RESTRICTED
WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
2 November 2014
(14-6381)  Page: 1/426
Working Party on the 
Accession of Kazakhstan   
  
  DRAFT REPORT OF THE WORKING PARTY ON THE  
ACCESSION OF KAZAKHSTAN  
Revision 
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 2 - 
 
  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 6  
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED ........................................................................................... 6  
INTRODUCTORY ST ATEMENTS ......................................................................................... 6  
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES .............................................................................................. 8  
- Monetary and Fi scal Policy ...................................................................................... 8  
- Foreign Exchange and Payments ........................................................................... 13  
- Investment Regime ............................................................................................... 21  
- State Ownership, State-Trading Entities and Privatization .................................... 30  
(a) Privatization .......................................................................................................... 30  
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Enterprises, Enterprises with Special 
and Exclusive Privileges ........................................................................................ 33  
- Pricing Poli cies ...................................................................................................... 47  
- Competition Policy ................................................................................................ 55  
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING PO LICIES ........................................ 64  
- Powers of Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government ................ 64  
- Framework of the Eurasian Economic Union among the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Belarus .......................... 68  
(a) Legal Framework Establishing th e Eurasian Econ omic Union ................................ 68  
(b) Eurasian Economic Union Structure an d Competency in the Area of Trade ............ 69  
(c) The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council .............................................................. 69  
(d) The Eurasian Intergov ernmental Council .............................................................. 69  
(e) The Eurasian Economic Commission ...................................................................... 70  
(f) The Council of the Commission .............................................................................. 70  
(g) The Collegium of the Commissi on ......................................................................... 71  
(h) Decision-making within the Bodies of th e EAEU  .................................................... 74  
(i) The Court of the Eurasi an Economic Union ............................................................ 74  
(j) Transparen cy ........................................................................................................ 76  
(k) Implementation of WTO Commitmen ts under the EAEU Regime ........................... 77  
- Government Entities Responsible for Making and Implementing Policies 
Affecting Foreign Trade; Right of Appeal ............................................................... 79  
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS ............................................................... 81  
- Registration Requirements for Im port and Export Operations .............................. 81  
- (a) Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Prod ucts ................................................................... 87  
- (b) Pharmace uticals .............................................................................................. 88  
- (c) Products containing cryptographi c capabilities, including goods with 
encryption technology and sp ecial technical devices............................................. 89  
- (d) Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 91  
A. IMPORT REGU LATIONS ......................................................................................... 91  
- Ordinary Customs Duties ....................................................................................... 91  
- Other Duties an d Charges ..................................................................................... 95  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 3 - 
 
  - Tariff Exemptions .................................................................................................. 96  
- Tariff Rate Quotas ............................................................................................... 100  
- Fees and Charges for Services Rendered ............................................................. 105  
- Application of Internal Taxes to Imports ............................................................. 108  
- Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and 
Licensing Sy stems ............................................................................................... 116  
- (a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas ............ 117  
- (b) Import Li censing ........................................................................................... 120  
- Customs Valu ation .............................................................................................. 133  
- Rules of Or igin .................................................................................................... 142  
- Other Customs Fo rmalities .................................................................................. 148  
- Preshipment In spection ...................................................................................... 149  
- Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duty  and Safeguar d Regimes ............................... 151  
- (a) Transitional  regime ....................................................................................... 152  
- (b) Regime established und er the EAEU Treaty ................................................... 153  
B. EXPORT REGU LATIONS ....................................................................................... 161  
- Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Services Rendered, Application of 
Internal Taxes to Exports .................................................................................... 161  
- Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas ................... 165  
- Export Licensing Procedur es ............................................................................... 169  
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS ............................. 171  
- Industrial Policy, including Subsidies .................................................................. 171  
-  Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification .................................... 180  
(a) Legal Frame work................................................................................................. 180  
(b) Institutio ns ......................................................................................................... 188  
(c) Technical Regulations, International and National Standards, and 
Conformity Assessmen t Procedur es .................................................................... 190  
- (i) Technical Re gulations .................................................................................... 190  
- (ii) Technical Requirements Not Su bject to Law No. 603 On Technical 
Regulation ........................................................................................................... 195  
- (iii) Voluntary National and International Standard s .......................................... 196  
- (iv) Disposition of Mandatory Nati onal Standards of  Kazakhstan ........................ 197  
- (v) Conformity Assessment Procedures  including the Accreditation of 
Conformity Assessm ent Bodi es ........................................................................... 199  
(d) Transparen cy ...................................................................................................... 209  
- Sanitary and Phytosani tary Measures ................................................................. 212  
- Trade-Related Investment Measures ................................................................... 213  
- Free Zones, Special Economic Areas .................................................................... 219  
- (a) EAEU Regulati on of SEZs ............................................................................... 220  
- (b) Basic Law on SEZs ......................................................................................... 223  
- (c) Customs and Tax Legislation of  the Republic of Kazakhstan .......................... 225  
- (d) Free Warehouse Cu stoms Regime ................................................................. 227  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 4 - 
 
  - Government Pr ocurement ................................................................................... 231  
- Transit ................................................................................................................. 235  
- Government-mandated Counter -trade and Barter ............................................... 239  
- Agricultural Policies ............................................................................................ 239  
- Trade in Civil Aircraft .......................................................................................... 239  
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME ........................................... 241  
- GENERAL ............................................................................................................. 241  
- Industrial Property  Protection ............................................................................ 241  
- Responsible Agencies for Policy Fo rmulation and Implementation ..................... 242  
- Participation in International In tellectual Property Agreements ......................... 244  
- Application of National and MFN Treatment to Foreign Nationals ........................ 245  
- Fees and Taxes .................................................................................................... 246  
- SUBSTANTIVE STANDARDS OF PROTECTION, INCLUDING PROCEDURES 
FOR THE ACQUISITION AND MAINTENA NCE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
RIGHTS ............................................................................................................... 247  
- Copyright and Rela ted Rights .............................................................................. 247  
- Trademarks, includin g Service Marks .................................................................. 249  
- Geographical Indications, includ ing Appellations of Origin ................................. 251  
- Industrial Design s ............................................................................................... 256  
- Patents ................................................................................................................ 256  
- Plant Variety Pr otection ...................................................................................... 260  
- Layout Designs of Inte grated Circ uits ................................................................. 261  
- Requirements on Undisclosed Inform ation, including Trade Secrets and 
Test Data ............................................................................................................. 261  
- ENFORCEM ENT .................................................................................................... 264  
- Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies ............................................................... 264  
- Provisional Me asures  .......................................................................................... 266  
- Administrative Procedur es and Reme dies ........................................................... 266  
- Special Border Measures ..................................................................................... 268  
- Criminal Proc edures  ............................................................................................ 270  
VI. POLICIES AFFECTING TR ADE IN SERV ICES ......................................................... 273  
VII.  TRANSPARENCY .................................................................................................. 279  
- Publication of Information on Trade .................................................................... 279  
- Notifications ........................................................................................................ 283  
VIII.  TRADE AGREEMENTS ........................................................................................... 284  
CONCLUSI ONS ............................................................................................................. 292  
ANNEX 1 ...................................................................................................................... 293  
ANNEX 2 ...................................................................................................................... 305  
ANNEX 3( A) ................................................................................................................. 32 4 
ANNEX 3( B) ................................................................................................................. 32 5 
ANNEX 3( C) ................................................................................................................. 32 6 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 5 - 
 
  ANNEX 3( D) ................................................................................................................. 32 7 
ANNEX 3(E) .................................................................................................................. 328  
ANNEX 3(F) .................................................................................................................. 329  
ANNEX 3( G) ................................................................................................................. 33 0 
ANNEX 4 ...................................................................................................................... 331  
ANNEX 5( A) ................................................................................................................. 33 4 
ANNEX 5( B) ................................................................................................................. 33 5 
ANNEX 6 ...................................................................................................................... 337  
ANNEX 7 ...................................................................................................................... 350  
ANNEX 8 ...................................................................................................................... 351  
ANNEX 9 ...................................................................................................................... 352  
ANNEX 10..................................................................................................................... 3 54 
ANNEX 11..................................................................................................................... 3 59 
ANNEX 12..................................................................................................................... 3 60 
ANNEX 13( A) ............................................................................................................... 361  
ANNEX 13( B) ............................................................................................................... 363  
ANNEX 14..................................................................................................................... 3 65 
ANNEX 15( A) ............................................................................................................... 390  
ANNEX 15( B) ............................................................................................................... 391  
ANNEX 15( C) ............................................................................................................... 393  
ANNEX 15( D) ............................................................................................................... 395  
ANNEX 16..................................................................................................................... 3 96 
ANNEX 17..................................................................................................................... 3 97 
ANNEX 18..................................................................................................................... 3 98 
ANNEX 19( A) ............................................................................................................... 399  
ANNEX 19( B) ............................................................................................................... 401  
ANNEX 19( C) ............................................................................................................... 402  
ANNEX 20..................................................................................................................... 4 03 
ANNEX 21..................................................................................................................... 4 16 
ANNEX 22..................................................................................................................... 4 19 
ANNEX 23( A) ............................................................................................................... 421  
ANNEX 23( B) ............................................................................................................... 422  
APPENDIX .................................................................................................................... 4 23 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 6 - 
 
  I. INTRODUCTION 
1. The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan applied for accession to the World Trade 
Organization (WTO) on 29 January 1996.  At its meeting on 6 February 1996, the General Council 
established a Working Party to examine the application of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to accede to the WTO under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the 
World Trade Organization (document WT/GC/M/9).  The terms of reference and the membership of 
the Working Party are reproduced in document WT/ACC/KAZ/2/[Rev.40]. 
2. The Working Party met on 19-20 March and on 9 October 1997 under the Chairmanship of 
H.E. Mr. B. Ekblom (Finland); on 9 October 1998, 12-13 July 2001, and on 13 December 2002 
under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. P. Huhtaniemi (Finland); on 4 March 2004, 3 November 2004, 
7 June 2005, 1 November 2006, and on 17 July 2008 under the Chairmanship of 
H.E. Mr. V. Himanen (Finland); on 18 April 2012 under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. H. Himanen 
(Finland); and on 24 July 2012, 5 October 2012, 10 December 2012, 20 March 2013, 6 June 2013, 
23 July 2013 and 11 October 2013 […] under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. V. Himanen (Finland).   
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED 
3. The Working Party had before it, to serve as a basis for its discussions, a Memorandum on 
the Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/3, WT/ACC/KAZ/3/Add.1), 
a Survey of the Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/40 of 
30 April 2003), the questions submitted by Member s of the Working Party on the foreign trade 
regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan, togeth er with the replies thereto (WT/ACC/KAZ/6, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/10, WT/ACC/KAZ/11, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/14, WT/ACC/KAZ/22, WT/A CC/KAZ/37, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.3, WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.3/Corr.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/50,  
WT/ACC/KAZ/50/Corr.1, WT/ACC/ KAZ/57, WT/ACC/KAZ/63, WT/ACC/KAZ/66, WT/ACC/KAZ/67, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/70, WT/ACC/KAZ/71, WT/ACC/KA Z/75, WT/ACC/KAZ/77, WT/ACC/KAZ/78, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/83, WT/ACC/KAZ/87 and ....), and other in formation provided by the authorities of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ/8, WT/ACC/KAZ/12, WT/ACC/ KAZ/19, WT/ACC/KAZ/24, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/25, WT/ACC/KAZ/26, WT/ACC/KAZ/27, WT/ACC/KAZ/27/Rev.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/28, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/29, WT/ACC/KAZ/30,  WT/ACC/KAZ/31, WT/ACC/KAZ/ 32, WT/ACC/KAZ/32/Rev.1, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/32/Rev.2, WT/ACC/KAZ/34, WT/ACC/KAZ/34/Rev.1, WT/ACC/KAZ/34/Rev.2, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/35, WT/ACC/KAZ/41, WT/ACC/KA Z/43, WT/ACC/KAZ/44, WT/ACC/KAZ/45, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/46, WT/ACC/KAZ/47, WT/ACC/KA Z/48, WT/ACC/KAZ/51, WT/ACC/KAZ/52, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/53, WT/ACC/KAZ/54, WT/ACC/KA Z/55, WT/ACC/KAZ/58, WT/ACC/KAZ/59, 
WT/ACC/KAZ/60, WT/ACC/KAZ/61,  WT/ACC/KAZ/64, WT/ACC/KAZ/ 65, WT/ACC/KAZ/73/Rev.7, 
and ..…), including the legislative texts and other documentation listed in Annex 1.   
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS 
4. The representative of Kazakhstan recalle d that the Republic of Kazakhstan had 
declared its independence on 16 December 1991.  Kazakhstan had since implemented a WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 7 - 
 
  programme of structural reforms with the ob jective to ensure transition to a market 
economy and sustainable economic growth.  Significant progress was achieved in such 
important areas as trade and price liberalizat ion, privatization, competition and fiscal 
and monetary reforms.  
5. The foundations of Kazakhstan's reform  programme consisted of a legal and 
regulatory regime based upon internationally  accepted standards and conducive to trade 
and investment.  In particular, Kazakhstan lib eralized its trade regime by substantially 
reducing import and export licensing requir ements to a limited number of goods; and 
abolishing State-trading monopoly and non-tariff barriers to trade such as import and 
export quotas.  In the sphere of services market access, Kazakhstan established a legal 
and regulatory framework, which eliminated  barriers to entry and guaranteed fair 
competition.  
6. Key trade and investment legislation adhe red to WTO principles by applying a 
non-discriminatory regime to products an d services regardless of their origin and 
national treatment towards foreign investors.   The Customs Code was based on the WTO 
and WCO norms, thus ensuring transparen cy of customs procedures and timely 
processing of goods.  The Government of Kazakhstan had also been undertaking 
important steps to bring its legislation into co nformity with WTO norms, most notably, in 
the spheres of technical regulation, sanitary  and phytosanitary measures, protection of 
intellectual proper ty rights, import licensing, etc. 
7. Kazakhstan was ready to become a memb er of the WTO and to fully integrate 
into the multilateral trading system.  This willingness was expressed when the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan  submitted a formal application for WTO 
accession on 29 January 1996. 
8. Members of the Working Party welcomed the application of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to join the WTO and pledged thei r full support for the accession process.   
Members acknowledged the scope of the reforms and steps undertaken by the 
Government of Kazakhstan in order to es tablish a market-oriented economy and its 
strong commitment to integration to the multilateral trading system. They also noted 
that Kazakhstan played an important role in  trade flows on the Eurasian continent and 
therefore its membership would strengthen the Organization and the world economy. 
9. The Working Party reviewed the economic  policies and foreign trade regime of 
Kazakhstan and the possible terms of a dr aft Protocol of Accession.  The views 
expressed by Members of the Working Party and the various aspects of Kazakhstan's 
foreign trade regime, and on the terms and conditions of Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO, are summarized in paragraphs […] and […] below. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 8 - 
 
  II. ECONOMIC POLICIES 
- Monetary and Fiscal Policy 10. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the National Bank of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (NBRK) was the sole authority determining and implementing the State monetary and 
credit policy.  Kazakhstan had a two-tier banking system, in which the NBRK represented the upper (first) tier, while all other banks represented th e lower (second) tier.  Within the limits of its 
authority, the NBRK represented the interests of th e Republic of Kazakhstan in relations with other 
countries' central banks and other banks; international banks; and other financial and credit 
institutions.  The NBRK was not guided by the aim of gaining profit in performing its tasks.  
The NBRK was independent, within the limits of its authority granted by law.  Representative and 
executive bodies had no authority to interfer e in the activity of the NBRK, its branches, 
representative offices and organizations. 
11. According to Law No. 2155 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995 
(as amended on 5 July 2012), the primary goal of the monetary policy of the NBRK was to ensure 
price stability.  To accomplish this primary goal, the NBRK was assigned with the following tasks:  
(i) development and implementation of the State' s monetary policy; (ii) support of the payment 
system; (iii) foreign exchange regulation and foreign exchange control; and (iv) facilitation of the 
financial system's stability; (v) regulation, control and supervision of the financial market and 
financial organizations; (vi) protection of rights and interests of financial services consumers; and 
(vii) statistics activity in the monetary sphere and in external sector, as well as other tasks in 
accordance with the laws of Kazakhstan and the ac ts of the President.  The NBRK also performed 
the function of a lender of last resort and was entitled to carry out other transactions, authorized 
under Kazakhstan's law, in accordance with the decisions of its Board.  Since 1998, the NBRK had 
not financed the budget deficit of the State.   
12. In order to conduct its monetary policy, the NBRK provided loans to commercial banks; 
took deposits in national and foreign currencies;  undertook interventions on the foreign exchange 
market; issued short-term notes; conducted open market transactions with securities; and 
provided commercial bill refinancing.  The instruments used by the NBRK for the conduct of 
monetary policy included setting of the official refinancing rate and interest rates on main 
transactions, as well as establishing of minimum reserve requirements.   
13. In 2011, inflation in Kazakhstan had been measured at 7.4%.  In 2012, one of the goals of 
the NBRK had been to implement monetary policy directed at the provision of price stability and 
maintenance of annual inflation at a low level, which would be adequate with existing 
macroeconomic conditions.   
14. In order to control the amount and remuneration rates on bank deposits and loans, the 
NBRK used the normative standards for minimum rese rve requirements.  In exceptional cases, if it 
was not possible to slow down inflation by means of indirect monetary control, the NBRK had the 
authority to establish direct quantitative restrictions on particular types of transactions.  Since the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 9 - 
 
  introduction of the national currency in 1993, the tenge (KZT), the NBRK had not established 
maximum rates and had not established credit restrictions since 1995.   
15. The main instruments of rate control on the financial market and sterilization of banks' 
surplus liquidity were short-term banknotes and th e deposits of second tier banks in the NBRK.  
The short-term banknotes were State securities, issued by the NBRK.  The supply of short-term 
banknotes was determined on the basis of constructing a financial instruments yield curve for a 
period of up to one year.  In 2011, the liquidit y situation on the monetary market had remained 
almost the same.  The conversion period for short-term banknotes was kept at existing levels - 
three, six and nine months. 
16. In response to questions on the currency regime, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that the earlier regulatory procedure for currency transactions had been completely revoked as of 1 January 2007.  The existing currency regulation (registration and notification) did not limit 
currency transactions and was aimed at providing statistical monitoring of currency transactions.  
The simplification of requirements for currency transactions conducted by residents, including 
transactions with foreign assets, was a major goal for further advancement of the currency regime 
and currency control.  In order to control risks relating to currency transactions, Kazakhstan would 
be taking measures to improve the effectiveness of  prudential regulation and risk management by 
banks, pension funds and insurance companies.   
17. Asked to clarify the term "resident" for the pu rposes of the registration and notification 
regime, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to Article 1 of Law No. 57 "On 
Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005, "residents" were defined as:  
(i) citizens of Kazakhstan, including those located temporarily abroad or those on State service 
abroad, but excluding those having permanent residence abroad in accordance with the legislation 
of the foreign State; (ii) foreigners and stateless persons holding a document entitling them to 
permanent residence in Kazakhstan; (iii) all juridical persons, established under Kazakhstan's 
legislation and located in Kazakhstan, as well as their branches and representative offices located 
in either Kazakhstan or abroad; and, (iv) diplomatic, trade and other official representative offices 
of Kazakhstan abroad.  Accordingly, "non-resid ents" were defined as all natural persons and 
juridical persons, their branches and representative offices, which were not defined as "residents".  
She noted that licensing and registration requirements applied only to residents engaged in 
currency transactions (and not to non-residents).   
18. Asked to provide information on the main sources of State revenue, as well as the main 
expenditures, the representative of Kazakhstan said that State budget receipts for 2011 had 
represented 19.9% of GDP.  Tax revenue had accounted for 74.1% of total budget revenue - with 
corporate income tax (19.5%), value-added tax (16% ), individual income tax (7%), and social tax 
(5.5%) representing the main tax revenue sources.  Taxes levied on international trade and 
external transactions had accounted for 20.4% of overall tax revenue.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 10 - 
 
  19. The representative of Kazakhstan furthe r noted that the new Budget Code of 
4 December 2008 (the Budget Code) had laid down the legislative basis for the transition to a result-oriented State budgetary planning.  The Bu dget Code was aimed at redirecting the activity 
of government bodies from formal disbursement  of the budget funds to reaching results in 
accordance with State policy priorities.  The fo llowing budgets were approved and implemented in 
Kazakhstan:  the republican budget, oblast budget, capital city budget, republican significance city 
budget, and regional budget (oblast significance ci ty budget).  The budget inflows were from the 
following:  revenues, repayments of budget loans, inflows from the sale of State financial assets, 
and loans.  Budget revenues consisted of tax inflows, non-tax inflows, inflows from sales of main 
capital, and transfers inflows.  Tax inflows comprised taxes and other obligatory payments to the 
budget stipulated by the Tax and Customs Codes of Kazakhstan.  According to the Budget Code, obligatory payments included corporate income tax, excluding inflows from the oil industry sector; 
value-added tax (VAT) on locally produced goods, works and services, and imported goods; excise 
tax on imported goods; excise tax on crude oil, gas condensate; excise tax on locally produced 
goods; and other payments to the budget.  Non- tax inflows were obligator y irrevocable payments 
to the budget, which were not related to inflows from basic capital sales, fixed grants and money 
transferred to the budget on a voluntary basis, except transfers of (i) revenue from republican 
property - inflow from the net profit of republican  State enterprises; inflow from the net profit of 
the NBRK; dividends from State-owned stakes; income from shares in State-owned entities; 
income from the lease of State-owned property; re muneration for external loan placements by the 
State on second tier accounts, as well as for government deposits in the NBRK; fees on credits 
issued from the republican budget; revenues from  the sale of military equipment; and other 
revenues from republican property; (ii) inflows fr om sales of goods, services and works by State 
institutions, financed by the republican budget; (iii) inflows from government purchases, financed 
from the republican budget; (iv) penalties, fines and sanctions imposed by institutions, financed 
from the republican budget, except for inflows from  the oil industry sector; and, (v) other non-tax 
inflows, except inflows from the oil industry sector. 
20. Asked to provide information on Kazakhstan's tax system, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that the tax system was based on th e principles of justice, transparency of the tax 
legislation, and unity of the tax system.  She added that the new Tax Code, which had become 
effective on 1 January 2009, was aimed at (i) reducing the tax burden on economic sectors other than those related to the extraction of natural resources; (ii) reducing administrative barriers; and 
(iii) increasing the effectiveness of tax administration.  
21. The tax administration was made up of the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of 
Finance and the tax service authorities.  The tax service authorities included the state revenue 
committees of oblasts and the cities of Astana and Almaty, and the state revenue committees of 
rayons, cities and districts of cities.  Tax authorities could also be established on the territories of 
special economic zones.  The tax service authorities were subject to a vertical authority, i.e., each 
tax service authority was directly subordinate to an authorised higher-level tax service authority 
and was not classified as a local executive government authority.  The Ministry of Finance WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 11 - 
 
  administered the tax service authorities.  The customs authorities collected taxes paid for the 
transportation of goods across the customs border of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereafter - EAEU), in accordance with Kazakhstan's Tax Code, as well as the customs legislation of the EAEU 
and Kazakhstan. 
22. The new Tax Code provided for a number of tax reductions.  The corporate income tax rate 
had been reduced from 30% to 20%.  Since 1 January 2009, VAT had been decreased from 13% 
to 12%.  As a result, Kazakhstan had one of the lowest VAT rates in the world.  The following 
persons were required to register for VAT payment in Kazakhstan:  (i) individual entrepreneurs; 
(ii) juridical persons of Kazakhstan except for government institutions; and (iii) non-residents 
conducting business in Kazakhstan through branches or representative offices.  In accordance with 
the Tax Code, the mandatory registration for VAT payment did not apply to:  (i) state institutions; (ii) structural divisions (branches, representati ve offices) of juridical persons of Kazakhstan; 
(iii) entities subject to gambling tax, fixed tax and single land tax; and, (iv) individual 
entrepreneurs, juridical persons of Kazakhstan  and non-residents conducting business through 
branches or representative offices in Kazakhstan , with an annual turnover of less than 30,000 MCI 
(i.e. small businesses).  In 2014, 30,000 MCI (monthly calculation index) was equivalent to 
US$305,274 (1 MCI equaled KZT 1,852 or approximately US$10.2). 
23. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the National Fund of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was established by Decree of the President No. 402 of 23 August 2000 with the 
objective to ensure stable socio-economic development of the State through reduction of dependence of the national economy on oil sect or and adverse impacts of external factors.  
According to Article 21 of the Budget Code, the National Fund fulfilled both saving and stabilization 
functions.  The National Fund represented assets of the State in the form of financial assets, and 
other property, except intangible assets
1, accumulated on the Government's account at the NBRK.  
According to Article 22 of the Budget Code, rece ipts into the National Fund consisted of the 
following: 
- direct taxes, collected from organizations of the oil sector (except taxes collected by local 
budgets); corporate income tax; excess profit tax; mineral extraction tax; export rent tax; 
bonuses; Kazakhstan's share received under production sharing agreements; and 
additional payment of subsurface users, op erating activity under production sharing 
agreements;   
- -other receipts from operations, conducted by companies of the oil sector (except 
payments collected by local budgets), including payments received as a result of breaching the terms of oil contracts; 
- receipts from privatization of State property  in republican ownership engaged in mining 
and processing sectors; and 
- receipts from selling land plots for agricultural purposes. 
24. She further clarified that according to Article 23 of the Budget Code, the National Fund of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan could be used:  
                                               
