colleagues had noted that information within column 3 of section 1 , which is titled "tariff line 
code(s) affected"  was limited to HS subheadings. He believe d that Members' original intention , 
when the decision had been taken, was to provide as much detail  as possible  with respect to the 
tariff line codes affected by the QR . With that in mind, he asked whether China could  provide more 
information at the national tariff line level within its notification.   
41. The representative of China  thanked Canada for its interest i n China's QR notification.  He 
had taken note of the question, which would  be transmitted to capital for consideration . 
42. The Committee  took note  of the statements , and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
- Mauritius (G/MA/QR/N/MUS/1)  
 
43. The Chairperson  recalled that, at its last meeting, the Committee had agr eed to revert to 
this notification . 
44. The representative of Switzerland  reiterate d the commen t that  had been made at the last 
meeting, which referred  to QR number 1. His delegation considered that the WTO justification was  
not appropriate , because salt, HS c ode 25.01, was an industrial product and Article XI:2(c) (1) of 
the GATT 1994 only applied to agricultural products .   G/MA/M/64  
 
- 8 - 
 
  45. The representative of Mauritius  replied that refined table salt was no longer under restriction 
as the measure had been removed in 2016.  
46. The representative of Switzerland  thanked the delegate of Mauritius for the update, and 
indicated that it would be conveyed to capital .  
47. The Committee  took note  of the statements , and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
- Mexico (G/MA /QR/N/MEX/1/Rev.1)  
 
48. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to Mexico 's notification . 
49. The representative of the European Union  thanked Mexico for its efforts in preparing and 
submit ting its first QR notification. While the transparency and completen ess of the notification 
had been appreciated , her delegation noted that non-automatic licenses , for imports and exports, 
appeared to be  applied  to a very high number of affected tariff lines. Therefore, h er delegation 
would like Mexico to explain the exten sive use of non -automatic licenses  and whether it had  plans 
to review them with  a view to lowering the number of procedures and number of tariff lines 
subject to non-automatic licenses . The EU also wished  to have a clarification on a specific 
measure, for which written questions would be submitted in due course. In summary, the EU was 
interested in better understanding the procedures which were required for the importation of 
certain products, such as non -automatic import licensing, and the justification un der WTO rules. 
She looked forward to receiving written answers to the questions that would be submitted.  
50. The representative of Mexico  thanked the EU for its  interest on Mexico's  notification. His 
delegation would be in a position to answer once the writte n questions had been received.  
- Russian Federation (G/MA/QR/N/RUS/2, G/MA/W/119)  
 
51. The Chairperson  recalled that, at its last meeting, the Committee had agreed to revert to 
this notification, as well as the questions which had been raised by the European U nion in 
document G/MA/W/119.  
52. The representative of the European Union  indicated that she would be referring to this point 
under agenda item O.  
53. The Committee  took note  of the statements and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
- Ukraine (G/MA/QR/N/UKR/3)  
 
54. The Chairperson  recalled that, at its last meeting, the Committee had agreed to revert to 
this notification . 
55. The Committee took note  of this notification.  
- United states (G/MA/QR/N/USA/2, G/MA/W/116)  
 
56. The Chairperson  recalled  that, a t its last meeting, the Committee had agreed to revert to 
this notification, as well as the questions which had been raised by the European Union in 
document G/MA/W/116.  
57. The representative of the European Union  noted that, following their initial request f or 
clarifications , which had been submitted  to the United States  in November 2015, the EU had 
continued the discussion on a bilateral basis .  Her delegation thanked the US for the replies which 
had been received so far. However, her delegation considered t hat further clarifications were 
needed . In particular , the United States  had confirmed that the five sturgeon species and their 
products, both wild and farmed, were prohibited and that the National Marine Fisheries Service 
(NMFS), in its analysis, had not  taken into account differences between wild and farmed sturgeons.  
The EU wanted to underline that wild and farmed sturgeons and their products need ed to be G/MA/M/64  
 
