WT/DS453/8  
 
4 November 2015  
(15-5832)  Page: 1/2  
  Original: English  
 
 ARGENTINA – MEASURES RELATING TO TRADE IN GOODS AND SERVICES 
NOTIFICATION OF AN OTHER APPEAL BY ARGENTINA 
UNDER ARTICLE 16.4 AND ARTICLE 17 OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON RULES 
AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE SE TTLEMENT OF DISPUTES (DSU),  
AND UNDER RULE 23(1) OF THE WORKING PROCEDURES FOR APPELLATE REVIEW 
The following communication, dated 2 November 2015,  from the delegation of Argentina, is being 
circulated to Members. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
1. Pursuant to Articles 16.4 and 17 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing 
the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU") and Rule 23 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review 
(WT/AB/WP/6) ("Working Procedures"), Argentina he reby notifies the Dispute Settlement Body of 
its decision to appeal certain issues of law and legal interpretation contained in the report of the Panel in Argentina – Measures Relating to Trade in Goods and Services (WT/DS453) ("Panel 
Report").  
2. The issues that Argentina raises in this other appeal relate to the Panel's findings that 
services and service suppliers located in jurisdictions that Argentina designates as "cooperative" and "non-cooperative" under Decree No. 589/2013 and the defensive tax measures at issue in this 
dispute are "like" within the meaning of Articles  II:1 and XVII of the General Agreement on Trade 
in Services ("GATS").  
3. In particular, Argentina seeks review of the Panel's finding that services and service 
suppliers located in "cooperative" and "non-cooperative" jurisdictions are "like" under Article II:1 
of the GATS.
1 The Panel erred in its interpretation and application of Article II:1 in concluding that 
the services and service suppliers at issue are " like" on the grounds that the measures at issue 
provide differential treatment "by reason of origin".2 If the Appellate Body were to conclude that 
services and service suppliers may be considered  "like" when a measure provides differential 
treatment " exclusively on the basis of origin", Argentina respectfully request that the Appellate 
Body find that the Panel erred in concluding that the services and services suppliers are "like" in 
the absence of a finding that the measures at issue provide differential treatment "exclusively" on 
the basis of origin.3  
4. Argentina further considers that the Panel committed legal error under Article II:1 of the 
GATS by reversing the burden of proof and finding that it was incumbent upon Argentina to 
demonstrate that the services and service suppliers  located in "cooperative" and "non-cooperative" 
jurisdictions are not like under that provision.4 
5. The Panel also erred in its interpretation and application of Article XVII of the GATS when it 
relied on its erroneous likeness finding under Article II:1 to conclude that services and service suppliers located in Argentina are "like" those located in "non-cooperative" jurisdictions.
5 In 
addition to the fact that the Panel's findings under Article II:1 were themselves in error, the 
                                               
1 Panel Report, para. 7.186.  
2 Panel Report, paras. 7.153-7.185 and 7.365. 
3 Panel Report, paras. 7.185, 7.186, 7.365. 
4 Panel Report, paras. 7.171-7.185, but in particular para. 7.179. 
5 Panel Report, paras. 7.481-7.489. WT/DS453/8 
 
- 2 - 
 
  Panel's findings under Article II:1 were not sufficient to establish likeness under Article XVII of the 
GATS. Argentina therefore requests that the Appellate Body modify the Panel's reasoning while upholding its ultimate conclusion that measures 2, 3 and 4 are not inconsistent with Article XVII of the GATS.
6 
6. With respect to Panama's claims under both Article II:1 and Article XVII of the GATS, 
Argentina further considers that the Panel committed legal error by making a prima facie  case of 
likeness for Panama in the absence of evidence and legal argument. 
7. Alternatively, in the event that the Appellate B o d y  w e r e  t o  f i n d  t h a t  A r g e n t i n a  b o r e  t h e  
burden of proving likeness under Articles II:1 an d XVII of the GATS, or that Panama had otherwise 
established a prima facie  case of likeness, Argentina claims on appeal that the Panel failed to act 
consistently with its duties to conduct an objective assessment of the matter under Article 11 of 
the DSU in reaching its findings under those provisions. The Panel ignored uncontested evidence 
on the panel record which demonstrated that th e differences in regulatory frameworks between 
cooperative and non-cooperative jurisdictions affe ct the nature and extent of the competitive 
relationship among services and service suppliers located in these different types of jurisdictions, 
to the extent that they cannot be considered "like" under Articles II:1 and XVII of the GATS.7 
Should the Appellate Body sustain this alternative claim of error, Argentina requests that the 
Appellate Body complete the legal analysis and find, on the basis of the Panel's factual findings and 
uncontested evidence on the panel record, that th ese categories of services and service suppliers 
are not like under Articles II:1 and XVII of the GATS. 
8. For these reasons, Argentina respectfully re quests that the Appellate Body reverse the 
Panel's finding that services and service suppliers located in "non-cooperative" jurisdictions are 
"like" services and service suppliers located in "cooperative" jurisdictions and in Argentina under Articles II:1 and XVII of the GATS, respectively.
8 Consequently, Argentina respectfully requests 
that the Appellate Body (1) reverse the Panel's ultimate finding that the measures at issue in this 
dispute are inconsistent with Article II:1 of the GATS9; and (2) modify the basis for the Panel's 
ultimate finding that measures 2, 3, and 4 are not inconsistent with Article XVII.10  
9. Pursuant to Rule 23(3) of the Working Procedures, Argentina files this Notice of Other 
Appeal together with its Other Appellant's Submission with the Appellate Body Secretariat.  
10. Pursuant to Rule 23(2)(c)(ii)(C) of the Workin g Procedures, this Notice of Other Appeal 
provides an indicative list of the paragraphs of the Panel Report containing the alleged errors of 
law and legal interpretation by the Panel, without prejudice to Argentina's ability to rely on other 
paragraphs of the Panel Report in its other appeal. 
__________  
                                               
6 Panel Report, para. 7.525. 
7 See e.g., Panel Report, paras. 7.509-7.521. 
8 Panel Report, paras. 7.185, 7.186, 7.365, 7.488 and 7.489.  
9 Panel Report, paras. 7.367 and 8.2.b.  
10 Panel Report, paras 7.523-7.525 and 8.2.c.