1 Intangible assets included goodwill, trade-marks,  title and publishing rights, computer software, 
licenses and franchises, copyright, pa tents and other rights on  industrial property, rights on services and 
exploitation, formulae, models, sketches and samples.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 12 - 
 
  (i) in the form of the guaran teed transfer from the National Fund into the Republican 
budget; and 
(ii) for covering of expenses related to the management by the National Fund and 
conducting annual audit. 
Investment revenues from the management by the National Fund proceeded from 
investments of the financial assets of the National Fund into financial instruments, except for 
intangible assets.   
25. Within the framework of social tax reforms, the new Tax Code provided for the 
replacement of the existing regressive social tax scale - based on rates ranging from 13 to 5% - by 
a horizontal tax set at 11%.  The social tax was a contribution by employers, levied on the basis of 
the income of employees, and was aimed at coveri ng for the social needs of the population.   
26. The Tax Code provided for companies operating in special economic zones the following 
preferences:  a 100% reduction of corporate income tax; a 100% reduction for advance payments 
o n  c o r p o r a t e  i n c o m e  t a x ;  0 %  r a t e  f o r  t h e  l a n d  t a x ,  a s  w e l l  a s  a  z e r o  c o e f f i c i e n t  a p p l i c a b l e  t o  
related rates in the calculation of the land tax;  and 0% rate on the average value of property 
subject to taxation in the calculation of property tax.   
27. Prior to 1 January 2009, Kazakhstan had used two tax regime models for subsurface 
users:  (i) subsurface use contract; and, (ii) a production sharing agreement (PSA).  
Since 1 January 2009, under the new Tax Code, the practice of concluding PSAs with subsurface users had been discontinued.  This was due to the difficulties of controlling the correct calculation 
of reimbursable costs under the PSA.  At the same  time, the tax regime defined in the PSAs - as 
approved by the President and signed before the enactment of the Tax Code (i.e., until 
1 January 2009) - had been preserved. 
28. In accordance with the new Tax Code, subsurface users paid all taxes and compulsory 
charges to the budget, in accordance with that Code, including (i) special charges for subsurface 
users, including a signature bonus, commercial discovery bonus, and payment for compensation of 
past costs; (ii) a mineral extraction tax (MET); and (iii) excess profit tax. 
29. In order to improve the taxation regime for subsurface users, royalty payments had been 
replaced by a MET.  The main goal was an even distribution of the tax burden, since the royalty 
was calculated under the terms of each subsurface use contract. 
30. In accordance with Article 331 of the Tax Code, the MET was imposed on subsurface users 
carrying out the extraction of oil, minerals, gro und water and mud, including the extraction of 
minerals from man-made mineral formations within each individual subsurface use contract.   
31. A tax reduction approach was applied in the calculation of excess profit tax by increasing 
the volume of non-taxable net income from 20 to 25%.  In accordance with the provisions of the 
new Tax Code, the tax base for this tax was the part of the subsurface user's net income in excess 
of 25% of the sum of the user's costs in the relevant tax period.  In addition, in calculating the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 13 - 
 
  excess profit tax, subsurface users had the right to deduct actual expenses for the acquisition of 
fixed assets and geological exploration.   
32. The rent tax on exported crude oil and gas condensate was applied at rates ranging from 
0 to 32%.  The value of factually exported crude oil and gas condensate was subject to taxation in 
accordance with world prices. 
33. A Member requested that Kazakhstan provide information on regional initiatives in the 
area of monetary and fiscal policy.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Section XIV 
"Monetary Policy" and Annex No. 15 "Protocol on measures aimed at coordinated monetary policy" 
of the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty of 29 May 2014 (hereafter – the EAEU Treaty), which came 
into effect on 1 January 2015, set up the legal framework in the EAEU in the area of monetary 
policies.  From 1 January 2015, as stipulated in Article 64 of Section XIV of the EAEU Treaty, for the purposes of deepening economic integration, development of cooperation in the monetary and 
financial sphere, ensuring free movement of goods, services and capital in the territories of the 
member States, enhancing the role of national currencies of the member States in foreign trade 
and investment transactions, as well as providing mutual convertibility of these currencies, the 
member States developed and carried out  coor dinated monetary policy within the EAEU.  
Further Article 64 provided that the coordination of exchange rate policy was conducted by a body, 
which consisted of the heads of Central banks of the member States.  The operational procedures 
of this body would be determined in the future by a separate international agreement within the 
EAEU.  She further clarified that a decision-makin g authority in the area of monetary and fiscal 
policy remained in the national competence of the member States.   
- Foreign Exchange and Payments 
34. The representative of Kazakhstan said that currency transactions were regulated by the 
following normative legal acts:  Law No. 57 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 
13 June 2005 (as amended on 6 January 2012) (Law No. 57), Resolution of the National Bank of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan (NBRK) Board No. 15 4 "On Approval of Rules for Conducting Currency 
Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 28 April 2012 (Currency Rules No. 154), Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 106 "On Approval of Rules fo r Conducting Foreign Exchange Transactions in 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 27 October 2006 (as amended on 30 November 2009) (Resolution 
No. 106), Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 63 "O n Minimum Charter Capital of Juridical Persons 
Solely Involved in Foreign Exchange Transactions" of 16 July 2009 (as amended on 
1 February 2010) (Resolution No. 63), Resolution of the NBRK Board No. 42 "On Approval of Rules 
on the Export-Import Currency Control in the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and receipt by residents of 
the record number on the export-import contracts" as of 24 February 2012, as well as other 
normative legal acts of the NBRK. 
35. The purpose of currency regulation in Kazakhstan was to advance the national policy of 
achieving sustainable economic growth and ma intaining economic security.  The currency 
regulation goals were to:  (i) establish procedures for the circulation of currency valuables in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 14 - 
 
  Kazakhstan; (ii) create conditions for Kazakhstan's further integration into the global economy; 
and, (iii) provide a database on currency transactions and capital flows.  
- Role of the National Bank of Kazakhstan 
36. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the NBRK adopted normative legal acts to 
ensure the efficient and reliable transaction of the payment systems in Kazakhstan and was 
responsible for their oversight.  In accordance with Article 48 of Law No. 2155 "On the National 
Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995, the NBRK had to arrange, coordinate and regulate 
payments and money transmissions.  The NBRK had to establish (i) "rules and peculiarities of 
application" of payment methods and/or money transmissions; and (ii) rules and conditions for 
payments related to the use of money in cash.   
37. The NBRK activities in the sphere of curre ncy regulation and currency control extended, 
inter alia , to:  (i) determination of the order of currency valuables circulation in Kazakhstan; 
(ii) establishment of rules for conducting currency transactions by residents and non-residents in 
Kazakhstan; (iii) establishment of unified rules and conditions for registration of foreign trade 
contracts for export and import, and of procedures for export-import currency control for fulfilling 
repatriation requirements by residents; (iv) esta blishment of the procedure for import, export and 
transmission of currency valuables in and out of Kazakhstan; (v) establishment of licensing 
procedures and the issuance of licenses for foreign exchange transactions; (vi) establishment of 
registration procedures and the issuance of registration certificates for foreign exchange offices; 
(vii) establishment of qualification requirements for conducting foreign exchange transactions; (viii) establishment of procedures for registration and notification of currency transactions and 
opening accounts in foreign banks by residents of Kazakhstan, as well as the issuance of 
registration and notification certificates; (ix) determination of the "rate deviation of foreign 
currency in purchase from the rate of foreign curre ncy in sale for tenge" in transactions conducted 
through exchange offices; (x) issuance of special permits for currency transactions within the 
special currency regime; (xi) establishment of procedures and forms of reporting on currency 
transactions obligatory for both residents and non-residents (after consultation with the competent 
State bodies); and, (xii) application of sanctions stipulated in the banking and currency legislation 
of Kazakhstan in cases of violation by banks and other persons.  
38. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan had accepted the obligations of 
Article VIII of the IMF Articles of Agreement and had established full convertibility of tenge in 
current transactions in 1996.   
39. Since 4 February 2009, the exchange rate of the national currency had been pegged to the 
US dollar.  Taking into account the stability of the national currency, the favourable position of 
Kazakhstan's exports on world markets, and Kazakhstan's balance of payments, the NBRK had 
cancelled the exchange rate peg and, as of 28 February 2011, had moved to a managed float 
exchange rate regime.  A devaluation of the tenge in medium-term was not expected.  The NBRK 
continued to take all necessary measures to prevent considerable fluctuations of the national WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 15 - 
 
  currency, which could have a negative impact on the competitiveness of Kazakhstan's industries.  
The NBRK's policy was, to the extent possible; to further decrease its activity on the exchange market in order to increase the exchange rate flexibility of the national currency.   
- Requirements Related to Foreign Exchange 
40. In response to a question concerning obligations and restrictions relating to the purchase 
of foreign currency, the representative of Kazakh stan said that, pursuant to Article 17 of Law 
No. 57, the purchase and sale (exchange) of foreign currency had to be carried out only through 
authorised banks, authorised organizations, or their exchange offices.  She explained that in 
accordance with Law No. 57, "authorized banks" were second-tier banks and organizations 
engaged in certain types of banking operations and conducting foreign currency transactions, 
including transactions on behalf of clients.  The definition of "authorized banks" excluded "authorized organizations", which were allowed to conduct only currency exchange transactions.  
She continued that according to the Article 15 of Currency Rules No. 154, residents and 
non-residents had a right to purchase foreign currency in the domestic currency market without 
providing a currency contract and/or other payment documents related to the foreign currency 
purchase and sale transactions.  In filling the application for the purchase of foreign currency 
through an authorised bank, juridical persons (resident and non-resident) were required to 
indicate the purpose of purchasing the foreign curre ncy.  However, in accordance with Article 18 of 
Currency Rules No. 154, the foreign currency purchased by juridical persons could be used for 
purposes other than indicated in the application.   
41. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with Article 26 of Law No. 57, 
non-residents had a right to open bank accounts in a foreign and/or national currency in 
authorized banks on an unrestricted basis.  Non-residents also had the right to transfer foreign and 
national currency, on an unrestricted basis, (i) from their accounts outside of Kazakhstan to their 
bank accounts in an authorized bank; and (ii) from their bank accounts in an authorized bank to 
their bank accounts outside of Kazakhstan.   
42. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with Currency Rules No. 154, 
natural persons had a right to withdraw (credit an account) foreign currency in cash from their 
bank accounts in an authorized bank without limita tions.  Juridical persons could withdraw foreign 
currency in cash from bank accounts in authorized banks for payments to natural persons in the 
following cases:  (i) payments for the sale of goods in duty free shops, as well as realization of goods and rendering of services to passengers on route during international transportation; 
(ii) payments between natural persons and author ized banks or authorized organizations through 
their exchange offices; (iii) payment of salary by resident juridical persons to non-resident 
employees, as well as by non-resident juridical persons to resident and non-resident employees in 
foreign currency; (iv) payment in foreign currency by juridical persons of expenses related to 
business trips of its employees abroad; and,  (v) payments between natural persons and 
non-resident juridical persons conducting activity under customs control in airports, ports and 
border terminals open for international traffic.  In her view, the requirement to indicate the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 16 - 
 
  purpose for the purchase and sale of foreign currency was only imposed for statistical purposes 
and did not restrict the juridical persons' use of the purchased currency for other legal purposes.  In her opinion, the current legal framework did not restrict legitimate trade transactions.   
43. The representative of Kazakhstan noted th at payments and money transmissions under 
current transactions between residents and non-residents could be carried out without restrictions, 
provided that they were conducted through accounts in authorized banks.  In addition, 
paragraph 1 of Article 16 of Law No. 57 stipulated cases where payments and transmissions on 
currency transactions could be carried out, by non-cash payment, without opening bank accounts 
in authorized banks in Kazakhstan:  (i) payments and transmission of natural persons' money, as 
w e l l  a s  p a y m e n t s  a n d  t r a n s m i s s i o n  o f  m o n e y  i n  t h e i r  f a v o r ,  i n  n a t i o n a l  c u r r e n c y ,  w i t h i n  t h e  
territory of Kazakhstan; (ii) transfer of natural persons' money without opening a bank account in an authorized bank in cases of non-repayable transmission of money (including tax and licence 
payments, fines, transfer of inheritance, alimony, grants, etc.) and other money transmissions 
from Kazakhstan, which were not related to conducting business activity by natural persons, and 
in relation to which there was no requirement to assign a record number to the foreign trade 
contract, registration and notification; (iii) payments for the sale of goods in duty free shops as 
well as the sale of goods and rendering services to passengers on route during international 
transportations; (iv) payments between natural persons and authorized banks or authorized 
organizations through their exchange offices; (v) pa yment of salary by resident juridical persons to 
non-resident employees, as well as by non-resident juridical persons to resident and non-resident employees in foreign currency; (vi) payment in fo reign currency by juridical persons of expenses 
related to sending employees on business trips outside of Kazakhstan; (vii) payments between 
natural persons and non-resident juridical persons conducting activity under customs control in 
airports, ports and border terminals open for inte rnational traffic; and, (viii) payments between 
resident juridical persons and non-resident juridi cal persons conducting business activity on the 
territory of Kazakhstan, in the national currency within the amounts specified by the legislation of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The following payments and transmissions of money could be carried 
out without opening bank accounts in authorized banks of Kazakhstan:  payments by checks; 
payments and transmission of money for transactions with non-residents through foreign bank 
accounts opened by residents, as well as paym ents and transmission of money through the 
authorized bank's correspondent accounts in foreign banks; and transfer of money from the foreign banks accounts of non-residents against fulfillment of the resident's obligations.  
- Restrictions on Foreign Exchange 
44. Restrictions on currency transactions as a mechanism of reaction to external shocks could 
be imposed in Kazakhstan only as provided by Article 32 of Law No. 57, according to which 
restrictions on currency transactions could be imposed only in case of threat to the country's 
economic security and the stability of its financial system, and only if the situation could not be 
resolved through other economic policy tools.  Restrictions on currency transactions could be WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 17 - 
 
  imposed within the framework of a special currency regime applied by an Act of the President.  
However, the special currency re gime had never been imposed. 
45. Asked to explain the procedures and criteria applied when the President decided to restrict 
currency transactions, the representative of Kazakhstan said that these were stipulated in 
Article 32 of Law No. 57 and included a requirement to:  (i) open a banking deposit without 
remuneration, in an amount determined as percen tage of the amount of the currency transaction, 
in an authorized bank or the NBRK, for a fixed period of time; (ii) obtain a special currency 
transaction permit from the NBRK;  (iii) fulfil obligatory sale of foreign currency obtained by 
residents of Kazakhstan; or, (iv) restrict the use of foreign banks accounts and establish terms for 
the repatriation of currency proceeds and limits on the scope, amount and transaction currency 
during currency transactions.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that not all measures would be applied at once, but that the measures would be applied selectively, depending on the 
situation and the nature of the risks of destabiliz ation in the currency market.  The President could 
also impose other temporary currency restrictions .  The special currency regime measures were 
aimed at fulfilling Kazakhstan's international obligations and creating conditions for the 
improvement of Kazakhstan's balance of paymen ts and the situation on the domestic market. 
46. The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that the special currency regime was 
applied by the President based on consulta tions with the Government and the NBRK.  
The President's Act on a Special Currency Regime had to contain:  (i) the list of measures and 
temporary restrictions of currency transactions; (ii) procedure to carry out the requirements of the special currency regime, including terms for issuing the special permit; and, (iii) date of 
introduction and validity period of the special currency regime.  A special currency regime could 
not be established for more than one year.  Within the year the special currency regime was in 
effect, the President was entitled to extend the te rm of the special currency regime (in case it was 
imposed for a term of less than one year) or to fully or partially abrogate it.  During the application 
of the special currency regime, residents and non-residents had to observe the requirements 
established by the Special Currency Regime Act of the President. 
47. Specific criteria and procedures for application of this regime were not established as it 
was difficult to forecast what could cause a threat to the economic security and financial stability of 
the State.  In her opinion, this system complied with the provisions of the WTO Agreements and 
did not conflict with Kazakhstan's obligations in resp ect of the IMF.  In response to a question from 
a Member, she noted that the regime of obligator y sale of foreign currency had been temporarily 
imposed from April to December 1999 during the transition to the new exchange rate regime.  
Since then, there had been no reasons to apply such restrictions.   
48. EAEU member States previously had signed an Agreement on the Rules of Transfer of Cash 
and (or) Cash Instruments through the Customs Bo rder of the Customs Union by Natural Persons 
of 5 July 2010.  Kazakhstan had ratified this Agreement through Law No. 389-IV "On Ratification 
of the Agreement on the Procedure for the Movement of Cash Monetary Funds and (or) Monetary 
Instruments by Natural Persons across the Customs Border of the Customs Union" of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 18 - 
 
  17 January 2011.  Under this Agreement, imports from third States to Kazakhstan and exports 
from Kazakhstan to third States of (i) cash and traveler's checks in a total amount exceeding the 
equivalent of US$10,000; and, (ii) cash instruments payable on demand irrespective of the 
amount - were subject to customs declaration in written form.  This Agreement was still in force 
within the framework of the EAEU.   
- Licensing, Registration and Notification of Foreign Exchange Transactions 
49. Some Members expressed concerns regarding th e large quantity of licensing requirements 
for foreign exchange transactions under the current legislation, some of which could complicate 
normal trade transactions, and asked for specific information on Kazakhstan's plans to liberalise its 
foreign exchange regime.   
50. The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Law No. 57, since 
11 August 2009 the licensing regime (authorisation procedure) of currency transactions and retail 
trade had been fully cancelled.  At present, lice nsing requirements were applied only to exchange 
transactions with foreign currency in cash by exchange offices and authorized banks.  Kazakhstan 
provided annual reports on its currency regime to the IMF.  The IMF had never deemed 
Kazakhstan's regime inconsistent with the IMF Agreement and, in particular, with Article VIII of 
the Agreement.  The registration and notification  requirements, as described in the following two 
paragraphs, were maintained for statistical monitoring of external liabilities/revenues of 
Kazakhstan and for further submission of the relevant data to the International Monetary Fund and 
the World Bank.   
51. Asked to clarify what changes had been introduced into Law No. 57 with respect to the 
licensing regime of currency transactions and retail trade, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that during the period of gradual liberalization of the currency transactions and retail trade 
licensing regime from 2005 to 2009, the licensing requirement had been eliminated towards the 
following currency operations and activities: 
- retail trade and provision of services for which payment was performed in cash foreign 
currency.  Under the previous regime, the licence had been issued to persons who carried out their activities under the customs regime of  duty free shops, as well as on the sea, 
inland water, air, rail and road transport engaged in international transportation; 
- payments based on exports (imports) exceeding the 180 days term; - purchase by residents of non-resident's secu rities, equity interests in investment funds - 
nonresidents, contributions by residents into the share capital of non-residents, as well as 
transactions with financial derivatives between residents and non-residents; and 
- opening accounts in foreign banks by physical persons-residents and juridical 
persons-residents.  Under the previous regime, the account balance and the conditions of 
use of a foreign bank account had been determined in accordance with a licence of the 
NBRK.   
52. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that only residents were required to register major 
transactions of capital flows and provide timely no tice to the NBRK.  Residents were required to 
register transactions related to capital flow, which provided for the receipt of assets (funds) in an 
amount exceeding US$500,000 or for the transfer of  capital (tangible assets) from Kazakhstan in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 19 - 
 
  an amount exceeding US$100,000.  She added that, in accordance with Law No. 57, the following 
transactions of residents with non-residents were subject to registration with the NBRK:  (i) commercial credits exceeding 180 days, except for foreign trade contracts, which were subject 
to export-import currency control as described in paragraph [ 478] of this Report; (ii) direct 
investments; (iii) financial loans for more than 180 days, including financial leasing; 
(iv) acquisition of an exclusive right to intellectual  property objects; and, (v) transfer of money or 
another property in fulfilment of obligations as a participant of a joint partnership.  The NBRK 
registration or notification requirements extended only to residents.  Non-residents investing 
directly in Kazakhstan could further export their investments and incomes without any restrictions. 
Registration of contract on currency transaction could only be refused in cases when (i) the 
submission contained unreliable information or did not include all information required in accordance with Law No. 57; and, (ii) the transaction did not comply with the legislation of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  The provisions of Arti cle 8 of Law No. 57 outlined the only conditions 
under which the registration of transactions could be refused.  If a resident submitted the 
complete set of required documents in compliance with the legislation of Kazakhstan, the 
authorised bank would not have grounds for refusing the registration.  Registered transactions 
could not be abrogated or nullified by the NBRK.  
53. The representative of Kazakhstan added that th e registration regime required the resident 
to submit to the NBRK a copy of the contract based on which the currency transaction would be 
carried out, as well as application form, identification documents and documents confirming incurrence, performance and discharge of liabilities  under the currency contract.  The notification 
regime required the submission of information on already conducted currency transactions.  
As part of the liberalisation reform of the currency transaction regime, the registration requirement 
for certain currency transactions had been replaced by the notification requirement.  Residents 
were required to notify currency transactions related to:  (i) capital movements involving the 
inflow of property (funds) in an amount exceed ing the equivalent of US$500,000; (ii) transfer of 
funds (tangible assets) from Kazakhstan in an amount exceeding the equivalent of US$100,000; 
and, (iii) payments/transfers by residents to non-residents and/or by non-residents to residents 
under financial derivatives transactions, as well as for payments related to export/import of works 
and services in amounts exceeding the equiva lent of US$100,000.  The notification regime 
covered:  (i) the bank's own transactions, including financial loans and direct investments; (ii) securities transactions carried out on the basis of a brokerage services agreement concluded 
with a resident broker (notification by a broker); (iii) transactions with derivative financial 
instruments; (iv) acquisition of real estate; (v) opening of foreign bank accounts by residents; 
and, (vi) transfer of property in trust (monetary funds and tangible assets).   
54. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, in accordance with paragraph 30 of Currency 
Rules No. 154, the currency control regime did not extend to:  (i) contracts on State external loans 
and/or contracts on non-State external loans guaranteed by the Government, as well as 
transactions carried out under these contracts; (ii) commercial credits related to export or import 
requiring the assignment of a record number to the foreign trade contract; (iii) acquisition by WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 20 - 
 
  non-residents of the securities of resident issuer s, which were issued under the legislation and on 
the territory of other States (including depositary receipts issued for resident issuers' securities) in the secondary market; (iv) acquisition by residents of  the securities of non-resident issuers, issued 
under Kazakhstani legislation (including Kazakhstani depositary receipts) in the secondary market; 
(v) acquisition by non-residents of government securities issued in Kazakhstan; (vi) banking 
transactions with derivative financial instruments; (vii) currency transactions carried out by 
overseas organizations of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and, (viii) commercial credits and financial 
loans granted by banks to non-residents for more than 180 days.  She emphasized that 
registration and notification was required for statistical monitoring purposes.    
- Exchange Offices 
55. Some Members asked the representative of Kazakhstan how enterprises obtained rights to 
conduct currency transactions, whether foreign organizations were able to become licensed banks 
or exchange offices, and whether the licenses could be issued to any other organizations except 
for banks.  She explained that foreign currency transactions, including those on behalf of clients, 
were carried out by second-tier banks and other financial organizations established in Kazakhstan 
on the basis of a licence issued by the NBRK .  She further continued that the Agency for 
Regulation and Supervision of Financial Markets and Institutions of the Republic of Kazakhstan had 
been abolished pursuant to Decree of the Pres ident No. 25 "On Further Improvement of the 
System of State Regulation of the Financial Market of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
12 April 2011.  The functions and authority of th e Agency had been transferred to the NBRK. 
56. The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that the NBRK issued licenses for 
conducting exchange transactions with foreign currency in cash only to juridical persons of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan, who were solely engaged in the organization of exchange transactions 
(exchange offices).  In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 6 of Law No. 57, to obtain a licence, 
the applicant had to meet only one qualification requirement – to have start-up capital as specified 
by the Resolution No. 63.   
57. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that such juridical persons could be established 
only as limited liability partnerships without the right to establish representative offices in 
Kazakhstan or abroad, or to participate in the charter capital of other juridical persons, but with 
the right to establish branches in Kazakhstan.  According to Article 7, Chapter 2 of Resolution 
No. 106, resident and non-resident natural and juridical persons could be the founders of an authorized organization, except for juridical persons, which previously had been founders (one of 
the founders) of an authorized organization whos e licence had been revoked less than three years 
before the date of application for a State registration permit or for a licence for organizing 
exchange transactions with foreign currency.  A general licence for conducting exchange 
transactions did not restrict the number of exchange offices of the applicant.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 21 - 
 