- 9 - 
 
  treated as different categories .  Captive bred sturgeon and their products could not  be considered 
as detrimental to the survival of wild stocks.  In fact,  the EU had  provided information on sturgeon 
aquaculture in the EU , which had illustrate d the positive effects of captive breeding on the survival 
of wild stocks. Consequently, and lacking a  demonstrat ion by the United States  that the ban could  
be justified for captive bred sturgeon products, her delegation considered this ban an unjustified 
trade barrier, in particular because these products could not  be considered to be detrimental to the 
survival of wild stocks. She announced that the European Union was about to submit a set of 
additional questions and look ed forward to receiving the replies.  
58. The representative of the United States  looked forward to receiving the additional questions 
which her delegat ion would be answering in due course. On the  question  raised  by the EU , she 
noted that, following a review of best scientific and commercial data available, the Fisheries 
Service had determined that all five  species were endangered . Previous conservation e fforts would 
not alter the risk of extinction. Her delegation would appreciate if the EU  could c larify which US 
agency had been contacted by the European Union , what type of information had been  submitted, 
and on what date. 
59. The Committee  took note  of the statements, and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
(2) 2016 -2018 Notifications  
- Cuba ( G/MA/QR/N/CUB /3) 
 
60. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention  to Cuba's notification.  
61. The representative of Canada  noted that the information p rovided in column 3 of  Cuba's QR 
notification, concerning the tariff line (s) code  affected, only included  information on the relevant 
HS subheadings. Canada believe d that the original intention of the QR decision was for Members to 
provide as much d etailed  information as possible  on the tariff lines and codes affected by the 
restriction . For this reason, his delegation would like to ask Cuba whether it  would be possible to 
provide  more detailed information , at the national tariff line level.   
62. The represent ative of Cuba indicated that the QRs that had been notified corresponded 
mainly to international environm ental agreements to which Cuba wa s a party, such as the 
Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals 
and Pesticides in International Trade , the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, 
the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer , etc.  Her delegation had taken 
note of the question which would be transmitted to capital fo r consideration.  
63. The Committee took note  of the statements  made , and agreed  to revert to this notification 
at its next meeting.  
- Hong Kong, China (G/MA/QR/N/HKG/3)  
 
64. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to Hong Kong, China's notification.  
65. The re presentative of the European Union  thanked Hong Kong, China for its notification.  Her 
delegation reserved its right to come back to it . 
66. The representative of Canada  noted that the information provided in column 3 of 
Hong Kong, China's notification, concer ning the tariff line(s) code affected, only included 
information on the relevant HS subheadings.  Canada believed that the original intention of the QR 
decision was for Members to provide as much detailed information as possible on the tariff lines 
and cod es affected by the restriction. For this reason, his delegation would like to ask whether it 
would be possible for Hong Kong, China to provide more detailed information, at the national tariff 
line level.  
67. The representative of Hong Kong, China  thanked the European Union and Canada for their 
questions. She indicated that t he Canadian question would be relayed to capital for consideration.  G/MA/M/64  
 
- 10 - 
 
  68. The Committee took note  of the statements  made, and agreed  to revert to this notification 
at its next meeting.  
- Macao, C hina (G/MA/QR/N/MAC/3)  
 
69. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to Macao , China's notification.  
70. The Committee took note  of this notification.  
- Russian Federation  (G/MA/QR/N/RUS /3) 
 
71. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention  to the Russian Feder ation's notification.  
72. The representative of the European Union  thanked the Russian Federation  for its notification.  
Her delegation reserved its right to revert  to it at the next meeting , in case needed.  
73. The representative from Switzerland  noted that the R ussian Federation had incorporated the 
answer to some of the questions that had been previously raised. His delegation would contact the 
Russian Federation in order to ask for more details.  
74. The representative of the Russian Federation  noted that her delega tion had paid attention to 
the comments by Switzerland in preparing the new notification . She would be happy to clarify 
them in bilateral format, if necessary.  
75. The Committee took note  of the statements  made, and agreed  to revert to this notification 
at its next meeting.  
- Chinese Taipei  (G/MA/QR/N/TPKM/2)  
 