  58. Branches and representative offices of foreign banks could not carry out foreign currency 
exchange transactions until they registered as juridical persons of Kazakhstan and obtained the 
relevant permit.   
59. The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that if Kazakhstan introduced restrictions on 
foreign exchange or payments such restrict ions would be applied in conformity with 
WTO requirements.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
60. A Member requested that Kazakhstan provide information on regional initiatives in the 
area of foreign exchange and payments policy.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
according to Section XIV "Monetary Policy" and Annex No. 15 "Protocol on measures aimed at 
coordinated monetary policy" of the EAEU Treaty , which came into effect on 1 January 2015, the 
member States developed and carried out coordinated monetary policy within the EAEU.  Article 64 of Section XIV stipulated that the coordination of exchange rate policy was conducted by a body, 
which consisted of the heads of Central banks of the member States.  The Advisory Council on 
Monetary (Currency) Policy (the Advisory Council) had been established within the framework of 
the Single Economic Space in accordance with the Treaty "On Coordinated Monetary (Currency) 
Policy of member States of the Agreement on Coordinated Principles of Monetary Policy of 
December 9, 2010", which had been  signed on 12 December 2011 and entered into force on 1 
January 2012.  The Advisory Council would continue to function as a consultative body within the 
EAEU with the objective to provide coordination of  monetary (currency) policy of member States.  
The decisions of the Advisory Council were made based on consensus and were not binding.  It 
operated on a regular basis with meetings held once per quarter.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan further clarified that a decision-makin g authority in the area of monetary and fiscal 
policy remained in the national competence of the member States. 
- Investment Regime 
61. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the general legislation comprising the 
investment regime of Kazakhstan included the Constitution of Kazakhstan of 30 August 1995; the 
Civil Code of Kazakhstan - General Part of 27 December 1994 (as last amended on 25 March 2011) and Special Part No. 409 of 1 Ju ly 1999 (as last amended on 2 April 2010); the 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the 
Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 and a number of other legislative acts, including:  
Law No. 373 "On Investments" of 8 January 2003 (as last amended on 20 February 2012), 
Law No. 112-IV 2008 "On Competition" of 25 December 2008, Law No. 233 "On National Security 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 26 June 1998, Law  No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and Subsurface 
Use" of 24 June 2010, Law No. 167 "On Concessions"  of 7 July 2006, and Law No. 124 "On Private 
Entrepreneurship" of 31 January 2006.  Provisions relevant to the investment regime contained in 
CU Agreements and Treaties, to which Kazakhstan was a party, also applied 
(see "Tariff Exemptions"). WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 22 - 
 
  62. The representative of Kazakhstan added that Law No. 373 "On Investments" of 
8 January 2003 provided the specific elements of the legal basis for Kazakhstan's investment policy.  This Law regulated relations with regard to investments in Kazakhstan, determined the 
legal and economic basis for the attraction of inve stments, guaranteed the protection of investors' 
rights when investing into Kazakhstan, and established measures of State support for investments 
and procedures for dispute resolution.  The Law "On Investments" did not establish local content 
or export performance requirements as measures of State support for investments.  In response to 
a question, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Law "On Investments" did not 
contain provisions specifying contractual rights, but rather described procedures for conclusion and 
termination of investment contract. 
63. Asked to clarify the definition of investments, and whether or not it included all goods, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the Law "On Investments" defined investment as all kinds 
of property (except for goods for personal use), including property under financial leasing as of the 
date of the contract; property rights invested by an investor into the charter capital of a juridical 
person; and the increase of fixed assets used in entrepreneurial activities, as well as fixed assets 
produced and received within a concession agreement by the concessionaire (including its legal 
successor).   
64. She further stated that, in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 4 of the Law 
"On Investments", an investor was granted full and unconditional protection of the rights and 
interests, ensured by the Constitution of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan, the Law and other legal acts 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as international agreements ratified by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  This legal protection of investments included full and unconditional protection of the 
rights of investors; guarantee of indemnity for damages suffered by investors due to issuance by 
public officials of acts that did not comply with  the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 922 of the Ci vil Code, such damages had to be compensated by 
court decision using funds from the State Budget.   
65. A Member requested to clarify whether in accordance with the Law "On Investments" the 
stability of the terms and conditions of contracts concluded between investors and state bodies 
were guaranteed, and whether any modification made into the list of priority activities or 
consequences of the list becoming void affected concluded investment contracts.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that legal certainty for investors was guaranteed by the Law "On Investments".  In accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 4 of the Law, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan guaranteed stability of the terms an d conditions of agreements concluded between 
investors and State agencies, except for agreements that were amended by mutual consent of the 
parties.  These guarantees for investors did not extend to: (i) amendments to the legal acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and/or their entry into force, nor to amendments made to international 
agreements that changed the terms and conditions  of import, production, and sale of excisable 
goods; (ii) amendments and addenda to Kazakhstan 's legislation introduced for national security, 
environmental safety, public health and morality purposes.  In these exceptional cases, stipulated WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 23 - 
 
  in Article 4 of the Law, the signed contracts could be modified, i.e., the State could enact new 
legislation or amend applied legislation.  It was im portant to note that up to date Kazakhstan had 
not applied above-mentioned exceptional cases and,  consequently, had not modified the terms of 
signed investment contracts.  The legal certainty guaranteed to investors by the legislation of 
Kazakhstan also meant that any modification made into the list of investment priority activities or 
consequences of the list becoming void, did no t affect concluded investment contracts.   
66. The Law "On Investments" also guaranteed th e transparency of the activities of State 
agencies; the access to information related to investment activities (company registration, charter 
documents, licensing, etc.); a guarantee for investors to use income at their full discretion; 
guaranteed protection of investors' rights in case  of nationalization and requisition; and investment 
dispute settlement regulations, including the possibility of international arbitration provided by this Law.  Agreements on promotion and mutual protection of investments were concluded with certain 
countries in order to guarantee investment protec tion.  These Agreements provided guarantees of 
investors' rights, including the recovery of investments when faced with political (regulatory) risks, 
nationalization and expropriation; the prevention of discrimination; and the regulation of disputes 
including appeal to international arbitration courts. 
67. In response to a request by a Member for more information on nationalization, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that nationalization procedures were stipulated in the Civil Code 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 269-XII of  27 December 1994 and Law No. 413-IV "On State 
Property" of 1 March 2011.  In accordance with Article 54 of the Law "On State Property", nationalization was carried out in the public interest, for national security purposes, in compliance 
with the established legal procedures and performed without discrimination.  Nationalization was 
subject to preliminary and equivalent compensation  by the Republic of Kazakhstan of the market 
value of the nationalized property and other losse s.  Reimbursement of the value of the property 
subject to nationalization and other relevant losses was carried out in full prior to transfer of 
ownership rights to the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
68. Asked to clarify if legislation on evaluation activities was developed and what effect it had 
on reimbursements, the representative of Kazakhst an said that evaluation of property, purchased 
or alienated by the State in case of nationalization or requisition, was performed by a valuator in 
accordance with Law No. 109-II "On Evaluation Ac tivity in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
30 November 2000.  The market value of the property  subject to nationalization or requisition was 
established without regard to the change of value as a result of announcement of the forthcoming 
nationalization or requisition.  Upon the requ est of the owner of the property subject to 
nationalization, a re-valuation of the value of the property could be conducted on the date of 
reimbursement.    
- Investment preferences 
69. The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the Law "On Investments" 
provided that the State's investment support was directed towards the creation of favourable WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 24 - 
 
  conditions for investors investing in new technologies, the expansion and renovation of existing 
production facilities, training and protection of the environment.  The State support of investments 
involved granting of investment preferences for a list of "priority" investment activities, which were 
available to all juridical persons of Kazakhstan provided they met the objective criteria.  As the 
Law "On Investments" did not set minimum capital requirements for foreign investment, its scope 
of application, including investment preferences, also covered small and medium-sized enterprises.  
Investment incentives were granted to the investment activity listed in the list of priority activities 
(approved by Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 and amended by Government 
Resolution No. 809 of 6 August 2010) or the list of strategic investment projects.  She further 
explained that the list of strategic investment  projects previously adopted by Government 
Resolution No. 1293 of 1 September 2009 had become void and that a new list of strategic investment projects would be developed by her Government.   
70. Previously, investment tax preferences had been  in the form of full exemptions from the 
payment of property tax, land tax and corporate income tax and had been enforced from the date 
the investor started to operate the facility.  However, as of 1 January 2009, these investment tax 
preferences had been eliminated from the Law.  Th erefore, they had no longer been granted since 
1 January 2009.  In the meantime, a transitional arrangement had been introduced for investment 
contracts concluded before 1 January 2009.  Thus, according to Article 23 of the 
Law "On Investments", tax preferences granted under an investment contract concluded with the 
authorised body on investments before 1 January  2009 would be effective until the expiration of 
the term specified in the contract.  There were approximately 100 investment contracts granting 
tax preferences concluded prior to 1 January 2009, 58 of which were still being in the process of 
implementation.  None of the investment contracts that had been concluded prior to 
1 January 2009 contained local content requirement.  
71. The fundamental criterion for granting all types of investment preferences was that an 
investment activity should be listed in the list of priority activities.  The following types of 
investment preferences could be granted within the investment contract: 
- customs duty exemptions;  
- in-kind state grants;  - preferences on land tax and property tax for juridical persons implementing strategic 
investment projects; and, 
- industrial preferences for juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects in 
socially and economically disadvantaged regions. 
72. Customs duty exemptions and in-kind state grants were granted, provided that the 
investment activity was listed in the list of priority activities approved by Government Resolution 
No. 436 of 8 May 2003.  Customs duty exemptio ns were granted for a period not exceeding 
five years from the date of conclusion of the investment contract.  In-kind state grants were 
granted for the implementation period of an invest ment project from the date of conclusion of the 
investment contract.  For land tax preferences, pr operty tax preferences and industrial preferences 
implementing strategic projects, an additional crit erion was established, i.e., an investment project WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 25 - 
 
  had to be included into the list of strategic investment projects.  If the project was not listed in the 
list of strategic investments projects, a juridical person could not apply for such preferences.   
73. On 20 February 2012, the concept of strategic in vestment projects, i.e., projects that had 
strategic impact upon the economic development of Kazakhstan, had been re-introduced into the 
Law "On Investments".  Juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects could benefit 
from the new preferences on land and property tax and industrial preferences.  The procedures for 
granting preferences on land tax and property tax were stipulated in the Tax Code of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV of 10 December 2008.  Pr eferences on land tax and property tax could be 
granted for a period not exceeding seven years from the date of conclusion of the investment 
contract.  Industrial preferences were granted to juridical persons implementing investment 
strategic projects in socially and economically di sadvantaged regions in the form of compensation 
or payments for such expenditures as gas, electricity, purchase of land, buildings and facilities.  
The list of the regions that were socially an d economically disadvantaged was approved by 
Government Resolution No. 601 of 10 May 2012.  The procedure for granting industrial 
preferences was approved by Government Resolu tion No. 61 of 30 January 2013.  Industrial 
preferences could be granted for a period not exceeding seven years from the date of launching 
the investment strategic project.  To date, ther e had been no industrial preferences, land and 
property tax preferences granted. 
74. The lists of priority activities and strategic investment projects were intended to be revised 
regularly.  The list of priority activities approv ed by Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 
had been amended in 2009 by Government Resolution No. 925, and again in 2010 by Government 
Resolution No. 809.  Changes had been made with regard to types of activities, but the number of 
activities (93) had not been changed.  The list of  priority activities was attached to the Working 
Party Report (Annex 2).  The list of priority ac tivities was amended by Government Resolution 
No. 1416 of 8 November 2012.  The updated list of pr iority activities was attached to the Working 
Party Report (Annex 2).   
75. According to Article 19 of the Law "On Investments", an applicant for investment 
preferences was required to submit documents to the authorised body in charge of investments 
determined by the Government to prove the juridical person's financial, technical and 
organizational capability to implement the investment project or the strategic investment project. 
The authorised body was responsible for concluding contracts on granting investment preferences based on the submitted information and for monitoring of their implementation.  It also took 
decisions on granting investment preferences an d the possible extensions of their terms.  
Currently, the Investments Committee under the Ministry of Investments and Development was 
the authorised body in charge of investments.   
76. In order to bring into compliance with the Decision of the CU Commission No. 130 
"On Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union between the Republic of Belarus, 
the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian  Federation" of 27 November 2009, the Law 
"On Investments" had been amended on 20 February 2012.  In accordance with those WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 26 - 
 
  amendments, customs duty exemptions were  granted for technological equipment, its 
components and spare parts, raw materials and inputs imported for implementation of an 
investment project or a strategic investment project within the investment contracts concluded 
with the authorised body.  In-kind grants could be  granted by the Government to investors in the 
form of land plots, buildings, machinery, equipment, computer machines, measuring and 
regulating units, transportation vehicles (except for automobiles), production and household 
equipment.  The authorised body, based on dome stic legislation and with the approval of the 
relevant State agencies, also could confer in-kin d State grants for either ownership or temporary 
use.   
77. She further explained that procedures and conditions for simpler and broader application 
of investment tax preferences were now established by the Tax Code.  The Tax Code provided tax preferences in the form of deductions on corporat e income tax.  Application of the tax preferences 
did not require the juridical person to conclude an investment contract with the competent 
authority on investments in order to benefit from them. In accordance with the Tax Code, 
application of these investment tax preferences was not conditioned to local content requirements. 
These tax preferences provided for the possibility of judicial persons to deduct from the taxable 
income the value of buildings and facilities, machinery and equipment used in production, as well 
as related costs for reconstruction and modernizat ion.  The duration of tax preferences depended 
on the method of deduction applied by the juri dical person.  Deductions could be carried out 
according to one of two methods:  (i) deduction after putting a facility into operation; or (ii) deduction prior to putting a facility into oper ation.  According to the method of deduction after 
putting a facility into operation, the original costs (to be paid for the purchase, construction, 
assembling and installation of buildings, facilities , machinery and equipment) could be deducted in 
equal amounts during the first three-year tax period, or on a lump-sum basis.  According to the 
second method - i.e. deduction prior to putting a facility into operation - the costs (to be paid for 
the purchase, construction, assembling and installation as well as reconstruction and 
modernization of buildings, facilities, machinery and equipment before putting them into 
operation) could be deducted in the tax period during which actual costs were incurred.  These tax 
preferences were applicable to industrial buil dings and constructions, machinery and equipment 
which were put into operation for the first time and were used for at least three years.  
78. Investment preferences in the automobile sector had been granted under the free 
warehouse regime, which included local conten t requirements.  In addition, preferences 
conditioned upon the use of local materials were described in the section "Free Zones, Special 
Economic Areas" of this Report.  The cust oms duty exemptions granted under the Law 
"On Investments" described above were distinct structurally and legally from the exemptions 
resulting from local content requirements in the free warehouse regime and the local content 
requirements in Kazakhstan's automotive investment programme described in the TRIMs section of 
this Report.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 27 - 
 
  79. The representative of Kazakhstan added that according to Article 3 of the 
Law "On Investments", foreign investment activities could be limited or banned in certain areas due to national security considerations.  Pursuant to Article 5 of Law No. 451-1 "On the Mass 
Media" of 23 July 1999, foreign physical and juri dical persons were not allowed to directly or 
i n d i r e c t l y  o w n ,  u s e ,  o r  m a n a g e  m o r e  t h a n  2 0 %  o f  t h e  c a p i t a l  o f  a  m a s s  m e d i a  e n t e r p r i s e  i n  
Kazakhstan.  Pursuant to Article 5 of Law No. 85-II "On Guarding Activities" of 19 October 2000, 
foreign juridical persons, domestic juridical persons with foreign participation, as well as foreign 
and stateless individuals, could not engage in secu rity and safety (guarding) activities.  She added 
that, pursuant to Law No. 233 "On National Security" of 26 June 1998, in the field of 
telecommunications, total foreign equity was limi ted to 49% of the charter capital of juridical 
persons supplying services as operators of long distance and/or international communications owning terrestrial communication lines (cable, including optical fibre, and radio relay).  
80. According to the Law "On Use of Air Space and Activities of Aviation", foreign participation 
in the authorised capital of air companies, performing regular air transportation was limited 
to 49%.  She also noted that, pursuant to Article 36 of Law No. 136-I "On Pensions in the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 20 June 1997, the total charter (registered) capital of pension funds with foreign 
capital participation could not exceed 25% of the aggregate charter capital of all pension funds in 
Kazakhstan.  For investment management companie s managing pension assets, this figure was set 
at 50%.  In addition, at least one third of the Board of Directors of such pension funds or 
investment management companies had to be made up of Kazakhstani nationals.  However, she noted that the provisions of Law No. 107-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Licensing and Consolidated Supervision" of 
23 December 2005 and Law No. 128-III "On Amendments and Addenda to the Legislative Acts of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan on Insurance" of 20 February 2006 had eliminated similar restrictions 
on foreign participation affecting banks and insurance/reinsurance companies.  She added that 
Law No. 204 "On Amendments to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Architectural, 
Town-building and Construction Activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan'" had eliminated the 49% 
foreign equity cap in architectural, urban development and construction services joint ventures.   
81. She noted that pursuant to Article 23 of the Land Code No. 442-II of 20 June 2003, private 
ownership of land plots located in the border zone and boundary territories of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan by foreigners and foreign juridical entities was prohibited.  Also foreign citizens and foreign legal entities could not privately own lands used for farming/agricultural production or 
forest planning purposes.  Foreigners might be granted the right of temporary land use for 
farming/agricultural production purposes for a period of up to 10 years.  Lease-holding of land 
plots for agricultural purposes adjacent to the State border of Kazakhstan was also restricted for 
foreigners.   
82. A Member sought clarification on the definitions of border zone and borderland.  
The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with paragraph 29 of Article 2 of 
Law No. 70-V "On the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 January 2013, the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 28 - 
 
  borderland was a part of the territory directly adjacent to the State border on the land plot.  In the 
areas, where the State border passes through border rivers, lakes and other waters, the borderland was defined as a part of the territory directly adjacent to the coast of these waters as 
well as territories located in the islands, where the State Border regime was established.  
In accordance with paragraph 28 Article 2 of Law "On the State Border of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan", a border zone was a part of the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan adjacent to 
the borderland within the territory of administrative districts. 
83. In response to the question of a Member concerning the minimum distance from the 
border that was prohibited for lease or purchase by foreigners, the representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that according to the Government Resolu tion of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 365 "On 
Establishment of the Limits of Borderland, Quar antine Zone and Border Zone" of 16 April 2014, 
such distance was established within the territory of 27 kilometers and/or within administrative 
territories (districts) adjacent to the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan, to the 
Kazakhstan's banks of the border rivers, lakes and other basins; and on the coast of the Caspian 
Sea - 25 km adjacent to the shoreline of the Caspian Sea. 
84. In response to questions on the existence of any restrictions or conditions, which did not 
apply to domestic juridical persons, but were applicable to foreign-owned juridical persons of 
Kazakhstan investing in land or leasing subsurface rights, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that all restrictions applied equally to domestically-owned and foreign-owned juridical persons of 
Kazakhstan.  She added that Article 12 of Law No. 291-I "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010, had been amended in line with the provisions of Law No. 233 "On National Security" 
of 26 June 1998, which stipulated that economic security extended to the preservation and 
increase of the energy resources of Kazakh stan.  According to these amendments, the 
Government of Kazakhstan had the priority in purchasing the rights to subsurface utilisation, when 
sold by their current holder.   
85. A Member asked the representative of Kazakhst an to clarify whether any financial actions 
affecting a change in ownership of an enterprise which owned the rights to subsurface utilisation, 
such as the sale of private equity in the enterprise, would also trigger the application of 
Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use".  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in 
accordance with Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", if subsurface user intended to alienate 
the subsurface use right (a part thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use rights
2, the 
State had a priority right to purchase the subsurfa ce use right (a part thereof) and/or an object 
related to subsurface use rights.  Subsurface user  that intended to alienate the subsurface use 
                                               
2 Items related to subsurface use rights means participating interests (shareholdings) in a legal entity 
holding the subsurface use right, as well as in a legal entity which may directly and/or indirectly determine, and/or influence on, decisions adopted by such subsurface user if the principal activity of that legal entity is 
related to subsurface use in the Republic of Kazakhstan.   Items related to subsurfa ce use rights also include 
securities evidencing the title to shares or securities convertible into shares of a legal entity holding a subsurface use right as well as a legal entity who may dire ctly and/or indirectly dete rmine, and/or influence on, 
the decisions adopted by such a subsurface user if the principal activity of such legal entity is related to subsurface use in the Re public of Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 29 - 
 
  right (a part thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use rights had to submit application to 
the competent authority.  The decision on acquis ition of alienable subsurface use right (a part 
thereof) and/or an object related to subsurface use right was taken by the competent authority on 
behalf of the Government of Kazakhstan.  Therefore, any financial actions resulting in change of 
ownership of an enterprise which owned the rights to subsurface utilisation, such as the sale of 
private equity in the enterprise, would bring into  effect the provision of Law "On Subsurface and 
Subsurface Use", giving the Government of Kazakhstan the priority right to subsurface utilisation, 
when sold by the current holder.  
86. A Member expressed concerns regarding the effect that the amendments to the 
Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" could have on the investment climate in Kazakhstan.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 291-I "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 24 June 2010, would not negatively affect the investment climate in 
Kazakhstan, as it did not discriminate between foreign and domestic investors.  The Law provided 
only for transparency and compliance with the terms of subsurface use contracts by subsurface 
users in order to ensure stable economic growth.  As of November 2011, 142 companies operated 
in the subsurface sector, among which 86 companies had foreign participation.   
87. In response to questions from some Members, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that Kazakhstan would provide foreign invested juridical persons of Kazakhstan, producing crude 
oil and gas in accordance with the national legislation of Kazakhstan, non-discriminatory access to 
pipelines which were partly or fully owned and re gulated by the Government in accordance with 
the national legislation
3 within the available remaining capacities of such pipelines, based on 
existing rights of access.  The access would be allocated in a fair and equitable manner, and 
proportional to the production capacity of compan ies, producing crude oil and gas in Kazakhstan.  
When applying measures relating to such pipeline transportation, including access to pipelines for 
foreign invested juridical persons of Kazakhstan producing crude oil and gas in Kazakhstan, the 
Government of Kazakhstan would ensure that the following principles were respected:  (i) fully 
transparent legal and regulatory measures on access and pipeline transportation tariffs; 
(ii) non-discrimination with respect to the origin of crude oil and gas production within the territory 
of Kazakhstan and the destination; and (iii) application of non-discriminatory transportation tariffs 
with respect to foreign and domestic investors.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
88. The representative of Kazakhstan added that, according to Article 193-1 of the Civil Code, 
the sale/purchase of shares and any alienation of objects of strategic importance were subject to 
approval and authorisation by the Government.  The sectors of strategic importance were defined 
in Article 193-1 of the Civil Code.  The list of objects of strategic importance was approved by 
Resolution of the Government. 
                                               
3 This applies only to pipelines regulated as natural monopolies within the framework of the Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan "O n Natural Monopolies". WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 30 - 
 
  89. A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that the list of objects of strategic importance was 
currently approved and whether it was pub licly available and regularly updated.  
The representative of Kazakhstan responded that the list of strategic objects transferred into the 
authorised capital of and (or) owned by national holdings and (or) national companies or their 
affiliates, as well as other legal entities with State participation, and strategic objects owned by 
legal entities non-affiliated to the State, as well as by individuals was approved by the Resolution 
of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan  No. 651 of 30 June 2008.  The list was regularly 
updated (as last amended on 21 July 2011) and public ly available on the official websites of the 
Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning of the Republic of Kazakhstan (www.minplan.kz) and the 
Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan (www.minjust.kz) in both Kazakh and Russian. 
- State Ownership, State-Tradin g Entities and Privatization  
(a) Privatization  
90. The representative of Kazakhstan said that privatization-related issues were regulated by 
Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 (hereinafter – Law No. 413-IV), which had replaced Law No. 2721 "On Privatization" of 23 Dece mber 1995, the Civil Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (General Part) of 27 December 1994, Law No. 415-II "On the Joint Stock Companies" 
of 13 May 2003, Law No. 220-I "On the Limited Liability and Additional Liability Partnerships" of 
22 April 1998, and Law No. 461-II "On the Securities Market" of 2 July 2003.  
91. State property consisted of both Republican and communal property.  Republican property 
included the republican budget, the National Fu nd of the Republic of Kazakhstan, property 
allocated to republican State enterprises and republican State-run institutions, property of which 
was in republican ownership, and other property  of the Republic of Kazakhstan, except for 
property at the communal level, i.e., the territorial administrative level.  Communal property 
included local budget, property allocated to communal State enterprises and communal State-run 
institutions, property of which was in the communal ownership and other property of the administrative territorial units. 
92. The representative of Kazakhstan said that pursuant to Law No. 413-IV, State property 
could be alienated in the following forms:  (i) privatization via auction, tender, two-staged bid, on 
the stock exchange, or by sales of derivatives; (ii) privatization via direct sales; or (iii) other forms 
of alienation without conducting a tender, for instance, transfer of State property as contribution to 
the charter capital of limited liability partnerships (hereinafter - LLPs) or purchase of shares of 
joint-stock companies (hereinafter – JSCs).  Privatization was the sale of State property to natural 
persons and non-State juridical persons conducted in accordance with the special procedures 
established by Law No. 413-IV.  She further explained that State property was privatized upon decision of the authorized body on State proper ty or a local executive body – in the case of 
municipal property, except for:  (i) natural mono polies or enterprises with dominant position on 
the respective market, which were privatized based on the decision of the Government; and 
(ii) transfer of State property as a contribution to the charter capital of LLPs or purchase of shares 
of JSCs – which were privatized based on the deci sion of the Government or a local executive body WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 31 - 
 
  – in case of municipal property.  The detailed de scription of the rules and procedures governing 
the privatization process was available to the public from the State Property and Privatization Committee at the website:  www.gosreestr.kz.  
93. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the rules for privatization and restrictions on 
privatization outlined in Law No. 413-IV did not apply to national companies and firms (JSCs/LLPs) 
held by national managing holdings or national holdings i.e. to subsidiaries of national managing 
holdings or national holdings.  Alienation of the property of national companies or firms 
(JSCs/LLPs) held by national managing holdings or national holdings was performed on the basis of 
the regulations outlined for JSCs/LLPs in the Laws "On Joint Stock Companies", "On Limited 
Liability and Additional Liability Partnerships", "On the Securities Market" and the Civil Code.  
In addition, Law No. 413-IV stipulated specific provis ions for strategic objects.  Disposal of shares 
of national companies, transferred as a contributi on to the charter capital of national managing 
holdings and national holdings, that were strategi c objects, was permitted only by the decision of 
the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
94. Concerning the results of privatization, th e representative of Kazakhstan informed 
Members that between 1991 and 2005, Kazakhstan had held six two-year privatization 
programmes.  Three of the programmes had focused on large scale privatization.  The last two 
programmes had been developed within the fram ework of the State Property Management and 
Privatization Concept.  During the period from 1991-2012, a total of 45,631 entities, or 
approximately 85% of State property, had been privat ized (Annex 3(A) of this Report).  Data on 
State property privatization in various sectors of the economy for 2000-2012 were provided in 
Annex 3(B) of this Report.  Data on State enterp rises and enterprises with State participation were 
provided in Annexes 3(C), (D) and (E) of this Report.  As a result of the privatization process by 
1 January 2013, the total number of existing State enterprises had been 6,827.  
By 1 January 2013, among the 364 JSCs with State participation, the State owned 100% of shares 
in 236 JSCs; from 50 to 100% of the shares in 67 JSCs; 25 to 50% of shares in 22 JSCs; and less 
than 25% of shares in 39 JSCs.  
95. Asked about operations of State-owned and State- controlled enterprises, in the agricultural 
sector and the existence of plans for their privatization, the representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that agricultural production was predominantly privately-owned.  Major commercial activities, 
including production, distribution, and food catering were no longer under State ownership or control.  State intervention in the welfare of the agricultural sector was conducted through the 
National Company "Food Contract Corporation", the JSCs "KazAgroFinance" and "KazAgroProduct", 
as outlined in sub-section (b) below.   
96. With respect to restrictions in the privatizat ion process, the representative of Kazakhstan 
informed Members that paragraph 3 of Article 94 of Law No. 413-IV determined the category of 
State property that could not be alienated or privat ized.  However, this category of property could 
be transferred as a contribution to the charter ca pital of a national managing holding, a national 
holding or a national company, a limited liability partnership, or a joint-stock company. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 32 - 
 
  97. State property not subject to privatization,  was approved by Decree of the President 
No. 422 "On the List of State Property Objects, Not Subject to Privatization" of 28 July 2000.  
The list of State property objects that could not be privatized included land (except for land in 
private ownership on grounds stipulated by the legislation of Kazakhstan), subsurface and water 
resources, flora and fauna; natural environmental zones under special protection; military 
organizations and property essential for national security; main-line railroads and highways, as 
well as accompanying engineering structures, as part of the State international routes network or 
designed for defence purposes; navigable waterways, as well as lighthouses, navigation devices 
and seamarks that ensured safety and regulated navigation; mainline oil and gas pipelines, and 
interregional electricity networks of 220, 500k W and 1,150kW voltage; water reservoirs with 
hydraulic facilities, water control pivots, dams and water barrages; first-aid medical organizations operating in rural areas, specialised medical centres (maternity welfare, radiological medicine, 
oncology, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and STD centres, blood banks, and mental asylums), 
organizations and centres acting as the sole provider of medical services in a given area; social 
protection services, children's homes, orphanages, nursing homes, hospitals and health resorts for 
the disabled, war veterans, children, and the elderly; secondary schools; and historic and cultural 
sites protected by the State.  
98. Asked about "strategic entities", the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
Kazakhstan's legislation provided a definition of the term "strategic object", which according to 
Article 193-1 of the Civil Code, was a property of social and economic importance for the sustainable development of Kazakhstan's society, the ownership, use or disposal of which would 
affect the national security interests of Kazakh stan.  Strategic objects consisted of main-line 
railroad networks; main-line oil pipelines; main-line gas pipelines; national electric network; 
main-line communication lines; national postal network; international airports; international sea 
ports; air navigation devices of the air traffic control system; devices and navigation signs 
regulating and ensuring the safety of ships; entities using nuclear energy; space industry entities; 
water facilities; public roads; shares (common stocks, ordinary shares) in juridical persons, which 
owned strategic objects; shares (common stocks, ordinary shares) owned by physical and juridical 
persons, which could directly or indirectly determ ine decisions or influence decisions of juridical 
persons which owned strategic objects.  Strategic objects could be either in State or private 
ownership.  Strategic objects could be encumbered by third party rights or disposed/sold only on 
the basis of the decision of the Government.  The Government of Kazakhstan had the priority right 
to purchase a strategic object at the market price, in case the owner intended to sell such an 
object.  Strategic objects were enumerated in Resolution of the Government No. 651 of 
30 June 2008.   
99. Concerning the participation of foreign persons in the privatization process, she said that in 
accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 188 of Law No. 413-IV, restrictions applied with respect to 
the sale of strategic objects to foreigners and stateless persons, juridical persons with non-resident 
participation and their affiliated persons.  Such restrictions applied in a limited number of sectors 
of Kazakhstan's economy and were described in the section "Investment Regime".  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 33 - 
 
  100.  In reply to questions on main pipelines, the re presentative of Kazakhstan said that the Law 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 20-V "On Main Pipeline" of 22 June 2012 (hereinafter – the Law) 
was aimed at ensuring effective, secure and safe operation of main pipelines.  The Law also 
regulated issues related to the ownership of main pipelines as well as the procedure for 
engineering, construction, operation, and connection of new pipelines to existing pipelines, 
maintenance control and liquidation of the pipelines.  According to Article 12 of the Law, main 
pipeline was an indivisible property and could be in public or private ownership.  Main pipeline 
could not be in ownership of physical or juridical persons registered in accordance with the laws of 
a foreign country.  Main pipeline, shares of juri dical persons, which owned the main pipeline as 
well as shares of physical or juridical persons which could directly or indirectly determine decisions 
or could influence the decisions of juridical persons which owned the main pipeline, were considered as "strategic objects" as described in Paragraph [ 98].  She also noted that pursuant to 
Article 16 of the Law, the Government had a priority right to participate in an amount not less than 
51% ownership in construction projects of main pipelines.  National operator operated the main 
pipelines on behalf of the Government.  National operator was a juridical person and its controlling 
shares were owned by the Government or national managing holding or national company.  In 
case the Government forewent its priority right, the person who planned to construct a main 
pipeline could offer participation in the project to other persons or performed the project on its 
own.  However, the conditions for participation in construction of a pipeline offered to other 
persons could not be more favorable than those offered to the Government.  The Government could take a decision to participate in the cons truction project with the share less than 51%.  
However, the priority right of the Government di d not extend to cases of expansion of existing 
main pipelines. According to Article 4 of the Law "On Natural Monopolies", main pipelines were 
natural monopolies. 
101.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the readiness of Kazakhstan to ensure the 
transparency of its privatization process.  Kazakhstan would provide annual reports to 
WTO Members (along the lines of the information provided to the Working Party) on developments 
in its privatization process for as long as the process continued.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment.   
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Ente rprises, Enterprises with Special and 
Exclusive Privileges 
102.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that State property in Kazakhstan included the 
property of State enterprises and State-owned shares  (right of participation) in JSCs and LLPs with 
State participation.  JSCs with majority (i.e. 50% or more) of State participation included national managing holdings; national holdings; and national companies that did not belong to national 
managing holdings or national holdings. State enterprises were regulated by the Civil Code, 
Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 and Law No. 527-IV "On National Security" of 
6 January 2012.  Joint-stock companies or limited liabilities partnerships with 50% or more of 
State participation were governed by the Law "On Joint Stock Companies" of 13 May 2003, the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 34 - 
 
  Law "On Limited and Additional Liability Partne rships" of 22 April 1998, the Law No. 413-IV, the 
Law "On the Securities Market" of 2 July 2003 and th e Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
103.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that State enterprises were considered as 
State-owned, while JSCs/LLPs with 50% or more of State participation were considered as 
State-controlled enterprises.  State enterprises were defined by Law No. 413-IV as enterprises 
established by the Government or local executiv e bodies to render State services with the 
objective to address the social and economic need s of the society and the State.  The State was 
responsible for the liabilities of State enterprises4 and had a right to dispose their property.  
The property assigned to State enterprises entirely belonged to the State, which was indivisible, 
e.g. could not be distributed among employees of State enterprises or alienated by them.  
State enterprises were prohibited to conclude transactions not related to the subject or purpose of their activity, assigned by the Government or local executive bodies.   
104.  Annex 22 of this Report contains the list of spheres where State enterprises could be 
established.  When State enterprises were engaged in commercial activity, the sales of produced 
goods and services were performed independently, except for transactions aimed at disposing the 
property, where the approval of the competent auth ority was required by law.   This requirement 
resulted from the need to preserve the property of the State and constituted the difference 
between State enterprises and other types of juridical persons with State participation.   
105.  In reply to question as to whether Kazakhstan  agreed that these firms would be considered 
as "State-owned" for the purposes of bein g covered by the commitment in paragraph [ 142], the 
representative of Kazakhstan clarified that property of State (owned) enterprises was fully owned 
and operated by the Government and their activities  were under strict control of the Government.  
State-owned enterprises were established in the ju ridical form of a State enterprise which was a 
separate legal entity from JSCs and LLPs with State participation.  State enterprises could not 
belong to a national managing holding or a national holding.  
106.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that th e legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
did not provide for the possibility for the Govern ment to exercise special control or special 
management of the activity of JSCs and LLPs with State participation, whose shares in full or in 
part were owned by the State.  In accordance wi th Kazakhstan's legislation, the JSCs and LLPs 
with State participation were not State enterprises due to the following reasons: 
(i) the property of JSCs and LLPs did not belong  to the State, hence, the Government did not 
have a right to dispose their property;  
(ii) the degree of control over operations of the JSCs and LLPs was limited to competence of 
the Government to act as a shareholder or participant; and, 
(iii) shareholders of the JSC were not responsible for liabilities of the company and borne the 
risks of losses related to the activities of th e company to the extent of the value of the 
shares owned; and  
                                               
4 In cases of bankruptcy resulted from actions of the founder, authoris ed State body, or local executive 
body, and insufficiency of financial re sources in cases of liquidation.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 35 - 
 
  (iv) these companies were subject to the rules of corporate governance and the general rules 
of Law No. 415-II "On Joint Stock Companies" of 13 May 2003 or Law No. 220-I "On Limited Liability and Additional Liability Partnerships" of 22 April 1998.  For example, Board of Directors of joint stock companies in cluded independent directors.  Property of 
such companies was managed by the management board.  
Kazakhstan used the term "State-controlled enterprises" with respect to joint-stock 
companies or limited liabilities partnerships with 50% or more of State participation. 
107.  The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that according to Article 171 of Law 
No. 413-IV, depending on the proportion of State's shares/right of participation, the JSCs and LLPs 
with State participation were divided into two categories:  (i) State-controlled JSCs and LLPs, in 
the charter capital of which the State owned controlling portfolio of shares (right of participation), 
i.e. more than 50% of the voting shares (right of participation); and, (ii) JSCs and LLPs with non-
dominant share of participation of the State.  
108.  The representative of Kazakhstan further added that according to Law No. 413-IV, 
State-controlled JSCs could be established in the following forms:  (i) national managing holding; (ii) national holding; (iii) national company; and, (iv) JSCs under the government agencies.  
109.  A national managing holding was a JSC, the founder and sole shareholder of which was the 
Government.  National managing holdings were established for effective management of shares 
(rights of participation in charter capital) of national development institutions, national companies 
and other juridical persons.  There were three national managing holdings in Kazakhstan:  the 
National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", the National Managing Holding "KazAgro" and the 
National Managing Holding "Bayterek".  
110.  A national holding was a joint stock company, the founder and sole shareholder of which 
was the Government, established for effective management of shares of national companies and 
other JSCs, and rights of participation in the charter capital of LLPs.  There were two national 
holdings in Kazakhstan:  the National Info-Communication Holding "Zerde", the National Scientific-Technological Holding "Parasat"
5. 
111.  A national company was a JSC, established by the decision of the Government or local 
executive bodies, controlling portfolio of shares of which belonged to the State, a national 
managing holding, or a national holding, and which operated in spheres, that formed the core of 
the national economy, or established for prom oting development of the economy of regions 
(socio-entrepreneurial corporations).  The national companies, controlling shares (50% and more) 
of which belonged to national managing holdings and national holdings, were not considered to be 
State-controlled JSCs as defined in Kazakhstan's law.  The national companies, controlling shares 
of which did not belong to national managing holdings or national holdings, but managed by the government agencies, were considered as State-controlled.  
                                               
5 The "National Medical Holding" had been removed from the list of national holdings by Government 
Resolution No. 336 of 11 April 2013, and had been tran sferred to the autonomous educational organization 
"Nazarbayev University".   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 36 - 
 
  112.  With respect to national managing holdings, national holdings, and national companies6 
and other State-controlled JSCs and LLPs, the Go vernment exercised the following competences 
(Article 11 of the Law No. 413-IV):  
- took decisions on the establishment, reorganiza tion, change of the title and liquidation of a 
company; 
- determined the procedure for elaboration,  approval, monitoring and evaluation of 
development strategies and plans; and 
- determined the procedure for reporting on im plementation of development strategies and 
plans.  
113.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan applied local content 
requirements, in the form of preferences for purcha se of locally produced goods, with the objective 
to diversify the national economy.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation, local content 
requirements applied in procurement of goods and services7 by the JSC "National Welfare Fund 
"Samruk-Kazyna"; the JSC "National Managing Holding "KazAgro"8; the JSC "National 
Info-Communication Holding 'Zerde'"; the JSC "National Scientific and Technological Holding 
'Parasat'"; national companies that did not belong to national managing holdings or national 
holdings listed above; and in procurement by other joint stock companies and limited liabilities 
partnerships with 50% or more of State participation and State-owned enterprises (referred to in 
the Government Procurement Section of this Report). 
114.  In reply to a question, the representative of Kazakhstan also clarified that the National 
Managing Holding "KazAgro", the National Info-Communication Holding "Zerde", the National 
Scientific-Technological Holding "Parasat" and State-controlled national companies conducted procurement of goods and services in accordan ce with their own Procurement Rules, which 
stipulated local content requirements by application of conditional price discounts in total of up to 
20% for locally produced goods and services in tender procurements.  These Procurement Rules 
had been  elaborated on the basis of the Model Procurement Rules approved by Government 
Resolution No. 787 of 28 May 2009.  
115.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that , Article 177 of Law No. 413-IV and Article 13 
of the Law "On Joint Stock Companies" provided for the possibility of introduction of a golden 
share by the decision of the sh areholders.  The golden share could be owned by the Government 
or by a private shareholder.  At present, the Go vernment did not own any such share.  She further 
clarified that a "golden share" did not participate in the formation of the charter capital and earned 
no dividends.  The owner of a "golden share" had the veto right with regard to decisions of the 
general shareholder meetings, the Board of Dire ctors and the executive body on the issues, 
determined by the Charter of the company.   The veto right was non-transferrable. 
                                               
6 Except for the national companies which belonged to the national managing holdings "Samruk-Kazyna" 
and "KazAgro", and national hold ings "Zerde" and "Parasat". 
7 The term "services" includes both services and work as those terms are used in Law No. 291-IV. 
8 The JSC "National Managing Holding 'Bayterek'" had been established on 22 May 2013.  The legal 
framework for functioning of the holding, including Proc urement rules, was planned fo r adoption by the end of 
2013. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 37 - 
 
  116.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that the Government's role in the 
decision-making process and activities of State enterprises, as well as JSCs/LLPs with State 
participation was strictly defined by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The Constitution 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan stipulated equal pr otection of both private and State property and 
ensured that the principle of non-discrimination  would be observed regarding the treatment of 
companies and enterprises of different forms of prop erty rights.  The Constitution also provided for 
the regulation and restriction of monopolistic acti vity.  In her view, this was a sound guarantee 
that State enterprises and JSCs/LLPs with State participation would not act in a manner that would 
distort the competitive environment.   
117.  In response, a Member noted that the govern ment owned 100% of the shares of national 
managing holdings and national holdings, and thus exercised control of both the national managing holdings, national holdings and any JSCs in which the national managing holdings and 
national holdings owned 50% or more of the shares .  Thus, each of the forms of JSCs described in 
paragraph [ 108] as well as those national companies where the government or a national 
managing holding, or a national holding owned 50% or more of the shares  were subject to the 
provisions of paragraph [ 142]. 
118.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan presented statistical data on the participation 
of State enterprises in the economy (Annex 3(F) of this Report), which demonstrated that the 
share of State property, including State enterprises in the total Gross Value Added
9 accounted for 
9.6% in 2011.  In particular, the share of State property, including State enterprises in agriculture, forestry and fishery in 2011 accounted for 6.8% of  the Gross Value Added.  The share of services 
produced by State enterprises in 2011 accounted for 14.8% in Gross Value Added (see Annex 3(G) 
of this Report).   
119.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to enumerate all enterprises that were State-owned or 
controlled and all enterprises that enjoyed special privileges, based on an agreed standard, in 
respect to Kazakhstan's energy sector, and to provide detailed descriptions of all such enterprises 
in the energy sector.  This Member also requested Kazakhstan to provide a more detailed 
description of "KazMunaiGaz" and the so-called "natural monopolies" that operated pipelines.  
120.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that there were no enterprises with special 
privileges in the energy sector of Kazakhstan with in the meaning of Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  
For example, the National Company "KazMunaiGaz" accounted for 11% of the total production of 
the oil and gas sector (according to data in 2010) .  "KazMunaiGaz" was engaged in the extraction, 
transportation and processing of oil and natural gas.  The company's main activities included 
exploration and survey work, development of oil, gas and gas condensate deposits; production and 
transportation of oil and natural gas; primary processing of oil and gas, sales of hydrocarbons and 
processed products.  In the oil transportation sector, the JSC "KazTransOil", a subsidiary of 
                                               