76. The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to Chinese Taipei's notification.  
77. The Committee took note  of this notification.  
(3) Summary of the Status of Notifications  
78. The Chairperson  drew the Committe e's attention to document G/MA/QR/4  entitled "Status of 
Notifications under the Decision on Notification Procedures for Quantitative Restrictions 
(G/L/59/Rev.1)" , which summarized the status of notifications as of 29 September 2016.  She also  
remind ed Membe rs that the Decision provided  that "Members shall make complete notifications of 
all quantitative restrictions in force by 30  September  2012 and at two yearly intervals thereafter."  
However, o nly a handful of notifications for the 2016 -2018 biennial perio d had been submitted by 
the deadline of 30 September. Furthermore, the  report by the Secretariat showed  that only 
22 Members have notified QRs for the 2012 –2014 period, and 25 Members  notified  for the 
2014-2016 period.   
79. The Committee took note  of the stat ement and document G/MA/QR/4.  
80. The Chairperson  noted that, based on a number of previous discussions at Committee, i t 
seemed  that the most notable difficulty faced by Members in preparing their notifications had been 
the proper identification of what consti tutes a quantitative restriction and coordination  required  at 
the national level. In this regard, she  believe d that looking at other Members’ notifications could 
be helpful, as they provide d examples of QRs applied by other Members . For instance, from the 
notifications received to date, it could  be noted that the types of QR measures most frequently 
notified referred to  prohibitions and non -automatic licensing procedures . Many Members had 
notified prohibition s on the importation of nuclear and other weapons  in order to protect their 
national security. Others had notified  prohibition s on importation and exportation of animals and 
animal products from endangered species in order to protect the environment. Several  Members 
had also notified the requirement of a n import permit or license as a precondition for the 
importation of  controlled substances. Some notifications had include d, for example, trade in 
certain chemical precursors that could be used in the fabrication of drugs or explosives, and 
substances that may negatively impact the environment. She urged Members requiring technical G/MA/M/64  
 
- 11 - 
 
  assistance for the preparation of their notifications to contact the  Secretariat. During the formal 
meeting of  December 2014, the Committee had requested the Secretariat to make a  factual report 
providing information on the QR notifications that had been received to date. The rep ort was 
issued in May 2015 and circulated as G/MA/W/114. The number of notifications that had been 
received afte r this report was issued seemed to imply th at the report had been  perceived as 
useful. If Members agree d, she would  request the Secretariat to update this factual report to 
reflect information on  Members’ most recent notifications . She  trusted that this would facilitate 
Members’ overview of the not ifications and , possibly , have a positive impact on the number of 
notifications.  
81. The Committee took note  of the statement.  
L. ARGENTINA – NEWLY ADOPTED LAW IN  THE AUTO -PART SECTOR – STATEMENT BY 
THE EUROPEAN UNION  
82. The Chairperson  recalled that this agenda item had been included at the request of the 
European Union.  
83. The representative of the European Union  expressed her delegation's concern with respect 
to Argentina's  new Law No .27263 entitled "Régimen de desarrollo y fortalecimiento del 
autopartismo argenti no", which  entered into force on 2 August 2016. On the  basis of this law, 
Argentina had been  using indirect taxes as a means of protecting and promoting  domestic 
manufacturing, in particular  through the use of subsidies that depend ed on domestic content in  the 
auto-part sector. As it stood, the law appeared to be in conflict with the basic requirements of 
WTO law , such as national treatment under  Article III of the GATT,  and the prohibition of  import 
substitution subsidies under Article 3 of the Agreement o n Subsidies and Countervailing Me asures .  
Therefore, the European Union  called  on Argentina to review this law and to refrain from adopting 
or implementing provisions that would discriminate against imported goods with regard to indirect 
taxes , or that would support domestic manufacturing using local content requirements.  
84. The representative of Mexico  thanked the European Union for including this item under the 
agenda.  His delegation fully shared  the concern with respe ct to the entering into force of the new 
law No.27263 of 2 August, which sought to strengthen  the development and promotion of the 
auto-part sector in Argentina. It established the grant  of an  electronic fiscal credit that could be 
transferred  to third parties  and taken into account in the pay ment of national taxes in an amount 
equivalent to the ex -works price of national auto -parts included in the final product . In other 
words, for the Argentinean companies to qualify for those credits, they need to purchase 
Argentinean inputs with a view to i ncrease the value of the national content in the final product, 
i.e. cars and other auto -parts. The effect was not only to restrict  the exportation to Argentina, but 
also to other markets  due to the artificially lower prices .  Law No.27263 had been publish ed in 
Argentina's official journal on  1 August 2016, but it had not been notified to the WTO. His 
delegation encouraged Argentina to notify and to comply with its obligations under the WTO .   
85. The representative of Canada  joined Mexico in thanking the Europ ean Union for including the 
agenda item  on which his delegation shared the concern . From a systemic perspective , the 
measure appeared to be in consistent with WTO law.  His delegation looked forward to Argentina's 
response on the concerns raised.  
86. The represe ntative of Japan  expressed his delegation's interest on the issue and noted that 
it would be closely monitored .  
87. The representative of Turkey  thanked the European Union for having included the agenda 
item. His delegation shared the concern  expressed regard ing Argentina's  new law, which did not 
seem to be in line with basic principles of the WTO, including national treatment. Turkey would be  
following the issue and hope d that the law would be promptly rectified . 
88. The representative of Chinese Taipei  indicated  that his delegation also had systemic interest 
in this issue  and share d the concerns which had been raised by the European Union . He 
encouraged Argentina to keep to its WTO commitment s and to notify the measure.  H is delegation 
would follow the case very carefully.  G/MA/M/64  
 