9 Gross Value Added - is the difference between output  of goods and services (e.g. sales revenue) and 
intermediary consumption (e.g. cost of goods and servic es used in production).  Gross Value Added does not 
include net taxes, which are included  into the Gross Domestic Product. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 38 - 
 
  "KazMunaiGaz", operated the Uzen – Atyrau (K azakhstan) – Samara (Russia) oil pipeline.  
This part of the activity was regulated by the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies.  
With respect to gas transportation, the principal transporter of natural gas by main-line pipelines 
was "Intergas Central Asia", a subsidiary of "KazMunaiGaz".  It provided domestic transportation, 
international transit, and export transportation services.  Transportation services rendered to 
domestic consumers were regulated by the Agency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies.  
Tariffs for export routes and transit of natural gas by pipelines were not subject to State 
regulation.   
121.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that a number of companies with 50% or 
greater State participation in equity had been included in the portfolio of the National Welfare Fund 
"Samruk-Kazyna", a national managing holding, established in the form of the JSC with 100% 
participation of the State.  The Fund had been established with the objective to improve corporate 
governance in national companies and enhance the competitiveness of the national economy.  
Independent ownership also allowed companies to operate more as commercial entities and 
generate their own profits.  The sole founder an d shareholder of the Fund was the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, which managed the Fund exclusively through fulfilling the 
competences of the shareholder and through represen tation in the Board of Directors.  The Prime 
Minister of Kazakhstan ex officio chaired the Boar d of Directors.  The Fund interacted with its 
companies through exercising functions of the shareh older and its representation in their Boards of 
Directors. 
122.  In reply to the request of a Member for further clarifications on the role of the 
Government, the representative of Kazakhstan stat ed that according to Article 7 of Law No. 550-IV 
"On the National Welfare Fund" of 1 February 2012, exclusive competences of the Government, as 
the sole shareholder of the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", were stipulated as the 
following:  
1) Approval and introduction of amendments  and addenda to the Charter of the Fund; 
2) Approval of the Annual Financial Statement of the Fund; 3) Approval of the Development Strate gy of the Fund and introduction of 
amendments and addenda to the Strategy; 
4) Decision-making on voluntary reorganization and liquidation of the Fund; 5) Decision-making on increase of number of authorised shares of the Fund or 
changing the type of unallocated authorised shares of the Fund; 
6) Determination of the term of office of the Board of Directors of the Fund, election 
of its members and early termination of their office;  
7) Sales of shares of the daughter companie s, determined by the sole shareholder of 
the Fund, and transfer of these shares into trust management; 
8) Decision-making on liquidation, reorganization of daughter companies, determined 
by the sole shareholder of the Fund; 
9) Appointment and early termination of office of the Chairman of the Board; 
10) Distribution of net income for the reporting financial year, payment of dividends on 
ordinary shares and approval of the amount  of dividends per one ordinary share of 
the Fund; 
11) Decision-making on non-payment of dividends on ordinary shares in cases, 
stipulated by the Law "On Joint Stock Companies"; 
12) Approval of the dividend Policy of the Fund; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 39 - 
 
  13) Approval of the decision of the Board of Directors of the Fund, on the price, 
quality, structure of placement of shares of companies within the Fund, offered on 
the stock market for the purposes of implementing a decision of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan;    
14) Decision-making on the purchase and sale s of shares of banks and transfer thereof 
to trust management; 
15) Approval and introduction of amendments  into the Code of Corporate Governance; 
and, 
16) Other issues according to the Law "On the National Welfare Fund" and (or) Charter 
of the Fund.  
123.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  the selection of the Board of Directors was 
performed on the basis of the Law "On Joint Stock Companies" and the Law "On the National 
Welfare Fund".  In accordance with Article 35 of the Law "On Joint Stock Companies", the 
Government, as a single shareholder, had an ex clusive competence to select members of the 
Board of Directors.  Pursuant to Article 8 of th e Law "On the National Welfare Fund", the Board of 
Directors consisted of the Chairperson and members elected by the single shareholder.  The Board 
of Directors was formed from the Cabinet me mbers, CEO, independent directors and other 
persons.  Number of the Directors was defined by the Charter of the Fund provided that the 
number of independent directors was not less than two fifths of the total number of the Board of 
Directors. The criteria and procedure for selecting independent directors were set in Article 1 of the 
Law "On Joint Stock Companies" and Rules for the Election of Independent Directors.  In particular, independent directors could not be: 
- affiliated with the given JSC, and affiliated  with the affiliated persons of the given JSC 
 within the last three years prior to election; - in subordination with an executive of the given JSC or organizations - affiliated persons of 
 the given JSC within the last three years prior to election; 
- a civil servant; - a representative of the shareholder on the m eetings of the bodies of the given JSC within 
 the last three years prior to election; and 
- participate as an auditor in auditing of the given JSC within the last three years  prior to election. 
124.  Strategic decisions of the Fund's companies we re made from the perspective of increasing 
their long-term value and effective management of assets.  The Government did not interfere into the day-to-day activities of the Fund.  The Government was not accountable for liabilities of 
companies under the "Samruk-Kazyna" and was not authorised to dispose their property.  
The companies under the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" were neither "State 
enterprises", nor companies with State participation since their shareholder was the National 
Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", and not the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
125.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that , based on data provided by the Statistics 
Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in 2011,  the "Samruk-Kazyna" accounted for 7.2% of 
Kazakhstan's GDP and 5.3% in 2012.  According to  the Statistics Agency of Kazakhstan, the share 
in GDP of other national managing holding or national holdings and their entities in total 
constituted less than 0.5%.  A Member noted, in contrast, that in October 2013, Fitch Ratings had 
noted Samruk-Kazyna's 100% State ownership and its strategic significance to Kazakhstan's 
economy, and stated that the consolidated assets of Samruk-Kazyna and its 405 subsidiaries were WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 40 - 
 
  equivalent to 50% of the country's GDP.  Fitch added that its investment accounted for 7-10% of 
GDP per year, and that 27% of Kazakhstan's total tax revenues and 6% of its total employment were also accounted for by this national holding company.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan noted that methodologically, consolid ated assets of "Samruk-Kazyna" could not be 
compared to the GDP of Kazakhstan because the GDP represented the total value of final goods 
and services produced within a country during a sp ecified time period.  In 2012, more than half of 
the GDP, i.e. 52.5%, was accounted for services, while production of goods constituted 41.4%.  In 
services sector, "Samruk-Kazyna"'s subsidiaries engaged mainly in transportation and 
communication services.  The share of transporta tion and warehousing services constituted 7.5% 
of GDP, while the share of information and comm unication services constituted 2.6% of GDP.  
Companies providing services in both sectors were operating in a competitive environment along with other private companies.  The share of oil and gas production in GDP was 14.7%.  
In accordance with the data from the Statistics Agency, the share of "Samruk-Kazyna"'s oil and 
gas producing subsidiary "KazMunaiGaz" in GDP in 2012 was 2.24%.  
126.  In reply to the question of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
privatization of national companies, national holdings, or national managing holdings and the 
companies they held was conducted by the means of  alienation of shares of the abovementioned 
companies.  The legal basis for alienation of sh ares of such companies was the Law No. 415-II "On 
the Joint Stock Companies" of 13 May 2013.  Pursuant to paragraph 2.15 Article 53 of the Law, the 
decision on alienation of 10% or more shares of the daughter and affiliated companies of the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" was under the competence of the Board of Directors of 
the Fund.  Pursuant to the Government Resolution No. 280 of 31 March 2014, as amended on 30 
April 2014, "On Approval of Complex Plan of  Privatization for 2014-2016", the Government 
recommended to national holdings, national managing holdings, national companies to approve 
the list of daughter and affiliated companies subject to transfer into competitive environment.  
There were 106 entities of National Welfare Fund  "Samruk-Kazyna" subject to alienation primarily 
by means of bidding and four companies were subject to "Halyk IPO" procedure.  At the moment, 
one of Samruk-Kazyna's companies, KazTransO il, had been listed for partial privatization 
in the form of Halyk (People's) IPO, i.e., offering 10% (minus one share) for private 
purchase in December 2012.  More recently , Samruk-Kazyna announced plans for similar 
a 10% (minus one share) public listing of the Kazakhstan Electr icity Grid Operating 
Company (KEGOC) for November 2014.  Other pa rtial public listings (i.e., under 10% of 
shares) of Samruk Energy, KazAtomProm and KazTemirZholy were contemplated later in 
the decade .  The companies subject to privatization  operated in the spheres of oil and gas, 
transportation, energy, telecommunication, services and education.   
127.  The majority of the Fund's portfolio consisting of key national companies operating in oil 
extraction, telecommunication, mining, railway, electric power transmission and the defence 
industry, included:  "KazMunaiGaz", "Kazakhtel ecom", "Kazakhstan Temir Zholy", "KEGOC" and 
"Kazpost", "Samruk-Energo", National At omic Company "Kazatomprom", "Kazakhstan WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 41 - 
 
  Engineering", "Air Astana", and "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia"10.  Other holdings of the "Samruk-
Kazyna" were represented by companies operating in the financial sector, transportation and the 
chemical industry.  For the most part, the "Samruk-Kazyna" companies were classified as 
"strategic objects" as they operated assets indicated in paragraph [ 98].  Services provided by 
national companies in the spheres classified as natural monopolies were regulated in accordance 
with Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Re gulated Markets" of 9 July 1998 (for more 
detailed information please see section on "Pricing Policies").   
128.  The National Company "Kazakhtelecom" was an operator of fixed-line telephony services, 
which rendered traffic transit services providing connection between operating networks of 
countries bordering Kazakhstan.  The National Company "Kazpost" rendered public postal services, 
including, delivery, distribution and mailing of periodicals, cash transactions in settlements, and 
mailing of registered letters within the geogra phical boundaries of Kazakhstan.  The National 
Company "Kazakhstan Temir Zholy" rendered main railway network services, cargo transportation 
services in domestic and import-export routes, and passenger transportation services.  
The National Company "KEGOC" rendered electric power transmission services via the national 
electricity grid; technical traffic control services; regulation and reservation of electric power; and 
management of electric power production-consumption balance.  
129.  The JSC "Samruk-Energo" operated in the following spheres: production of electric and 
heating energy; transmission and di stribution of electric energy and coal mining; reconstruction, 
extension and construction of energy-related  facilities.  The National Atomic Company 
"KazAtomProm" was engaged in the following activities:  geological exploration; uranium 
extraction; production of nuclear fuel cycle products; construction of reactors, nuclear power 
plants, nonferrous metals industry; and building of constructional materials.  The National 
Company "Kazakhstan Engineering" was a holding company managing enterprises related to 
production of goods and services for national defence and law-enforcement purposes.  The JSC 
"Air Astana" was an airline company, which rendered air transportation services in international 
and local directions.  The LLP "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" was a single distributor of 
pharmaceuticals within the framework of the Go vernment's programme providing guaranteed free 
medical treatment to the population. 
130.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that in 2011 Government Resolution No. 1027 of 
8 September 2011 approved the Programme on sale s of shares of daughter and affiliated 
companies of the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" on the stock market – the "Halyk IPO".  
Subsequently, the Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" approved the programme on the sales of minority 
shares of the JSC "KazTransOil" on the stock market.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to provide 
a description of "KazTransOil" itself, information on percentage of shares authorised for sales and 
on quantity of shares that had been sold, and implications of the sales in terms of management 
control.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the JSC "KazTransOil" was a subsidiary of 
                                               
10 "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" was transferred to th e State ownership by the Government Resolution 
No. 516 of 25 May 2013. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 42 - 
 
  the National Company "KazMunaiGaz", which tran sported crude oil and oil products through the 
main pipelines.  The shares of "KazTransOil" were  offered to citizens of Kazakhstan and pension 
funds of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Citizens of  Kazakhstan, owning the shares, would be able to 
participate in the management of the company by voting in the general shareholder meetings and 
would be entitled to receive dividends paid from  the net income of the company.  Overall, 10% 
minus one share of the authorised common shares of the "KazTransOil" had been placed on the 
stock market and approximately 80% of these shares  had been sold to more than 34,000 citizens 
of Kazakhstan.   
131.  The "Samruk-Kazyna" managed its subsidiaries in accordance with Law No. 415-II 
"On Joint Stock Companies".  Procurement of goods and services by the Fund and organizations, in 
which the Fund directly or indirectly owned 50 % or more of the voting shares (rights of 
participation), was conducted in accordance with the Procurement Rules, approved by the Board of 
Directors of the Fund on 26 May 2012.  In reply to a Member's question as to whether the 
requirement for local content in procurement for the "Samruk-Kazyna" was initiated with the 
May 2012 Procurement Rules, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that initially the local 
content requirements had been introduced by the Procurement Rules approved by the Decision of 
the Board of Directors of 18 November 2009 in accordance with the previous Law "On the National 
Welfare Fund" of 13 February 2009.  The curren tly applied Procurement Rules were approved in 
accordance with the new Law "On the National Welfare Fund" of 1 February 2012.  Local content 
provisions were introduced into the Procurement Rules of the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" in 2009 as part of the Government efforts to overcome negative impact of the 
global financial crisis of 2008-2009 in the economic  growth of the country.  In particular, the local 
content provisions were aimed at stabilization of the social and economic situation in 27 single 
industry towns of Kazakhstan and maintaining jobs in the enterprises, including small and 
medium-sized businesses, which formed the core business activity of these towns.  
The Procurement Rules did not apply to companies, in which the Fund's share ownership (rights of 
participation) was less than 50%.  Tender was the main method applied for the procurement of 
goods and services.  The Rules stipulated criteria for the evaluation of bids and provided for the 
application of conditional price discount in total of up to 20% for locally produced goods and 
services.  
132.  Asked to describe the structure of the local content requirements in procurement contracts 
in terms of scope and duration, the representati ve of Kazakhstan stated that the procurement 
contracts, concluded by "Samruk-Kazyna" and its  companies, had to contain the local content 
provisions, which were indicated by a supplier in his/her tender offer or price quotation.  "Samruk-
Kazyna" and its companies  signed a contract with a supplier, who accepted the lowest 
conditional price, as a result of application of conditional price discounts, provided that the 
technical requirements of tender documentation ha d been met.  Thus, there were several factors 
affecting tender results, such as conformity with  technical requirements, proposed price for goods 
and services, and the share of local content in goods or services. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 43 - 
 
  133.  A Member requested to clarify which firms were engaged in commercial activities and 
distinguish them from those that were conducting business for the Government.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that a ll the "Samruk-Kazyna" subsidiaries were engaged 
in commercial activities, except for the JSC "K azakhstan Engineering".  The JSC "Kazakhstan 
Engineering", along with machinery construction products and engineering services in commercial 
sphere, produced goods for the national defence purposes.  The LLP "Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" 
conducted procurement of pharmaceuticals, medical equipment and materials which were 
distributed to public hospitals and polyclinics for provision of guaranteed free medical treatment to 
the population by the State.  At the same time, it should be noted that pursuant to Government 
Resolution No. 516 of 25 May 2013, 100% portfolio of rights of participation in the LLP 
"Samruk-Kazyna Pharmacia" was transferred to the State ownership from the "Samruk-Kazyna" 
Fund.   
134.  Some Members noted that in practical, if not in legal, terms, many of the enterprises in 
Kazakhstan appeared to enjoy exclusive or spec ial privileges.  These Members of the Working 
Party requested Kazakhstan to submit a draft notification prepared in conformity with the 
provisions of Article XVII of the GATT 1994 and sought a strong commitment from Kazakhstan that 
State-enterprises including JSCs/LLPs with State participation, engaged in commercial activities 
operated in compliance with WTO provisions, including on a commercial basis.  A Member noted 
that Kazakhstan had acknowledged the existence of about 6,000 State-owned enterprises and 
JSCs and LLPs with State participation in their ownership, which included a number of State-controlled enterprises, some of them involved in import-export operations, and enquired 
whether a number of these enterprises, including JSCs and LLPs with State participation, would 
qualify as State-trading enterprises under the criteria set-out in Article XVII of the GATT 1994, 
whether or not "funded by the national budget" or  operating as monopolies.  This Member pointed 
out that the substantive provisions of Arti cle XVII of the GATT 1994 were applicable to 
State-controlled enterprises, such as JSCs and LLPs with State participation in their ownership 
even without special or exclusive privileges that made them eligible for notification, and that the 
obligations of this provision also applied to all purchases and sales "involving either import or 
export".  This Member requested Kazakhstan to submit a revised notification on State-trading 
enterprises. 
135.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that there were only three companies, 
subsidiaries of the National Managing Holding "KazAgro", that were involved in import and export 
operations with the use of budget funding – the National Company "Food Contract Corporation", 
the JSC "KazAgroProduct" (previously known as "Mal Onimderi Korporatsiyasy") and the JSC 
"KazAgroFinance".  However, the representative of Kazakhstan asserted that these enterprises did 
not fall under notification obligations of the Un derstanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994 as 
they did not enjoy either exclusive nor special rights with respect to the importation or exportation 
of goods.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 44 - 
 
  136.  The National Company "Food Contract Corporation" had been established to ensure the 
country's food security by maintaining and renewing the State grain reserve through the State grain resource.  The "Food Contract Corporatio n", as an agent of the Government, had an 
exclusive right to implement the budget programm e on procurement, storage and transportation 
of State grain resources (comprising of State grain reserve and realization resources ), as well 
as the stocks for market interventions.  The Government approved the rules governing purchases 
for State grain resources and annually established the volumes and prices for such purchases.  
The Government had the right to use State resources as food aid to foreign countries through the 
"Food Contract Corporation".  The "Food Contra ct Corporation" conducted its foreign trade 
operations in competition with private traders an d subject to market prices.  The total share of 
procurement of the "Food Contract Corporation" constituted 16.8% of the total volume of grain produced in Kazakhstan.  In response to the question of a Member, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that the local content requirement was stipulated in the Rules on Procurement 
of Goods and Services of the "Food Contract Corpor ation" approved by the Decision of the Board of 
Directors of 24 November 2009.  In particular, paragraph 30 of the Rules provided for conditional 
price discounts of up to 20% for domestically produced goods and services in procurements 
conducted via tender.   
137.  The JSC "KazAgroProduct" had been established in 2001 with the objective to support 
domestic producers of livestock products.  The company was engaged in (i) procurement, storage, 
processing and the sale of livestock, raw materials and livestock products in the domestic market and for export; (ii) importation of agricultural and livestock products for further processing and 
sale; and, (iii) purchase (including importation) of specialised transport, technological equipment 
for processing and storage of agricultural and livestock products for the company's needs or for 
sale.  The company conducted import and export operations alongside private companies in a 
competitive environment and its share was less than 1% of the total volume of meat produced in 
Kazakhstan.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
"KazAgroProduct" conducted its procurement of goods and services in accordance with the 
Procurement Rules approved by the Decision of the Board of Directors of 18 April 2011.  
The Procurement Rules provided for application of a conditional price discount in total of up to 
20% for locally produced goods and services in procurements conducted via tender, which was a 
mandatory method for procurements exceeding 4,000 monthly calculation indices
11.  She further 
added that since 2007 there were no purchases of specialized transport and technological 
equipment for processing and storing of agricultural  and livestock products.  Therefore, there were 
no local content requirements applied for those particular types of purchases. 
138.  The JSC "KazAgroFinance" was established to implement the State policy aimed at creating 
a competitive agricultural sector through rendering financial services and provision of agricultural 
machinery and equipment under financial leasing schemes.  "KazAgroFinance" purchased 
agricultural machinery in the domestic and international markets for subsequent leasing to 
                                               
11 One monthly calculation index (MCI) is equal to 1,731 tenge.  4,000 MCIs are equal to around 
US$46,160. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 45 - 
 
  farmers.  In the sphere of foreign economic acti vity, "KazAgroFinance" was engaged in importation 
of agricultural machinery, equipment, and animals, and had no monopoly or any other exclusive rights or privileges in this sphere.  The Government did not regulate the prices, the volume or the 
types of agricultural machinery or equipment purc hased by the company.  All such decisions were 
made by "KazAgroFinance" in accordance with available financial resources and based on 
applications from agricultural producers with the specification of the type of machinery they 
planned to lease from "KazAgroFinance".  The Gove rnment determined only the interest rates in 
leasing schemes and other financial support programmes of the "KazAgroFinance" funded from the 
State budget, and did not regulate the interest rates for its financing activities funded from other 
sources.  In reply to a question, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that the 
"KazAgroFinance" conducted its procurement of goods and services in accordance with the Procurement Rules approved by the Decision of the Board of Directors of 4 April 2011.  
The Procurement Rules provided for application of a conditional price discount in total of up to 
20% for locally produced goods and services in procurements conducted via tender.  However, 
procurement of agricultural machinery and equipment for subsequent leasing to agricultural 
producers was conducted based on applications from farmers.  Therefore, conditional price 
discounts foreseen for procurements via tender were not applied to the purchases of agricultural 
machinery and equipment for subsequent leasing to agricultural producers.  She added that 
according to the data provided by the Ministry of Investments and Development, in her view, the 
share of local content in the procurement of  "KazAgroProduct" and "KazAgroFinance" was 
insignificant.  For instance, in 2012 "KazAgroProduct" purchased goods for the amount of 
24.5 million tenge, of which local content composed around 2.5 million tenge or 10%.  In 2012, 
"KazAgroFinance" purchased goods for the amount of 48.6 billion tenge, of which local content 
constituted only 2 billion tenge or 4.2%. 
139.  With the objective to facilitate the growth and diversification of the economy, attract 
investments and develop clusters through optimization of the management system of development 
institutions and financial organizations, the National Managing Holding "Bayterek" had been 
established by Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 571 of 22 May 2013.  
The following subsidiaries of the National Welfar e Fund "Samruk-Kazyna" had been transferred to 
the NHM "Bayterek":  the JSC "Development Bank of Kazakhstan", the JSC "Kazyna Capital 
Management", the JSC "Export-Credit Insuranc e Corporation "KazExportGarant", the JSC 
"Investment Fund of Kazakhstan", the JSC "En trepreneurship Development Fund "Damu.  
The portfolio of the NMH "Bayterek" also included a number of JSCs previously supervised by 
government agencies, such as:  the HJSC "Nat ional Agency on Technological Development" 
(previously under the auspices of the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies), the JSC 
"Zhilstroysberbank of Kazakhstan", the JSC "M ortgage Organization "Kazakhstan's Mortgage 
Company", the JSC "Kazakhstan's Fund on Guaran teeing Mortgage Loans" (previously under the 
auspices of the Ministry of Regional Developmen t), the JSC "Distressed Assets Fund" (previously 
under the auspices of the Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning). WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 46 - 
 