- 12 - 
 
  89. The representative of Argentina  thanked the interest that had been expressed by the 
delegations of the European Union, Mexico, Canada, Japan, Turkey,  and Chinese Taipei.  He had 
taken note of all the statements, which would be transmitted to the  competent authorities.  
Preliminarily, he wanted to clarify that law No.27263 of 2016 established a new regime for the 
development and strengthening of the car -part sector in Argentina. The law had been approved by 
Argentina's Senate on 13 July and had be en published  in the official journal on  1 August. The 
objectives of this law included promoting the development of the car part sector and to create 
favourable conditions to it. However, he wanted to clarify that the law had not been implemented 
yet, becau se it had not yet been regulated  by the Executive branch. His delegation stood ready to 
engage with other delegations in c larifying the relevant issues.  
90. The Committee took note  of statements made . 
M. INDIA - CUSTOMS DUTIES ON TE LECOMMUNICATION AND OTHER PR ODUCTS - 
STATEMENTS BY THE EU ROPEAN UNION, JAPAN,  KOREA, AND THE UNITE D STATES  
91. The Chairperson  recalled that this agenda item had been included at th e request of the 
European Union, Japan, Korea, and the United States.  
92. The representative of the United Sta tes had brought this issue together with the European 
Union and Japan, and had transmitted a communication to the delegation of India with a number 
of questions regarding Indian Customs Notification No. 11/ 2014 o f 1 April 2016. The document , 
which was circulated under documents G/MA/W/120 and G/IT/W/42, had been circulated to 
Members in advance of the meeting of t he Committee on Market Access that took place on  
18 April. To summarize, the communication outline d questions and explained their  delegations' 
serious concerns regarding possible inconsistencies between certain telecommunication equipment 
in India’s 2015 -2016 MFN tariff schedule and India's  WTO Schedule of Concession in HS 2007. To 
date, they had  not received a response from India on this important matter. As it had  been over 
six months since this communication, she  hoped that India ha d come prepared to provide an 
answer to the  questions. In particular, they would like to know how India justified  introducing a 
10% import duty for products falling und er tariff line 8517. 62 in light of India’s commitment 
pursuant to the ITA , and in light of the concessions in its WTO schedule. In addition, given the 
seriousness of their concerns, they continued to request  answers in writing.  
93. The representative of Japan  recalled that, at the previous meeting, his delegation had 
co-sponsored a document where they had expressed concern on the increase of duties on ICT 
products which may not be consistent with  India's schedule  and tariff concessions under the ITA . 
Japan ask ed India to provide written answers  to the questions which had been raised  in 
G/MA/W/120 . 
94. The representative of Korea  noted that a t the last Committee meeting , his delegation had 
joined others in expressing concern on this issu e. Korea sought  clarification  on whether some tariff 
lines with a 10% customs duty  were under India's ITA concessions.  His delegation would 
appreciate if a more detailed explanation was provided.  
95. The representative of the European Union  underline d its serious concerns on this matter , as 
had been reflected in the questions that had been submitted together with other Members . Her 
delegation hoped to receive written answers from India in due course . 
96. The representative of Norway  indicated  that, in  line with other statements, his  delegatio n 
had a strong interest in the issue  and looked forward for the written response s to the questions . 
97. The representative of Canada  joined previous speakers in expressing his delegation's 
concern  on India's increase of duties through Customs Notification No. 11/2014 . The increase of  
duties on products under heading 85 .17 above bound duties was inconsistent with India's schedule 
and the ITA.  Such increases  ran contrary to the objective of multilateral tariff liberalization. He 
believed that this increase could  hinder and have a negative impact on exports of Canada to India .  
He looked forward to receiving India's responses to the questions concerning  that C ustoms 
Notification . G/MA/M/64  
 