  140.  In reply to the question from a Member regarding the establishment of State monopolies in 
the field of importation or exportation of goods, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that currently Kazakhstan did not maintain and was not envisaging establishment of State monopolies 
for importation or exportation of goods, except for exports of sturgeon roe and other sturgeon 
products.  According to Article 11-1 of Law No. 593 "On Protection, Reproduction and Use of 
Fauna" of 9 July 2004, exports of sturgeon roe and ot her sturgeon products, as well as the activity 
on catching of Acipenseridae  fish species and their procurement and processing, was referred to 
the sphere of State monopolies.  In 2011, the Government had established the state 
monopoly, Ural-Atyrau Sturgeon Fishing Plan t, which was going at the moment through 
the reconstruction works.  Kazakhstan was planning to notify the enterprise as provided for in 
the Understanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  
141.  In response to a request from a Member, the re presentative of Kazakhstan stated that the 
local content requirements in the form of 20% conditional price discount were applied in 
procurements of national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies, as well as 
other joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships with 50% or more of State 
participation.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that the entities described in paragraphs [ 109-114 ] above and paragraph [ 726] of the section on 
Government Procurement were the only entities in  Kazakhstan other than those described in the 
TRIMs section of this Report that must comply with the local content provisions when seeking to 
purchase goods, services or works.  Currently the following State-controlled companies existed in Kazakhstan:   
- Three national managing holdings ("Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro", "Bayterek");  
- Two national holdings ("Zerde" and "Parasat");  
- 33 national companies (including 10 under the national managing holdings); and 
- 944 joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships managed by the government 
agencies. 
142.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan had State-owned and 
State-controlled enterprises that operated in the commercial sphere , [including national 
companies, national managing holdings, national holdings and any JSCs in which the 
national managing holdings and national ho ldings owned 50% or more of the shares] .   
She further confirmed that from the date of accessi on of Kazakhstan to the WTO, such enterprises, 
when engaged in commercial activity, would make purchases, which were not intended for 
governmental use, and sales in international trade in a manner consistent with applicable 
provisions of the WTO Agreement.  She confirmed in particular, that such enterprises would make 
such purchases and sales in accordance with commercial considerations, including price, quality, availability, marketability, and transportation, and would afford enterprises of other WTO Members 
adequate opportunity in conformity with customary business practice, to compete for participation 
in such purchases or sales.  She also confirmed that within the scope of the services commitments 
of Kazakhstan, including the limitations, set-out in its Schedule of Specific Commitments on 
Services, the rights and obligations of Kazakhstan under the GATS, and the regulatory measures 
of Kazakhstan covered by the WTO Agreement, including pricing regulations, and without prejudice WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 47 - 
 
  to such commitments, rights, obligations, and measures that are consistent with these 
commitments, rights and obligations, Kazakhstan would ensure that such enterprises would act in accordance with the provisions set-out in this paragraph.  [She further confirmed that these 
commitments were without prejudice to the tr ansition period for investment contracts 
concluded under Law No. 291-IV set out in paragraphs [685 and 686] and to 
Kazakhstan's participation in negotiations  on joining the Agreement on Government 
Procurement or its offer on covere d entities in such negotiations .]  She also confirmed 
that, upon accession, Kazakhstan would notify enterprises falling within the scope of the 
Understanding on Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
- Pricing Policies 
143.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal basis for the policy of regulation of 
natural monopolies within the Eurasian Economic Union was Section XIX "Natural Monopolies" 
(Article 78) and Annex No. 20 "On Common Principles  and Rules of Regulation of the Activity of 
Natural Monopolies" of the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty of 29 May 2014 (hereafter – EAEU 
Treaty).  These provisions replaced the Agreemen t on Common Principles and Rules of Regulation 
of Activities of Natural Monopolies of 9 December 2010, which was terminated when the EAEU 
Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  From 1 January 2015, Section XIX and Annex No. 20 to the EAEU Treaty provided for basic principles and rules of regulation of activities of natural 
monopolies.  The EAEU Treaty aimed at ensuring balance of interests of consumers and natural 
monopolies, effectiveness of functioning an d development of natural monopolies, and 
harmonization of national legislations in this sphere.  In particular, Annex No. 20 provided for 
non-discriminatory access to services rendered by natural monopolies of a member State to 
consumers from the other EAEU member States provided technical capacities were duly available.  
Regulation of tariffs was based on the principle of separate accounting of costs related to services 
provided by natural monopolies.  When regulating tariffs, the following criteria was taken into 
account: (i) recovery of economically justified costs related to regulated activities; (ii) earning of economically justified profits; (iii) promotion of cost effectiveness; and, (iv) formation of tariffs 
taking into account reliability and quality of services rendered by natural monopolies. 
144.  Pursuant to Chapter VII of the Annex No. 19 of  the EAEU Treaty, price regulation could be 
introduced on the goods markets which were not in the state of natural monopoly in exceptional 
cases, which include, inter alia, emergency situations and natural calamities, national security 
interests, and for particular types of socially important products. 
145.  The Eurasian Economic Commission (hereafter the Commission or EEC) upon request of 
another EAEU member State could adopt a decision on necessity of repealing the regulated price.  
The Commission's decision was implemented in accordance with the national legislation of a 
member State.  However, this competence did not extend to the  services sector, natural 
monopolies, state procurement and interventions, and the following goods: (i) natural gas; (ii) 
liquefied gas for household needs; (iii) electric  and heat energy; (iv) vodka, liquor and other WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 48 - 
 
  alcoholic products with strength above 28% (minimum price); (v) ethyl alcohol from food raw 
material (minimum price); (vi) solid and heating fuel; (vii) production of nuclear energy cycle; (viii) kerosene for household needs; (ix) oil products; (x) medicals; and, (xi) tobacco products. 
146.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and 
Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998 (hereinafter  – Law No. 272-I) had established the legal 
framework for State regulation in the sphere of natural monopolies and regulated markets, 
including price setting by natural monopolies and regulated market participants.  The Law aimed at 
protecting the interests of consumers, natural monopolies and regulated markets, as well as at 
balancing consumer interests vis-à-vis  the interests of natural monopolies.  A natural monopoly 
was deemed to exist in a market in which creati on of a competitive environment for the provision 
of a particular type of services (goods, works) was not possible or economically viable, due to the 
technological characteristics of the production process and supply of services (goods, works).  
State regulation was implemented through establishing  (i) tariff rates (prices, fee rates); (ii) tariff 
estimates; (iii) temporary compensatory tariffs; (i v) temporary decreasing coefficients; (v) special 
order for cost formation; (vi) separate calculat ion of revenue, expenditures and used assets for 
each type of regulated activity; and, (vii) coordination of accounting policies.  The coverage of 
Law No. 272-I extended to both foreign and domestic juridical persons (their branches and 
representative offices), individual entrepreneurs, public bodies and natural persons in Kazakhstan.  
The provisions of Law No. 272-I, however, did not extend to individual entrepreneurs and juridical 
persons, engaged in activities classified as natural monopolies related to the construction and operation of facilities used for their own needs.  She added that Order of the Agency on Regulation 
of Natural Monopolies No. 91-OD of 19 March 2005 had approved the "Rules on Increase or 
Decrease of Tariffs (Prices, Rates and Fees) or the Maximum Levels for Rendered Services (Goods, 
Works) Subject to Regulation" (hereinafter – "Rules on Tariffs").  Pursuant to Law No. 272-I and 
the Rules on Tariffs, the maximum level at which tariffs were set, as well as any tariff rate 
changes, had to cover the production cost of serv ices rendered and take into account the profit 
margin required for effective operation.  In addition, many of these controls regulated the price of 
certain goods (e.g., energy) supplied to househol ds and other non-commercial users, and were 
also based on domestic social policy considerations.  The list of services regulated by the State as 
natural monopolies is contained in Annex 4 of this Report.   
147.  A regulated market participant set a ceiling price for its goods (works, services) based on 
production and marketing costs, as well as profit ma rgins.  The ceiling price had to be approved by 
the authorized body as being reasonable, based on the findings of a price expertise.  A regulated 
market participant had the right to decrease and increase the price for produced (sold) goods 
(works, services) within the ceiling price level.   
148.  She added that Resolution No. 1005 of 30 Se ptember 2010 had approved the "Programme 
on the Tariff Policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014", which was aimed at establishing 
an effective and balanced regulation system in the sphere of natural monopolies, which 
encouraged investments in modernization and technological upgrades, quality improvements, and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 49 - 
 
  the enhancement of competitiveness of the infrastructural sectors.  She added that the legislation 
did not prevent foreign and domestic enterprises from competing in sectors dominated by "natural monopolies".  In response to a specific question, she confirmed that "natural monopoly" was a 
legal term.  
149.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that all natural monopolies were subject to a 
uniform set of requirements and applied prices (tariffs) that were approved by the Committee on 
Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition of the Ministry of National 
Economy (hereinafter – Committee).  When considering applications, the Committee conducted a 
financial and, if necessary, technical evaluations of the proposed increases, while taking into 
account the operations of other similar enterprises.   The tariffs approved by the Committee had to 
cover costs required to provide the regulated services and take into account an adequate level of profits necessary to ensure the company's effici ent operation.  Based on the outcome of the 
review, the Committee developed a preliminary deci sion, which was discussed at public hearings 
(consultation process).  The Committee was required to hold public hearings when reviewing 
applications of natural monopolies for approval of tariffs ceiling levels.  Public hearings involved 
members of local executive branches, representatives from Government agencies, consumers 
and their public associations, independent experts, as well as the applicant (natural monopoly).  
Relevant information (e.g. Committee decisions)  was published regularly in the media and was 
available on www.regulator.kz or the magazine "Regulator ".  Asked to provide the list of natural 
monopolies, she referred to the website – www.arem.gov.kz. 
150.  She further noted that the adoption of the "Measures on Improvement of the Tariff Policy 
for Natural Monopolies for the period 2008-2010 ", approved by Gove rnment Resolution No. 
1279 of 24 December 2007,  had demonstrated the Government's effort to ensure the 
sustainable operation of natural monopolies.  Measures were aimed at improving the legal and 
regulatory framework, and the methodology for establishing tariffs, including the introduction of 
forward-looking methods.   
151.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that th e production of electric power, natural gas 
and gas condensate, as well as other forms of energy, were not regulated as a natural monopoly.  
She added that the Law "On Amendments and Addenda into Legislative Acts on Natural 
Monopolies" of 5 July 2006 had introduced the concep t of "strategic goods" that included:  coal, 
gas, mazut, diesel fuel, and electric power used by natural monopolies.  The provisions of the Law 
required that a natural monopoly (consumer) had to purchase those strategic goods directly from 
producers or direct importers, except in cases where supply shortages existed in a particular 
market.  This requirement had been introduced as  a result of the fact that the fuel cost had 
reached 70% of the expenses of natural monopolie s due to the large number of intermediaries in 
the supply chain from producer to natural monopoly (consumer).  In reply to a question, she noted 
that the term "strategic object" was not related to the term "strategic good".  The term "strategic 
object" was used for regulation of certain infr astructural assets important for protecting the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 50 - 
 
  national integrity of Kazakhstan's economy, whereas the term  "strategic good" was used for the 
purpose of tariff regulation of natural monopolies. 
152.  In reply to the question from a Member re garding the regulation of energy prices, 
especially gas prices, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, according to Law No. 532-IV 
"On Gas and Gas Supply" of 9 January 2012, her Government had established maximum wholesale 
prices for commercial and liquefied petroleum gas on the domestic market, based on the proposal 
o f  t h e  M i n i s t r y  o f  E n e r g y .   I n  a c c o r d a n c e  with Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and 
Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998, retail prices  for gas charged by market participants with 
dominant or monopolistic position on the relevant market were regulated by the Committee on 
Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition of the Ministry of National 
Economy.  Companies with dominant or monopolistic position submitted to the Committee notification on the proposed price increases for gas, along with the relevant justification materials.  
The proposed price was subject to the approval by  the Committee based on the results of the price 
expertise conducted in accordance with Article 7-2 of Law No. 272-I, which regulated price setting 
in regulated markets, as described in paragraph [ 147] of the Report.  Retail prices for petroleum 
products were regulated in accordance with the Law No. 463-IV "On State Regulation of Production 
and Turnover of Certain Types of Petroleum Products" of 20 July 2011.  The Committee in 
coordination with the Ministry of Energy approved maximum retail prices for petroleum products in 
accordance with the procedures established by the Government Resolution No. 287 of 
2 March 2012.  The list of regulated petroleu m products was approved by the Government 
Resolution No. 286 of 2 March 2012, which included the following types of oil products:  Ai-80, 
Ai 92 and Ai 93 gasoline brands, summer and inter-seasonal diesel fuel.  These measures had 
been introduced in order to prevent unfair price increases on utility services provided for 
households and stabilize the situation on the domestic market of petroleum and gas products, in 
particular to curb high inflation in the country.  She added that the Government regulated prices of 
petroleum products and gas used by households as part of social policy aimed at stabilization of 
retail prices for socially important products. 
153.  Asked whether the Government had an author ity to apply price controls on goods and 
whether such controls existed, the representative  of Kazakhstan replied that, in principle, in 
accordance with Article 9.7 of the Constitutional  Law No. 2688 "On Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 18 December 1995, the Government had the authority to develop and implement the State pricing policy, as well as to set the pr ices of goods and services.  At the moment, the 
Government set prices for the following goods:  (i) minimum retail prices of vodka, special vodka 
and other hard liquors (Law No. 429-I "On State Re gulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl 
Spirit and Alcohol Beverages" of 16 July 1999; Government Resolution No. 1592 "On Establishing 
Minimum Prices for Alcohol Products" of 23 October 1999, as amended in February 2011); 
(ii) minimum retail prices of filter cigarettes of length between 45 and 85 mm, and of length 
between 87.1 and 160 mm (Law No. 439 "On State Re gulation of Production and Turnover of 
Tobacco Products" of 12 June 2003; Government Resolution No. 260 "On Establishing Minimum 
Retail Prices of Filter Cigarettes" of 4 April 2007 ); and, (iii) maximum retail prices of petroleum WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 51 - 
 
  products (the Law No. 463-IV "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Certain Types of 
Petroleum Products" of 20 July 2011); and (iv) ma ximum wholesale prices of liquefied petroleum 
gas on the domestic market (Law No. 532-IV  of 9 January 2012 "On Gas and Gas Supply", 
Government Resolution No. 1272 "On Establishing Maximum Wholesale Price of Liquefied 
Petroleum Gas on the Internal Market" of 8 October 2012).  Price setting applied only to internal 
sale, and had not been applied in a discriminatory manner between domestically-produced and 
imported products.  These measures were introduced  as part of public health and social stability 
policies.   
154.  Concerning the provision of electric power supply services, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that Government Resolution No. 190 of 18 February 2004 had approved the 
Concept of Further Development of Market Relations in the Electric Power Industry in the Republic of Kazakhstan.  She added that Law No. 588 "On Power Industry" had been adopted on 
9 July 2004.  In accordance with the provisions of this legislation, electric power supply services 
(on the retail market for electricity) had been transferred to the competitive market where 
electricity suppliers set tariffs for final consumers on the basis of market principles.  Power supply 
companies with a dominant (monopolistic) position had been registered at the Committee on 
Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition of the Ministry of National 
Economy.  Other new developments included use of centralized bidding for electric power 
procurement for sale to retail customers; the separation of heating networks from generation 
plants; and the creation of a level playing field fo r the supply of electric power with the purpose to 
promote competition between national-level electr ic power stations and regional producers of 
electric power.  Transmission and distribution of  electricity by inter-regional networks (via the 
national company "KEGOC") was considered to be an activity within the sphere of natural 
monopolies, and therefore subject to State price re gulation.  The methodology of setting tariffs for 
electric power transmission services had been amen ded to remove the direct dependence of tariffs 
rates on the distance of power transmission.  An energy deficiency and network capacity 
coefficient had instead been introduced.  She noted that the provisions of the new legislation 
allowed for an easy access to the wholesale market for electricity.   
155.  With regard to the regime governing natural gas, a Member enquired whether foreign 
companies in Kazakhstan benefited from the same prices as Kazakhstan's companies, and whether 
prices charged for domestic consumers were the same as for export.  In addition, this Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that prices of energy products (notably oil and gas) in Kazakhstan 
covered at least all costs of extraction, producti on, transport and marketing of those products, an 
appropriate contribution to fixed costs and financing charges plus a reasonable profit margin, 
sufficient to remunerate current fixed and capital investments associated with those products and 
secure future ones, including maintenance and upgrade of infrastructure and in the exploration 
and development of new fields done or planned.   
156.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan sa id that, at present, her Government regulated 
the prices of gas, in particular the wholesale domestic prices for liquefied petroleum gas WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 52 - 
 
  (as indicated in paragraph [ 153]), and retail domestic prices for petroleum products and retail 
prices for gas charged by market participants with dominant or monopolistic position on the relevant market (as indicated in paragraph [ 152]).  Except for these limitations, gas and crude oil 
produced in and exported from Kazakhstan were so ld at market-based prices.  Transportation of 
gas via pipelines for domestic consumption and crude oil via main pipelines was subject to 
regulation as natural monopolies.  The regulated tariffs for transportation of gas and oil were 
based on a "cost plus reasonable profit" principle.  Tariffs for transportation of gas for export via 
pipelines were not regulated by the Government.   
157.  With regard to the regime governing oil, some Members requested more information on 
the natural monopolies operating in the oil (and ga s) pipeline industry and on the procedures set 
by natural monopolies to access oil pipelines.  These Members enquired what criteria were used to provide access to pipelines and whether any form of guidance was provided by the Government 
with respect to the provision of access.   
158.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the procedure for providing consumers with 
equal access to regulated services (goods, works) of natural monopolies was approved by 
"the Rules For Granting Equal Access to Regulated Services (Goods, Works) in Oil and (or) Oil 
Products Transportation Via Main Pipelines" (Order of the Chairman of the Agency on Regulation of 
Natural Monopolies No. 107 of 19 January 2005).  At the moment, Kazakhstan's oil was exported 
via three pipelines:  (i) "Uzen – Atyrau (Kazakhstan) – Samara (Russia)" owned by "KazTransOil"; 
(ii) "Tengiz-Novorossiysk" owned by the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC); and, 
(iii) "Kenkiyak-Alashangkou", owned by the "Kazakhstan-China Pipeline".  The volume of oil 
exports via the Uzen-Atyrau-Samara pipeline was determined by its traffic capacity and was based 
on the annual inter-governmental agreement between the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan.   
159.  The Ministry of Energy allocated available tran sportation quotas for exports of crude oil via 
"Uzen–Atyrau – Samara" pipeline among Kazakhstan's companies producing crude oil 
proportionally to the volume of their production depending on the available transport capacities of 
the main pipeline in Kazakhstan and transit ca pacity provided by the Russian Federation.  
Applications from producers had to indicate the production volume and destination for the 
transportation of crude oil.  Once the quota volume was agreed, the exporter had to sign an Oil 
Transportation Agreement with the main pipeline operator - KazTransOil.  In negotiations on the 
annual transit quotas with the Russian Federation, the Government of Kazakhstan took into account the forecasted needs for crude oil transportation of all of Kazakhstan's companies.  
To date, all requests for transportation of crude oil had been met and there had been no shortage 
of quotas.  Thus, quotas were allocated to both domestic and foreign invested companies 
producing crude oil in Kazakhstan on a non-discriminatory basis.   
160.  A Member asked if there was an official double  pricing policy in any sector and a double 
pricing regime in practice as a result of Govern ment measures.  In reply, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan's legislation did not provide for double pricing policy.  
Different tariffs charged for transportation of good s in different directions were explained by the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 53 - 
 
  differences in costs incurred by natural monopolies when rendering their services.  According to 
the Law "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets", when establishing tariffs of natural monopolies, the Committee on Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition of 
the Ministry of National Economy took into acco unt all the costs incurred by the entity and the 
reasonable profit, which could ensure efficient functioning of the operator.  
161.  Some Members noted that, although a priori tariff rates for transport of oil by pipeline 
were the same for domestic consumption and export, the application of a decreasing (discount) 
coefficient for domestic consumption resulted in a higher de facto  rate for transportation of oil for 
export destination.  These Members noted that Ar ticle XI of the GATT 1994 provided that "other 
measures" could not be used to prohibit or restrict the exportation or sale for export of any 
product destined for the territory of another Member.  These Members stated that Kazakhstan was expected to eliminate the discriminatory pricing applicable to oil destined for export prior to its 
WTO accession.   
162.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan had discontinued the practice of 
application of decreasing coefficients for transporta tion of crude oil to domestic refineries in 2010.  
Instead, the tariffs for transportation of crude oil by mainline pipelines for export and domestic 
destinations were calculated separately based on ac tual costs, reasonable profits, and the physical 
capacity of pipelines.  Such an approach was ne cessary to ensure transparency in the accounting 
of revenues, costs and operational assets in regulated services, as well as transparency in the 
elaboration of tariff estimates, and the tariff calculation for regulated services delivered by natural monopolies.   
163.  Some Members also noted that the differential oil transport fees applied by Kazakhstan 
were in conflict with the provisions of Arti cle V of the GATT 1994 on freedom of transit.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that there was no discriminatory treatment 
with respect to transit routes in Kazakhstan.  As of 2004, oil transit from the Russian Federation to 
the People's Republic of China through Kazakhstan had been conducted by the 
Omsk-Pavlodar-Atasu pipeline, the only transit pipeline of crude oil via Kazakhstan.  The transit 
tariffs were regulated by the Agreement between the Government of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of the Russian Federation of 7 June 2002 as amended in November 2009.  
164.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the scope of services monopolization in the 
railway services market, subject to State regulati on as natural monopoly, had been reduced due to 
the restructuring of the railway transport sector which had begun in 2004.  As a result of these 
reforms, currently only the services of main-line railway networks were regulated by the State as 
natural monopoly.  Different tariffs for railway transportation were set depending on distance, 
rolling stock (wagons) type, cargo and destinat ion.  In her view, the application of these 
differential tariffs did not contradict WTO requirements.  She noted that, in the context of the 
ongoing restructuring of the railway transp ortation sector, between 2006 and 2013 her 
Government had undertaken  a gradual unification of tariffs charged for the main-line railway 
services in domestic, export and import routes.  During the first stage, in 2006, tariffs for WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 54 - 
 
  transportation of construction materials, ferrous and nonferrous metals and their scrap had been 
unified.  During the second stage, in 2010, tariffs for transportation of crude oil and coal had been unified.  During the third stage, in 2011, the unifi cation of tariffs had continued with respect to 
non-ferrous ore, iron ore, alcohol and alcoholic beverages.  The unification of tariffs had been 
completed during the fourth stage in 2012 for all remaining goods, including chemical and mineral 
fertilizers, chemicals and sodium bicarbonate, petroleum products and grain.   
165.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's authorities had a very large discretionary margin to 
qualify activities as natural monopolies and said that this Member did not consider, for instance, 
telecommunications and postal services to be natural monopolies.  Another Member asked 
Kazakhstan to explain how there was competition in the markets dominated by natural 
monopolies.   
166.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan reiterated that, as evidenced by the 
description of ongoing reforms in key sectors of the economy, her Government was pursuing 
liberalisation programmes in order to facilitate competition and reduce the list of natural 
monopolies.  In particular, her Government had reduced the types of regulated postal services.  
The list had originally included eight types of postal services, but had subsequently been reduced 
to only include universal postal services (cards, letters, packages and postal wrapper).  Regarding 
telecommunication services, she said that the scope of services subject to Government regulation 
as natural monopoly had been reduced and currently included only:  (i) telecommunication 
services under conditions of absence of competing operators for reasons of technological infeasibility or commercial inexpediency; and, (ii) leasing or use of cable channels and other basic 
facilities technologically related to connecting telecommunication.  In addition, operator connection 
services (to the services of the universal telecommunication network) and telephone transit 
services would remain regulated and would only be excluded from the list of natural monopolies 
after the development of a competitive environment.   
167.  Some Members stated that enterprises that had a monopoly position in international trade 
and/or domestic distribution should be notified under the 1994 Understanding on Interpretation of 
Article XVII of the GATT 1994, and enquired whethe r Kazakhstan intended to notify any of its 
"natural" monopolies.  A Member said that ther e was ample evidence that State-owned natural 
monopolies in Kazakhstan did not grant equal access as transporters and enjoyed extensive 
special privileges.   
168.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that natural monopolies in Kazakhstan acted as 
transport carriers with equal non-discriminatory (open) access for all suppliers and operators, 
regardless of the form and type of ownership.  In  this respect, she pointed to Article 2 of Law 
No. 266 of 8 December 2001 "On Railway Transport", which stipulated the principle of 
non-discriminatory access to railway transport services for all participants of transport market.  
The Rules of Non-Discriminatory Access for Carriers to the Services of the Main-Line Railway 
approved by Order of the Minister of Transport and Communications No. 401-I of 
8 November 2004 had been repealed in October 2012.  In her view, no exclusive rights or special WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 55 - 
 
  privileges were granted to natural monopolies and, therefore, natural monopolies did not fall under 
the notification requirements of the 1994 Understanding. 
169.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that, upon accession, the Government of 
Kazakhstan would, in regulating prices, ensure that State-owned enterprises and natural 
monopolies in Kazakhstan, in respect of their supplies of goods to industrial users, would recover 
their costs (including a reasonable profit) in the or dinary course of their business.  Kazakhstan was 
also asked to confirm that that the application of price controls on goods and services would be in 
a manner consistent with WTO obligations, including Article III:9 of the GATT 1994, and that price 
controls would not be used for purposes of affording protection to domestic industries or service 
providers.   
170.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply price controls on products and services contained in Annex 4 of this Report, and any 
similar measures that would be introduced or re-introduced in the future, in a manner consistent 
with the WTO Agreement.  She further confirmed that price control measures on goods would take 
account of the interests of exporting Members, as provided for in Article III:9 of the GATT 1994.  
Price control measures would not be used for purposes of affording protection to domestic 
production of goods, or to impair the service co mmitments of Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan also confirmed that the lists of goods and services subject to State price controls in 
Annex 4 of this Report were comprehensive, and that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would publish in the Yegemen Kazakhstan and the Kazakhstanskaya Pravda, notice of any changes 
in the coverage of goods or services that were subject to price controls.  The Working Party took 
note of these commitments. 
- Competition Policy 
171.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal basis for the competition policy 
within the Eurasian Economic Union was Section XVIII "Common Principles and Rules of 
Competition" (Articles 74-77) and Annex No. 19 "Protocol on Common Principles and Rules of 
Competition" of the Eurasian Economic Union Tr eaty of 29 May 2014 (hereafter – EAEU Treaty).  
These provisions replaced the Agreement on Co mmon Principles and Rules of Competition of 
9 December 2010, which was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 
2015.  From 1 January 2015, Section XVIII and Anne x No. 19 of the EAEU Treaty were aimed at 
development of common principles and rules of competition, ensuring prevention of 
anticompetitive actions on the territories of the Parties, and actions that might have negative 
impact on competition in transboundary markets. 
172.  The Eurasian Economic Commission had a competence to prevent violations of common 
rules of competition by market participants, physical persons and non-commercial organizations of 
the member States if such violations affected or  might have affected competition in transboundary 
markets, except for violations, affecting competition in transboundary financial markets, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 56 - 
 
  prevention of which was performed in accordance with the national legislation of the Member 
States. 
173.  The Eurasian Economic Commission had the following competence:   
(i) Review applications (materials) on existence of signs of violations of common rules of 
competition, which affected or might have affe cted competition on transboundary markets, and 
carried out necessary investigations; 
(ii) initiate and consider cases on  violation of common rules of competition, which affected or 
might have affected competition on transboundar y markets, on the basis of the appeals by the 
competent authorities of the member States, enterprises (market participants) of the 
member States, authorities of the member States, individuals or on its own initiative; 
(iii) make determinations, adopt decisions binding for market participants, including application 
of penalties to market participants, regarding actions aimed at termination of violation of common 
competition rules, elimination of consequences of violations of common competition rules, ensuring 
competition, regarding prevention of actions which might have hindered establishment of 
competition and (or) might result in restriction, elimination of competition on transboundary 
markets and violation of common rules of competition; 
(iv) request information from the authorities of the member States, local executive bodies, 
other bodies or organizations carrying out their functions,  juridical persons and physical  persons, 
including confidential information, necessary to fulfill competence to control over compliance with 
common competition rules on transboundary markets;  and, 
(v)  other functions, necessary to implement the common competition rules established by 
Section XVIII and Annex No. 19 of the EAEU Treaty. 
174.  She further added  that anti-monopoly legislation of Kazakhstan was developed in line with 
the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and comprised inter alia  of the relevant provisions 
of the Civil Code, the Code on Administrative Violations and Law No. 112-IV "On Competition" of 
25 December 2008 (hereinafter – Law No. 112-IV), as last amended by Law No. 81-V of 
6 March 2013, that had entered into force on 1 January 2009 replacing Laws No. 173 
"On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities" of 7 July 2006 and No. 232 "On Unfair 
Competition" of 9 June 1998.   
175.  The key objective of Law No. 112-IV was protection of free competition and creation of a 
favorable environment for entrepreneurial and investment activity, and growth of businesses.  This was to be achieved through:  (i) prevention of monopolistic activity; (ii) prevention of unfair 
competition; (iii) demonopolization of industries; (iv) development of fair and free competition; 
and, (v) protection of consumer interests.  Law No. 112-IV was directly applicable and did not 
contain references to by-laws.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 57 - 
 
  176.  The Committee on Regulation of Natural Monopolies and Protection of Competition of the 
Ministry of National Economy (hereinafter - the Committee) was responsible for implementation of the national policy aimed at developing competitio n and restricting monopolistic activities.  The 
main functions of the Committee were:  (i) to promote development of fair competition; (ii) to 
prevent, detect and investigate violations of the anti-monopoly legislation of Kazakhstan; (iii) to 
control economic concentration; and, (iv) demonopolization of market participants that restrained 
competition.  Development of State policy on competition and restriction of monopolistic activity 
was one of the key functions of the Ministry of National Economy.   
177.  Asked about measures taken in the framework of demonopolization, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that the decisions on demonopolization of sectors of the economy were 
made by the Government upon results of the commodity markets analysis conducted by the Committee.  For instance, in 2011, the Committee conducted the analysis of interconnection and 
traffic transmission (hereinafter – interconnection) in telecommunication services.  Based on the 
results of the analysis, the Government took a decision to exclude interconnection services from 
the sphere of natural monopolies and transfer into competitive environment.  Moreover, within the 
framework of demonopolization policies, Law No. 112-IV stipulated rules, under which state 
enterprises and legal persons and their affiliat es, where the Government owned 50% or more 
shares, had to receive the positive conclusion from the Committee for further activity in the 
relevant commodity market.  In 2011, 3% of such enterprises were transferred to the competitive 
environment (including enterprises in such spheres as maintenance of hotels and resorts, maintenance of car parks, construction, etc.). 
178.  Asked about merger control regulation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
according to sub-paragraph 1, paragraph 1 of Article 50 of Law No. 112-IV, regulating issues 
related to control over economic concentration, merger transactions fell under the notion of 
economic concentration.  Articles 49-57 of Law No. 112-IV regulated issues of economic 
concentration control.  The Committee conducted control over economic concentration via an 
approval procedure of merger transactions (actions).  In reply to a specific question on current 
merger thresholds to trigger the obligation for notification in Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that consent of the Committee to perform transactions, acknowledged as 
economic concentration was required in the following cases:  (i) merger or acquisition of a market 
participant; (ii) acquisition by a person (group of persons) of more than 25% voting share (right of participation) of a market participant, if previously this person (group of persons) had not held the 
shares (rights of participation) of a market participant, or its portion was less than 25%; and, 
(iii) obtaining ownership, including in payment of the charter capital by a market participant 
(group of persons) of the main industrial assets and (or) intangible assets of a market participant, 
if the balance value of the property subject to the transaction exceeded 10% of the balance value 
of the main industrial and intangible assets.  Consent for economic concentration with participation 
of financial organizations could be given in case when the value of assets or amount of equity 
capital of a financial organization exceeded the amount jointly established by the Committee and 
the National Bank (for financial organizations).  Market participants had to notify the Committee in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 58 - 
 
  the following cases of economic concentration:  (i) acquisition of rights (including rights on the 
basis of trust management agreement and joint ac tivity agreement) by the market participant 
allowing him/her to give mandatory instructions to other market participant when conducting 
commercial activity or to perform functions of its executive body; and, (ii) participation of the 
same individuals in executive bodies, boards of directors, supervisory boards, and other managing 
bodies of two or more market participants if these individuals determine conditions of commercial 
activities conducted by the market participant.  In accordance with paragraph 3 Article 50 of the 
Law No. 112-IV, the consent and notification me ntioned above was required if the aggregate 
balance value of assets of reorganized market participants (group of persons) or the acquirer 
(group of persons), and also market participant whose voting shares (rights of participation) in the 
charter capital had been acquired, or their aggregate volume of goods sold for the last financial year exceeded 10 million monthly calculation indices
12, or one of the persons participating in the 
transaction was a market participant with dominant or monopolistic position on the relevant goods 
market.  The consent of the Committee was not required for the following deals, not considered as 
economic concentration:  (i) acquisition of shares (rights of participation) of the market participant 
by financial organizations, if this acquisition was conducted with the aim of further resale, with the 
condition that this financial organization did not have voting rights in the managing bodies of the 
market participant; (ii) acquisition by financial organizations of property, main production assets 
and/or intangible assets of another market participant with the aim of repayment of the debtor's 
liability fully or in part, if this acquisition was conducted with the aim of further resale, with the condition that these financial organizations did not use such property to gain profit in their own 
interest; (iii) appointment of rehabilitation or  bankruptcy manager, temporary administration 
(temporary administrator); and, (iv) economic concentration within one group of persons.  
179.  Asked about the test for a merger to be prohib ited, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that, according to Law No. 112-IV, a general rule was that all mergers leading to restriction of 
competition were prohibited.   
180.  Consent of the Committee could be granted provided that the participants of the economic 
concentration fulfilled certain requirements and commitments eliminating or alleviating the 
negative impact on competition.  For instance, economic concentration should not result in the 
following: 
- restriction of competition; 
- breach of the conditions contracted with customers; 
- suspension of services being rendered; 
- deterioration of quality of the services rendered; - non-fulfillment of the commitments under the investment contracts concluded with the 
Ministry of Investments and Development; and, 
- unreasonable reduction of production or sales.  
                                               
12 One monthly calculated index (hereinafter - MCI) is equal to 1,731 tenge (around US$10.9); 
10 million MCI equals to approximately US$114.6 million. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 59 - 
 
  181.  Such conditions could include restriction in management, use or disposal of property.  
The Committee, on its own initiative or upon the application  o f  a n  i n t e r e s t e d  p e r s o n ,  c o u l d  
change its decision on economic concentration in cases, when:  
- within three years upon its adoption , the circumstances giving reasons to reject it were 
revealed; 
- it was adopted on the basis of unreliable information, which led to the adoption of an  
illegal decision; and, 
- requirements and undertaken  commitments were not fulfilled.   
182.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that  Law No. 112-IV distinguished three types of 
monopolistic activities:  (i) "anti-competitive agreements"; (ii) "anti-competitive coordinated 
actions"; and, (iii) abuse of dominant or monopolis tic position.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
noted that agreements or coordinated action s between competing and non-competing market 
participants, as well as agreements of State and local executive bodies, or between State  bodies 
and market participants, were prohibited when they restricted competition or violated the rights of 
juridical and physical persons, including by establishing and/or maintaining cooperative pricing or other conditions of acquiring and selling goods, unreasonable limitation of production or sale of 
goods, unreasonable refusal to conclude contracts with certain sellers (providers) or buyers, and 
application of discriminating conditions to equivalent contracts with other market participants.  
She further explained that Law No. 112-IV differentiated between "anti-competitive coordinated 
actions" and "anti-competitive agreements".  The difference between anti-competitive agreements 
and anti-competitive coordinated actions was that anti-competitive agreements provided for 
intended written arrangement between market participants to conclude anti-competitive 
agreements, for example, agreements on sale of products at the same price or within certain 
territory.   
183.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Law No. 112-IV redefined the term "group of 
persons".  Abuse of dominant or monopolistic posi tion by a group of persons was considered as 
abuse by a single market participant.  Market participants were not obliged to seek for approval of 
economic concentration in cases when transactions were made within one group of persons.  
Law No. 112-IV also contained new definitions of what constituted a dominant and monopolistic 
position.  The position of a market participant(s) in the relevant commodity market was recognised 
as dominant or monopolistic, if such market participant(s) acquired a capability to control the 
market.  A market participant was deemed to have a dominant position if it had 35% or more of 
the relevant market.  Several market participants were considered to have a dominant position 
(i) if the aggregate share of up to three market  participants in a given commodity market was 
equal or exceeded 50%; or, (ii) if the aggregate share of up to four major market participants in a given commodity market was equal or exceeded 70%.  A financial organization was deemed to 
have a dominant position (i) if the aggregate share of up to two financial organizations in a given 
financial services market equalled or exceeded 50%; or, (ii) if the aggregate share of up to three 
financial organizations in a given financial servic es market equalled or exceeded 70%.  A company 
with less than a 15% share of the market, including a financial services market, could not qualify 
as a company with a dominant position.  Natural monopolies, state monopolies and market WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 60 - 
 
  participants that owned 100% dominant share in the relevant commodity market were considered 
as companies (market participants) with a monopolistic position. 
184.  Asked to clarify the differences between the concepts of dominant or monopolistic position 
and monopolistic activity, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the concept of 
monopolistic activity was wider than the concept of dominant or monopolistic position.  
Monopolistic activity was an activity or actions performed by a market participant, while dominant 
or monopolistic position was a characteristic of a market participant, defined by the market share.  
According to paragraph 4 of Article 26 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
monopolistic activity was regulated by the law.  Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position had to observe restrictions set-out in Law No. 112-IV.  Hence, monopolistic activity was 
restricted, but not prohibited.  Monopolistic types of activities restricted by Law No. 112-IV are described in paragraph [ 182].   
185.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the dominant 
or monopolistic position itself was not considered breach of the anti-monopoly legislation.  
Article 13 of Law No. 112-IV listed prohibited cases of abuse of dominant or monopolistic position:  
- establishment, maintenance of monopolistically high (low) or monopsonistically low prices;  
- application of different prices or conditions to equivalent agreements with market 
participants or customers without objectively justified reasons;  
- establishing restrictions for distribution of goods, works or services based on territorial 
factors, group of customers, purchasing conditions, and also quality and price;  
- preconditioning or imposing a conclusion of an agreement where a market participant or a 
customer would accept additional obligations, which in their essence or according to customary business practice were not related to the subject of such agreements; 
- unreasonable refusal to conclude an agreement with or selling a good to independent 
customers while having the ability to produce or sell good, work or service.  This also 
included deviation from concluding such an agreement within thirty calendar days of such 
request;  
- preconditioning supply of goods, works or serv ices to accept restrictions for purchasing 
goods, works or services, produced or sold by competitors;  
- unjustified reduction of volumes of production  and/or supply, including production and/or 
supply of goods, works or services, for which there is demand or customer orders; 
- withdrawal of goods from circulation, if it resulted in the good's price increase; - imposition of economically or technologicall y unjustified agreements terms on  a partner, 
not connected with the subject of the agreement; 
- creation of obstacles for another market participants to accede or exit from a goods 
market; and, 
- unjustified establishment of different prices (tariffs) on the same good; creation of 
discriminating conditions.   
In addition, Kazakhstan's legislation did not provide penalty for dominant or monopolistic 
position itself, only for abuse and actions to restrict competition.  
186.  In reply to the question of a Member regarding economic indicators taken into account for 
identification of market participants with dominant or monopolistic position, the representative of 
Kazakhstan noted that in accordance with the Methodology on Analysis and Assessment of the 
Competitive Environment in the Commodity Market, approved by the Order of the Chairman of the 
Antimonopoly Agency No. 8-OD of 12 January 2009 and the Methodology on Analysis and 
Assessment of the Competitive Environment in th e Financial Services Market, approved by the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 61 - 
 
  Order of the Chairman of the Antimonopoly  Agency No. 57-OD of 19 February 2009, the 
Committee conducted analysis of the competition environment.  The results of the analysis provided the picture of development of competit ion in the given market and identified market 
participants with dominant or monopolistic position.  The methodology of analysis included the 
following steps:  (i) identification of goods or substitute goods; (ii) identification of geographical 
boundaries of the commodity market; (iii) identificati on of time intervals; (iv) identification of 
structure of the market; (v) calculation of commodity market volume and shares of market 
participants in the market; (vi) assessment of competitive environment in the commodity market; 
and, (vii) detection of entry barriers to the commodity market.  Based on these factors the 
Committee drew its findings on the competition environment. 
187.  Law No. 112-IV expanded the list of types of unfair competition which included the 
following:  (i) illegal use of trademarks and packing; (ii) illegal use of a product of another 
manufacturer; (iii) copying of product design; (iv) discrediting a market participant; 
(v) deliberately misleading, unfair and false advertisement; (vi) tie-in sale of goods; (vii) calling 
for a boycott of a seller (provider); (viii) calling for discrimination against a buyer (provider); 
(ix) calling for a market participant to terminate a contract with a competitor; (x) bribing a seller's 
(provider's) employee; (xi) bribing a buyer's employee; (xii) illegal use of trade secrets; 
(xiii) selling goods with giving the customer of unreliable information regarding the character, 
method and place of production, consumer properti es, the good's qualities and quantities and (or) 
it's producers; and, (xiv) improper comparison by the market participant of its goods with the goods produced and (or) sold by another market participants.   
188.  The State could participate in commercial activity in the following cases:  (i) failure to 
ensure national security, national defence capability and protection of the social interests by other 
means; (ii) use of State-owned strategic objects; and, (iii) public need in public manufacturing of 
goods where competition was absent or was underdeveloped.  In the last case, the activity of 
public enterprises was regulated in coordination with the Committee.  The State could participate 
in commercial activity in the form of the following types of enterprises:  (a) a State enterprise, or, 
(b) a juridical person 50 or more per cent of shares (rights of participation) of which belong to the 
State and its affiliated entities.  State enterprises could engage only in the spheres stipulated in 
Article 134 of Law No. 413-IV "On State Property" of 1 March 2011 (see Annex 22 of this Report).  
If establishment of such enterprises was not direct ly mentioned in the laws of Kazakhstan, consent 
of the Committee was required in the case mentio ned in clause (iii) above.  The Committee could 
deny creation of a state enterprise or a juridical pe rson by the State, if such creation could lead to 
restriction of competition on the market where there was no competition or it was underdeveloped.  
Nevertheless, the Committee could grant its consent if a state enterprise or a juridical person 
undertook special commitments to eliminate or alleviate negative impact to competition.   
189.  Law No. 112-IV also introduced the term "state monopoly" as an exclusive right of the 
State to produce and (or) sell, purchase, or use goods.  The State had the right to restrict 
competition by establishing a state monopoly only in those spheres where sale of goods on the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 62 - 
 
  competitive market could have negative consequences for the constitutional system, national 
security, the protection of public order, human  rights and freedoms, or health of people.  
The representative of Kazakhstan added that a state monopoly could be established only by law.  
State monopolies could be established only in the form of state enterprises by the decision of the 
Government or local executive bodies.  In reply to a specific question, she said that the notion of 
"state monopoly" differed from the notion of "natural monopoly".   
190.  State monopoly activities were defined in Law No. 85 "On Safeguarding Activity" of 
19 October 2000, Law No. 339 "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002, Law No. 456 "On Trademarks, 
Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of G oods" of 26 July 1999, Law No. 422-I "On Protection 
of Selective Achievements" of 13 July 1999, La w No. 331 "On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002, 
Law No. 593 "On Protection, Reproduction and Use of Fauna" of 9 July 2004, as well as in Law No. 427 "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1999, the Land Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 442 of 20 June 2003 and the Forestry Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 477 of 8 July 2003.  The Committee was responsible for regulation and monitoring 
activities of state monopolies.  At present, st ate monopolies provided special types of services, 
including:  hydro meteorological monitoring and monitoring of the environmental situation; 
liquidation of centres of extra hazardous contagious animal diseases; security services for facilities 
subject to the State protection; production of identification documents of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan; monitoring of education quality, etc.  Kazakhstan's legislation did not prohibit private 
sector participation in sectors, where state enterprises were present, except in the spheres of state monopoly.  She explained that the Law No. 34-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legislative Acts on Issues of State Monopoly" of  10 July 2012 provided for the reduction of state 
monopolies spheres by inviting the private business to certain sectors.  According to this Law, 
activities transferred to the competitive market in cluded certification and registration of selective-
seed and selective-genetic facilities located on the territory of the State forest fund, disposal of 
waste, construction and operation of landfills, accreditation in the sphere of conformity 
assessment. 
191.  In reply to a specific question on the scope of exemption for state monopolies, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the scope of activities of state monopolies were narrower 
than the sphere of activities of state enterprises engaged in commercial activity.  The types of 
state monopoly activities were defined in special legal acts, which clearly stipulated the types and scopes of their activities.  State monopolies were not allowed to:  
- produce goods, works and services, not connected with the state monopoly sphere; 
- hold shares (rights of participation in the charter capital) and otherwise participate in the 
activity of legal persons; 
- transfer rights, associated with state monopoly; and 
- establish prices for produced or sold goods, works and services, different from those 
established by the Government.  
192.  The Committee initiated investigations upon receiving information on violations of anti-
monopoly legislation such as:  (i) files/documents from the Government bodies; (ii) application 
from a physical or juridical person; (iii) detection of anti-monopoly legislation violations by the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 63 - 
 