- 13 - 
 
  98. The representative of Chinese Taipei  joined others in expressing his delegation 's con cern on 
the issue. His delegation looked forward to receiving India's response  and more details on the 
issue. 
99. The representative of Thailand  had taken note of Customs N otification number No. 11/2014  
and the concern that had been raised  by previous speakers . Her delegation had commercial 
interest in the products under heading 85.17  and shared the systemic concerns  on the issue .  
Thailand looked forward to India's detailed response s to the questions posed,  and hoped that a 
mutually satisfactory  solution could  be found.  
100.  The representative of Singapore  noted that her delegation would be closely following the 
issue and they also lo oked forward to India's responses.  
101.  The representative of India thanked the European Union, Japan, Korea, Norway, Canada, 
Chinese Taipe i, Singapore, and the United States for their  interest  on India's Customs Notification . 
On this matter , and particularly the matter relating to WTO document G/MA/ W/120, he recalled 
the statement that had been made by India in the Council for Trade in Goods  that had been held 
on 14 July 2016 . In that statement, India had alre ady clarified its stance on this  matter. Therefore, 
interested delegations were requested to refer  to that statement. There were no further updates 
available at that  juncture. India was in the process of formulating replies to the written questions, 
which would be filed shortly.  
102.  The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
N. OMAN  - CUSTOMS DUTIES ON TOBBACO  – STATEMENT BY THE UNITED STATES  
103.  The Chairperson  recalled that this agenda ite m had been included at the request of the 
United States . 
104.  The representative of the United States  indicated that her delegation understood that Oman 
had recently implem ented changes affecting its dut y for agricultural products in Chap ter 24 of the 
Harmonize d System, specifically through the Customs Decree on “Adjustment of the Minimum 
Specific tariff for tobacco and its products in the Unified Customs Tariff for the GCC countries”  
which had taken effect on 1 September 2016. If they understood  correctly,  Oman ’s Decree 
appeared  to raise the minimum specific duty on those products classified under HS Chapter 24 to a 
rate that exceed ed its WTO  bound tariff rate of 150%. She hoped that any change s in the process 
for calculating and collecting tariffs for these agr icultural products would be consistent with Oman’s 
WTO bound tariff rates. The United States held the same view for all WTO -bound tariffs :  Members 
should abide by their commitments not to go above their bound commitments . She request ed 
Oman to clarify how it would calculate and collect tariffs for these agricultural products in a 
manner that was consistent with its WTO  bindings . 
105.  The representative of the European Union  shared the concerns that had been expressed by 
the United States. In their  view, the Sul tanate of Oman's tariff increase was not in line with its 
tariff bindings  as laid down in its Schedule of Concessions . In so doing, the Sultanate of Oman was  
acting in violation of its obligations under Article II of the GATT. If the Sultanate of Oman wish ed 
to maintain the minimum specific duty for cigarettes at the level agreed by the GCC, the European 
Union believed that it should submit to the WTO a notification under Article XXVIII of the GATT, 
seeking a modification of its tariff schedule and abide  by the rules laid down therein. Most  notably , 
entering into the necessary negotiations with all relevant trading partners. The EU trusted  that 
fruitful cooperati on on trade -related matters would  be pursued, in particular within the framework 
of the World Tra de Organization (WTO) and that despite the recent increase of the minimum 
specific duty on tobacco and its derivatives in the Common External Tariff of the Gulf count ries, 
the Sultanate of Oman would  continue honouring its commitments vis -à-vis all WTO mem bers. 
106.  The representative of Switzerland  joined the concerns by the United States and the 
European Union related to the decision by the Sultanate of Oman to increase specific duties on 
these products at a level that seems to exceed Oman's binding commitment s. He asked Oman to 
provide further clarification concerning the implementation  of this measure . G/MA/M/64  
 
- 14 - 
 
  107.  The representative of Oman  thanked the delegations of the United States, European Union 
and Switzerland for their interest in Oman's customs duties  on tobacco . She informed the 
Committee that they had held consultations with these delegations last Friday with a view to 
listen ing to their concerns.  The questions had been forwarded to capital .  She had taken note of 
other concerns that had been raised during the meeting  by the European Union and Switzerland .  
She hoped to be able to come back with responses at the next meeting of the Committee.  
108.  The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
O. RUSSIAN FEDERATION – EXPORT BAN ON RAW HI DES AND SKINS – STATEMENT BY 
THE EUROPEAN UNION  
109.  The representative of the European Union  thanked  the Russian Federation for the replies to 
the questions that had been previously  submitted, bilaterally, on 19 April 2016. In its replies, the 
Russian Federation had stated  that the purpos e of the expo rt ban on raw hides and skins, which 
had been discussed under the QR notification at the beginning of the meeting, was  to assure the 
implementation of the state defence procurement . Goods purchased for these needs were to  be 
manufactured with the use of raw materials or parts originating from the Russian Federation, from 
Republic of Belarus or the  Republic of Kazakhstan. The European Union  would like to understand 
how the use of domestic raw materials could  assure the implementation of the stat e defence 
procuremen t. Therefore, she  would be grateful if the Russian Federation could elaborate further on 
this aspect and, in particular, on its compatibility with WTO rules. The EU regretted  that the replies 
which had been received  did not clarify all the issues that had been raised . Therefore , she wanted  
to reite rate her delegation's  interest in receiving detailed replies to the questions. In particular, the 
European Union  would like to know whether the Russian Federation was considering prolonging 
this measure a fter 18 January 2017. Should that  be the case, to also clarify whether the Russian 
Federation could clarify the current state of p lay of the legislative process.  Should the Russian 
Federation prolong this measure after January 2017, the European  Union  wanted to know the 
reasons for such a decision , and for the Russian Federation  to indicate the provision under the 
WTO law  that would justify the imposition and prolongation of this ban.  
110.  The representative of the Russian Federation  requested the del egation of the European 
Union to consider not keeping in the agenda the  previous  QR notification , because the first issue 
was the temporary ban.  The Russian Federation had a lready submitted a  new notification  and, for 
this reason,  asked the European Union  to consider the possibility of closing the review of the 
previous notification, for the 2014-2016 biennial period . Regarding the question by the E uropean 
Union, the Russian Federation  believe d that their new notification had provided  the required 
informat ion on the measure . It sensibly covered  the questions  raised , namely  the WTO justification 
and time -frame for this temporary ban. They had not previously  discuss ed this issue bilaterally 
with the EU, but her delegation was ready to provide more information  on this matter. She wanted 
to reiterate that this measure had not been notified in the new QR notification . Although i t could  
be treated as a separate issue, they would prefer to keep discussing it as part of the QR 
notification . 
111.  The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
P.  DRAFT REPORT (2016) OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRAD E IN GOODS 
(G/MA/SPEC/56)   
112.  The Chairperson  recalled  that the Committee was required to submit annually a report on its 
activities to the C ouncil for Trade in Goods . A dr aft report covering the activities of the Co mmittee 
since its last meeting had been  circulated  in document G/MA/SPEC/ 56. The report would be 
updated by the Secretariat in light of the meeting.  
113.  The Committee agreed  to the proposal by the Chairperson . 
Q.  ELECTION OF THE VICE -CHAIRPERSON  
114.  The Committee elected  Mr. Abid Mostafa Khan (Bangladesh) as Vice -Chair of this 
Committee.  G/MA/M/64  
 
- 15 - 
 
  R.  OTHER BUSINESS  
- CROATIA - REGULATION OF THE IM PORTATION AND SALE O F CERTAIN OIL AND BIODIESEL PRODUCTS  
115.  The Chairperson  recalled t hat the issue had been included at the request of the Russian 
Federation.  
116.  The representative of the Russian Federation  express ed a concern regarding Croatia's 
regulation on the import and sale of certain oils and biodiesel products. Her delegation was 
concerned by the d ifferent conditions that applied to  motor spirits, oil, and some other products 
depending on their origin.  The Russian Federation was discussing the issue with the European 
Union and hoped to have a positive development in the near future.   
117.  The Committee took note  of the statement . 
- INDIA – MINIMUM IMPORT PRICES  FOR IRON AND STEEL P RODUCTS  
118.  The Chairperson  recalled that the issue had been included at the request of  Japan.  
119.  The representative of Japan  had been instructed to make a comment conc erning India's 
minimum import prices for iron and steel  products .  He recalled that the Ministry of C ommerce of 
India had introduced  minimum import prices  (MIP) for 173 iron and steel products on 
5 February  2016. According to India's notification d ated 5 February  2016, the MIPs did not allow 
products  to be imported if prices  were below certain prices in the notification , which would be 
applicable  for 6 months.  Subsequently, the g overnment of India had extended the applicability  of 
the MIP measure on 66 prod ucts as of 4 August  2015 and 4 October 2016 . The measures will 
continue until 4  December  2016. The measure ha d had a s ignificant adverse impact on Japan's 
export s of iron and steel products , and  were clearly inconsistent  with Article XI of the GATT. 
Accord ingly, Japan strongly requested India to repeal the measure immediately and to provide an 
explanation on its consistency with WTO rules .   
120.  The representative of India thanked the delegation of Japan for its interest on India's import 
regime , namely the minimum import price  on certain steel products . As the matter had  been 
raised under other business, he understood that substantive discussions  had to be avoided.  India 
had made a detailed statement at the previous meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods  that had 
been held on 14 July, so he asked the delegation of Japan to refer to it . He considered it  important 
to update the Committee on the latest state of play. When initially introduced in February 2016, 
the measure covered 173 national tariff lines . It had been  imposed on a temporary basis in order 
to reduce the stress on the domestic industry on ac count of unprecedented imports arising from  
unfair international business practices , such as predatory pricing. Subsequently, t he number of 
tariff lines had bee n significantly reduced to only 66 national tariff lines. On 4 October 2016, the 
measure had been e xtended only for those 66 tariff  lines. The government of India was c losely 
monitoring the situation. The current extension was only for a period of two mont hs and would 
expire on 4 December 2016 . 
121.  The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
- KOREA – RECTIFICATION AND MO DIFICATION OF RICE P RODUCTS  
122.  The Chairperson  recalled that the issue had been included at the request of  Thailand.  
123.  The representative of Thailand  recalled that Korea had submitted on 30 September 2014 a 
document to modify its schedule  of concessions . In light of objections by Thailand and other 
Members, namely  Australia , China, the United States,  and Viet Nam, Korea's proposal had not 
been certified. In response to Thailand's questions d uring the 78th meeting of the Committee on 
Agriculture , Korea had confirmed that the proposed, but unapproved, schedule had entered into 
force since 1 January 2016 . Thailand understood that Korea had been a pplying a global quota for 
rice products of 408.700  tons with  an in-quota duty of 5% and out -of-quota duty rate of 5 13%.  
Thailand continued to believe that the out -of-quota duty  was unreasonably high and could not  
accept the methodology  of calculation that ha d been used by Korea . The TRQ would negatively 
affect Thailand's exports of rice to Korea. While Thailand and Korea had held bilateral consultation s G/MA/M/64  
 
- 16 - 
 
  in 2015 , no conclusion had been reached and no updates had been  received. Her delegation 
requested Korea to  provide an update  on the progress made in the consultations  with Members 
concerned , and to kindly indicate when it planned to reconvene consultations with Thailand, with a 
view to achieving a mutual solution.  
124.  The representative of Korea  thanked Thailand f or its interest on the issue. He noted that, he 
would submit the issue to capital for due consideration .  
125.  The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
- DATE OF THE NEXT MEET ING 
126.  The Committee took note that its next formal meeting had been  provisionally  scheduled for 
28 March  2017. In addition, t he next informal multilateral review session s for HS transpositions 
had been scheduled for  8 December 2016 and 9 March 2017 . 
127.  The meeting was adjourned . 
__________