  Committee; and, (iv) appeal to the Committee by the mass media; (v) information in the mass 
media.  The Committee within its competencies conducted investigations on violations of anti-monopoly legislation and adopted a decision  based on its results.  Investigation was 
conducted within two months from the date of issuing an order of its initiation.  This term could be 
extended for up to two months.  
193.  The representative of Kazakhstan added th at the Committee took one of the following 
decisions on the basis of investigation results:  (i) suspend an investigation in cases envisaged by 
Law No. 112-IV; (ii) initiate administrative proceedings; (iii) adopt instructions on elimination of 
the anti-monopoly legislation violations; or, (iv) initiate criminal proceedings by the 
law-enforcement bodies.  
194.  She informed Members that Article 147 of the Code on Administrative Violations provided 
the following sanctions for violations of the anti-monopoly legislation:  a fine in the amount of 
150 Monthly Calculated Indices
13 (hereinafter - MCIs) for individual entrepreneurs, 5% of profit 
receipts from the monopolistic activity for small and medium-sized businesses, and 10% of profit 
receipts from the monopolistic activity for other businesses.  The Criminal Code (Article 196) 
provided for criminal liability for actions causing severe damage, including fines of 500 to 
1,000 MCIs, or up to two years of correctional labour, custodial restraint, or imprisonment.  
For repeated offences, or for actions committed by (organized) groups or officials, the sanctions 
consisted of fines in the amount of 1,000 to 2,000 MCIs, or the equivalent of five to seven months' 
salary or other income of the convicted person, or imprisonment for up to five years that could be accompanied by deprivation of the right to hold specific posts or engage in certain activities for up 
to three years, and property expropriation.  Offe nces committed with the use of force or the threat 
to use force or which could lead to damage, or threat of damage of third party's property, were 
punishable by three to seven years of imprisonment that could be accompanied by property 
expropriation. 
195.  The representative of Kazakhstan added th at Chapters 9, 10 and 11 of Law No. 112-IV 
defined responsibilities for violation of the anti-monopoly legislation and established procedures for 
adoption, appeal, and execution of instructio ns and decisions taken by the Committee.  
The Committee had the right to review administrative violations regarding competition protection 
and restriction of monopolistic activity, impose administrative sanctions provided in the Code on 
Administrative violations, and appeal to the courts for enforcement of its instructions and decisions.  Law No. 112-IV did not provide for introduction of fixed prices by the Government in 
case of repeated abuses by market dominating entity of their monopolistic positions.  In a case in 
which a market participant that had a dominant or monopolistic position twice within one calendar 
year and violated the provisions of Law No. 112-IV on (i) "anti-competitive agreements"; 
(ii) "anti-competitive coordinated actions"; and, (iii) abuse of dominant or monopolistic position; 
                                               
13 Monthly Calculated Index - index used in Kazakhsta n for the purposes of calc ulation of pensions and 
other social allowances as well as for the application of  penalties, calculation of taxes and other payments to 
the budget - annually approved by the Law "On Republican Budget".   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 64 - 
 
  and continued taking actions that restrained competition, the Committee had the right to appeal to 
the court seeking the splitting of  the market participant into several juridical persons or the 
detachment of one or several juridical persons from the market participant.  The instructions and 
decisions of the Committee could be appealed in acco rdance with the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  Instructions of the territorial bodies of the Committee could be appealed to the 
Committee or directly to the courts within three months of the date of handling of an appeal  to 
the entity concerned.   
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
- Powers of Executive, Legislative an d Judicial Branches of Government 
196.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Republic of Kazakhstan was a unitary 
State with a Presidential form of Government.  Power was divided among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.  The Presid ent ensured the coordinated functioning of all 
branches of power.  The Parliament of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan was the highest representative 
body and performed legislative functions.  The Go vernment exercised executive power, headed the 
executive bodies and provided guidance to them .  Judicial power was exercised through civil, 
criminal and other statutory forms of judicial pr oceedings by the Supreme Court, local courts and 
other courts.  
197.  The President was elected for five year terms on the basis of universal, equal and direct 
suffrage by secret ballot.  The President a ppointed and could dismiss the members of the 
Government (including the Prime Minister, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Defence, Internal Affairs and Justice and Heads of State Committees ), the Heads of diplomatic missions, higher 
Officers of the Armed Forces, the Chairperson and two members of the Constitutional Council, the 
Chairperson and two members of the Central Election Committee, the Chairperson and 
two members of the Accounting Committee for Contro l Over the Implementation of the Republican 
Budget, 15 Deputies of the Senate, chairperso ns and judges of local and other courts, the 
Prosecutor General, the Chairperson of the National Security Committee, the State Secretary, the 
Chairperson of the National Bank, and Akims. 
198.  The President approved laws submitted by the Senate (the upper house of the Parliament) 
within one month, or returned laws with his comments to the Parliament for consideration, to be 
reviewed within one month.  If the specified deadline was not met, the President's objection would 
prevail and the law was adopted in the version pr oposed by the President.  If the Parliament 
overturned the President's objection by a two-thirds majority vote of each Chamber, the law was 
adopted in the version initially proposed by the Parliament.  In cases where the Parliament failed 
to overturn the President's objections, the la w was adopted in the version proposed by the 
President.  The President could prioritize draft laws for consideration by the Parliament and could 
invite the Parliament to announce a draft law as urgent, i.e. to be considered within one month of 
its submission.  If such a request was not fulfille d, the President could issue a decree, which would 
remain in effect until the adoption of the new law by the Parliament.  Laws came into force within WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 65 - 
 
  ten calendar days after the date of their first official publication, unless the laws or the relevant 
implementation acts had specified different terms for entry into force.  The Parliament could delegate its legislative powers to the President fo r a period of up to one year, while the President 
had the right to dissolve Parliament in certain circumstances.  The President could decide to hold a 
national referendum, to issue decrees, and to issue decrees having the force of a law. 
199.  The Parliament was a bicameral legislative body, consisting of a lower chamber, called the 
Majilis, and an upper chamber, called the Senate.  The Parliament was responsible for adopting 
constitutional laws, laws, resolutions of the Parliament, separate resolutions of the Senate and the 
Majilis, and for passing Constitutional amendments, upon the initiative of the President.  
The Parliament could adopt and amend the State budget, as well as put forward an initiative 
calling for a national referendum.  At separate sessions, the Majilis, and then the Senate, ratified international treaties and took decisions on State loans and other forms of economic assistance.  
The Senate, inter alia , had exclusive jurisdiction, at the init iative of the President, to elect and 
discharge the Chairperson and Justices of the Supreme Court.  The Majilis, inter alia , had exclusive 
jurisdiction to accept draft laws for consideration and to announce regular Presidential elections.   
200.  The Government was organized and chaired by the Prime Minister.  The Government was 
accountable to the President and to the Parliament.  The Government submitted draft laws to the 
Majilis, and was responsible for their implementati on when enacted.  By-laws in the form of 
resolutions and directives could be issued by the Government.  By-laws of the Government, as well 
as the acts of municipal chief executives could be annulled by the President.  The mandate of the Government expired with that of the President, unless specifically terminated by the President. 
201.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Government was responsible for directing 
the national socio-economic policy.  Kazakhstan's socio-economic and trade policy were developed 
and coordinated by the Ministry of National Economy.  The Ministry of Investments and 
Development was the principal body responsible for development of industrial and investment 
policy.   
202.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the governmental authority in Kazakhstan 
was administered at both the central and regional  level.  Local governmental power was divided 
between representative bodies called Maslikhats and executive bodies called Akimats.  Akimats 
were local executive bodies.  These were headed by Akims - representatives of the President and 
the Government - who (i) administered the local executive bodies; (ii) ensured the implementation of State policy on the relevant territory; and, (iii) ensured the coordinated functioning of all 
territorial branches of the central State bodies.  Akims also fulfilled the functions of a local public 
administration and were responsible for the social  and economic development of the administered 
territory.  She further noted that local governments had (i) partial autonomy to regulate 
region-specific economic relations; (ii) a regional (local) administrative system; (iii) authority to 
make provisions for the development of business activities; (iv) the right to conclude concession 
contracts; (v) the authority to monitor the local budget; and, (vi) the obligation to coordinate 
foreign trade-related issues.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 66 - 
 
  203.  Referring to item (vi) of the preceding paragraph, some Members asked the representative 
of Kazakhstan to explain if local administration bodies had to consult with the Government when initiating foreign trade related projects and if they had an obligation to perform foreign trade 
activity on behalf of the Government.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in 
accordance with Article 61 of the Constitution, only the President, as well as members of the 
Parliament and Government of the Republic of Kaza khstan had the right to initiate legislation, and 
local administrative bodies did not have the right to initiate legislation related to foreign trade.  
Local administrative bodies had the right to submit their proposals on the improvement of 
legislation to the Government, which in turn had the right to initiate the drafting of a regulatory 
legal act on the basis of the submitted proposals.  Local administrative bodies were not authorised 
to perform foreign trade activity on behalf of the Government.  However, they had to adhere to the national foreign, internal, financial and investment policies, determined by the State 
(Government, President and Parliament).  
204.  Asked to explain the relationship between local (sub-central) authorities and the central 
Government in the implementation of WTO provisions, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, 
according to Article 4 of the Law "On Local Government in the Republic of Kazakhstan", Maslikhats 
and Akimats did not have the right to adopt decisions inconsistent with national policy or 
Kazakhstan's international commitments, as set-out in ratified international agreements.  
In particular, sub-central authorities could not independently impose measures aimed at hindering 
the free exchange of goods and services within the country, such as imposing taxes and issuing regulations.  Decisions of Akims or Maslikhats, which derogated from Kazakhstan's commitments 
ensuing from international agreements (including WTO commitments), could be annulled by the 
President, the Government, the Akim, as well as through court procedures.  In addition, the 
Prosecutor General's Office exercised constant supervision over the precise and uniform application 
of laws and other legislative acts. 
205.  Judicial power was exercised by means of civil,  criminal, and other legislation, within the 
framework of a three-tier unitary court system .  The Supreme Court was the supreme body for 
civil, criminal and other cases.  It exercised supervisory powers over the conduct of general 
jurisdiction courts within a statutory framework, and provided clarifications on issues relating to 
court practice.  The Supreme Court could also act as a nisi prius  court (first instance court) whose 
decisions came into legal force from the date of their adoption.  Oblast and rayon (district) courts were courts of first instance and proceedings, conducted in these courts, took place within 
two months upon receipt of the claim.  This period could vary, however, depending on the 
category of civil case.  Questions challenging the co nstitutionality of laws or by-laws were reviewed 
by the Constitutional Council. 
206.  She further explained that the Code "On Administrative Violations" of 30 January 2001 was 
aimed at preventing administrative violations, while protecting the rights, freedoms and lawful 
interests of persons, citizens and organizations.  The Code addressed issues concerning the 
sanitary and epidemiological welfare and health of  the population, the environment, public morals, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 67 - 
 
  property, public order and safety, and the estab lished procedure for exercising State powers.  
A hearing with a judge or an authorised body us ually took place within 15 days (with a possible 
one month extension).  A request to reconsider the rulings of a judge or an authorised body could 
be made within one year from the date the court decision entered into force; the submission of 
such a request suspended the ruling's execution.  The Prosecutor-General or his deputies could ask 
a board of the Supreme Court to verify the legality and legal grounds of a decision on 
administrative violations, which had already taken legal effect.  The Supreme Court could 
reconsider previous rulings made by Oblast and Rayon (district) courts. 
207.  Some Members asked whether, following accession, the WTO Agreement would have 
priority over Kazakhstan's national legislation and further sought a description of how, in legal 
terms, would WTO rules and commitments be ratified.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that paragraph 3 of  Article 4 of the Constitution stipulated that international 
agreements ratified by Kazakhstan, had priority over national legislation and this provision also 
applied to the terms of the Protocol of Accession of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan to the WTO .  
Ratified international agreements were applied directly, except in cases when a law had to be 
adopted before an international agreement became applicable.  Asked to confirm that Kazakhstan 
needed to adopt a law domestically in order to make WTO Agreements applicable, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that a law ha d to be adopted in cases, where (i) the current 
legislation did not comply with WTO Agreements and had to be amended to comply with the WTO 
Agreements; or, (ii) issues contained in the WT O Agreements were not addressed in existing 
legislation.  Kazakhstan would ensure compliance of its legislation with commitments undertaken 
in accordance with the Protocol of Accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the WTO.  In 
accordance with the procedure of intergover nmental approval, it was planned that for 
the ratification of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, a draft law to that effect would be 
introduced to the Ministry of Justice, then presented to the Prime Minister's Cabinet for 
government approval and, finally, sent to the Parliament for enactment upon approval 
by both Chambers of the Parliament.  Current  plans were for the draft law to be enacted 
in the first half of 2015.  She further stated that in cases were obligations ensuing from WTO 
accession contradicted the provisions of other international agreements, Kazakhstan would apply 
the Vienna Convention "On International Treaty  Law" of 1969, which stated that a preceding 
agreement applied only to the extent its provisions complied with the provisions of a subsequent agreement.  Thus, the WTO Agreements would have a priority over international agreements 
concluded earlier.  She also stressed that no contradictions were expected to arise between WTO 
Membership obligations and contained in the Protocol of Accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO and  Kazakhstan's international agreements. 
208.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the provisions of the WTO Agreement 
would be applied uniformly throughout the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including in 
regions engaging in frontier traffic, special economic zones and other areas where special regimes 
for tariffs, taxes and regulations could be established.  She added that, in order to ensure 
compliance with provisions of the WTO Agreement any individual or entity could bring to the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 68 - 
 
  attention of the authorities of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan or competent 
EAEU body cases of non-application or non-uniform application of provisions of the WTO Agreement in the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Such cases would be referred promptly to the 
responsible authorities without requiring the affected party to petition through the courts, and 
when non-application or non-uniform application actually existed, the authorities of the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  o r  a competent EAEU body would act promptly to 
address the situation, consistent with the laws and international obligations of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  The individual or entity notifying the authorities of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan or a competent EAEU body would be in formed promptly in writing of any decision and 
action taken.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
209.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confir med that with respect to matters subject to 
the WTO Agreement, Kazakhstan's authorities would provide the right for independent review in 
conformity with WTO obligations, including but no t restricted to, Article X:3(b) of the GATT 1994, 
and relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property 
Rights (TRIPS) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services.  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments. 
- Framework of the Eurasian Economic Un ion among the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus 
(a) Legal Framework Establishing the Eurasian Economic Union 
210.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Me mbers that on 29 May 2014, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan), the Russian Federation (Russia) and the Republic of Belarus (Belarus) had concluded the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty (hereafter – the EAEU Treaty).  The EAEU 
Treaty established the Eurasian Economic Union (h ereafter – the EAEU) with the aim to create free 
movement of goods, services, capital and natural persons as well as coordinated or agreed policy 
in the sectors of economy, defined by the Treaty and international agreements within the EAEU.  
The EAEU was established as an international organization of regional economic integration with 
international legal personality.  The EAEU Treaty replaced the international agreements concluded 
within the CU and the SES listed in its Annex No. 33 "Protocol on Termination of International 
Treaties, Concluded within the Framework of Formation of the Customs Union and Single Economic 
Space due to Entering into Force of the Treaty on Eurasian Economic Union", which were 
terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  
211.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  according to Article 7 of the EAEU Treaty 
the EAEU had the right to exercise international ac tivity aimed at achievement of the objectives of 
the EAEU.  The EAEU had the right to engage in international relations with states, international 
organizations and international integration associations and independently or jointly with the 
member States conclude agreements on matters corresponding to its competence.  The procedure 
on international cooperation of the EAEU had to be established by the decision of the Supreme 
Eurasian Economic Council.  The issues concerning conclusion of agreements of the EAEU with a 
third party had to be determined by th e international treaty within the EAEU. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 69 - 
 
  (b) Eurasian Economic Union Structure and Competency in the Area of Trade 
212.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the following bodies were responsible for 
the implementation of the EAEU Treaty and international agreements within the EAEU: 
- the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council; 
- the Eurasian Intergovernmental Council; - the Eurasian Economic Commission (consist ing of the Council and the Collegium); and 
- the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereafter – the Court of the EAEU). 
(c) The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council  
213.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council 
(hereafter the Supreme Council) was the highest le vel Body of the EAEU, which pursuant to the 
EAEU Treaty performed the following functions: 
- defined the strategy, directions and perspectives of formation and development of the 
EAEU and took decisions on implementation of objectives of the EAEU; 
- approved the structure of the Eurasian Economic Commission, assigned responsibilities 
among the members of the EEC Collegium and took decisions on termination of their 
powers; 
- appointed the Chairman of the EEC Collegium and took decisions on pre-term termination 
of his/her powers; 
- approved the rules on procedures of the Commission; 
-  upon proposal of any Member State of th e EAEU, reconsidered decisions adopted by the 
Intergovernmental Council or the Commission;   
-  upon proposal of the member States appointed judges of the Court of the EAEU; 
-  requested the opinion of the Court of the EAEU; -  approved the budget of the EAEU, Regulation  on the budget of the EAEU and report on 
implementation of the budget of the EAEU; 
 -  upon initiative of the Intergovernmental Council or the Commission, considered the issues 
on which consensus was not achieved;  
-  determined the order on admission of new members of the EAEU; 
-  took decisions on granting observer or candidate status on accession to the EAEU;  
-  approved the procedure on implementation of international activity of the EAEU;  -  took decisions on negotiations on behalf of the EAEU with third parties, including decisions 
on conclusion of international treaties  and granting the right to negotiate as well as on 
expression of consent of the EAEU to be bound by international treaty with third party,  
termination or withdrawal from international agreement; and, 
-  performed other functions provided by the EAEU Treaty and international treaties  within 
the EAEU. 
The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council made its decisions and gave orders by consensus. 214.  The Supreme Eurasian Economic Council had to be held at the level of Heads of State.  
Meetings of the Council of Heads of Stat e had to be held at least once a year. 
(d) The Eurasian Intergovernmental Council 
215.  The Eurasian Intergovernmental Council (her eafter Intergovernmental Council) was the 
body of the EAEU that consisted of the Heads of the Governments of member States of the EAEU.  
Meetings of the Intergovernmental Council were he ld as necessary, but not less than twice a year 
216.  Intergovernmental Council performed the following functions: WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 70 - 
 
  - ensured implementation and control of implem entation of the presen t Treaty, international 
agreements within the EAEU and decisions of the Supreme Council; 
- upon proposal of the Council of the Commission considered issues on which consensus by 
the Council of the Commission was not achieved; 
- gave instructions to the Commission; 
- proposed to the Supreme Council candidates to the members of the Council and Collegium 
of the Commission; 
- approved drafts of the budget of the EAEU, regulations on the budget of the EAEU and 
reports on performance of the budget of the EAEU; 
- upon proposal of any EAEU member State cons idered issues on reversal or amendment of 
the approved decision of the  Commission or, if not agreed, took them for consideration of 
the Supreme Council; 
- approved decision on suspension of impl ementation of decisions of the Council or 
Collegium of the Commission; and, 
- performed other functions provided by the EAEU Treaty and international agreements 
within the EAEU. 
The Eurasian Intergovernmental Council made its decisions and gave orders by consensus. 
 (e) The Eurasian Economic Commission 
217.  Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – the Commission) was the permanent, 
regulatory body of the EAEU.  The Commission wa s established on the basis of the Treaty on 
Eurasian Economic Commission of 18 November 2011 and continued its powers under the EAEU 
Treaty. 
218.  The Commission carried out its activities within the competences stipulated in the 
EAEU Treaty, resolutions of the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council and international treaties that 
formed the legal framework of the EAEU.   
219.  The Commission consisted of the Council and the Collegium.  The Council consisted of one 
representative from each EAEU member State at the level of Deputy Prime Minister.  The Council 
took decisions by consensus and had the authority to cancel or revise any decisions made by the 
Collegium.  The Collegium of the Commission consisted of representatives from each 
EAEU member State based on the principle of equa l representation.  The Collegium took decisions 
by qualified majority voting (i.e. ⅔ of the aggregate membership of the Collegium) or 
by consensus.  Voting took place on all issues or decisions taken by the Collegium.  
220.  The competences of Council and Collegium were approved by the EAEU Treaty and Annex 
No. 1 to the EAEU Treaty. 
 (f) The Council of the Commission 
221.  Council of the Commission carried out general regulation of integration processes of the 
EAEU, overall management on the Commission ac tivity, and performed the following functions: 
- organized the work aimed at enhancing the regulatory framework of the EAEU; 
- submitted proposals on main directions of the integration process within the EAEU to the 
Supreme Council for approval; 
- reviewed issues on revision or amendment of the Commission's decisions taken by the 
Collegium of the Commission; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 71 - 
 
  - reviewed issues in respect of monitoring and controlling implementation of international 
treaties that constituted the legal framework of the EAEU; 
- performed functions on organization of the Commission's activity;  - provided instructions to the Collegium of Commission; and, 
- performed other functions provided by the EAEU Treaty and international agreements 
within the EAEU. 
 (g) The Collegium of the Commission 
222.  The Collegium of the Commission was an executive body of the Commission. 
The Collegium of the Commission provided implemen tation of the following functions and powers:  
- elaborated proposals and collected propos als from EAEU member State on further 
integration within the EAEU, including development and implementation of main directions 
of the integration; 
- took decisions, orders and recommendations; 
- implemented decisions and orders taken by the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council and 
the Intergovernmental Council and decisions taken by the Council of the Commission; 
- ensured monitoring and control on implementation of international treaties constituting the 
legal basis of the EAEU and decisions of the Commission and informed member States on 
necessity of their implementation; 
- annually reported to the Council of the Commission on its work;  -  drafted recommendations on formation, functioning and development of the EAEU; 
-  prepared written expert opinions on proposals of the member States submitted to the 
Commission; 
- assisted member States in resolving disput es within the EAEU before appealing to the 
Court of the EAEU; 
- represented Commission's interests at court instances, including the Court of the EAEU; - interacted with public authorities of the EAEU member States within its competence; 
- considered requests submitted to the Commission; 
- developed drafts of international agreemen ts and decisions of the Commission, taken by 
the Council of the Commission, as well as other documents, necessary for performing functions of the Commission; 
- ensured organization of meetings of the Council of the Commission, the Intergovernmental 
Council and the Supreme Council as well as  subsidiary bodies of the Commission;  
- established consultative bodies within the Collegium of the Commission; and,  
- performed functions to organize Commission's activity. 
223.  A Member asked whether the Eurasian Economic Commission had the authority to 
negotiate international agreements and if so, who was  the legal person signing and being the 
contact partner for such agreements.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in accordance 
with the EAEU Treaty, the Supreme Council took decisions on granting the right to conduct 
negotiations and expressed consent of the EAEU to be bound by international agreements with 
third parties, as well as the termination, susp ension or withdrawal from such agreements.  
The decision on granting such mandates was to be taken on case-by-case basis.   
224.  A Member enquired how the Commission interacted with Kazakhstan's domestic law 
authorities in the following areas:  sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary measures, technical 
barriers to trade, any other areas where special committees or commissions reporting to the EEC Collegium had been established to administer trade related authorities.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that in the field of technical regulation, sanitary, veterinary and phytosanitary 
measures Kazakhstan's national authorities had actively participated in drafting, at that time, of 
the CU Agreements and, subsequently, EAEU Trea ty and regulations through special mechanisms 
established by legislation of the EAEU.  In particular, the Consultative Committee on Technical WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 72 - 
 
  Regulation, Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures was a special consultative body 
that represented a platform for consultations among representatives from the EAEU member States.  Within the framework of the Consultative Committee Kazakhstan's relevant 
authorities participated in preparing proposals on draft regulations on TBT and SPS, including draft 
technical regulations; conducted expertise of legal acts of the EAEU, etc.   
225.  In particular, according to the established pr ocedures, draft technical regulations of the 
EAEU were developed by the EAEU member States.  A member State responsible for the 
development of a draft technical regulation designated a State body responsible for the 
development of the draft technical regulation.  The State body prepared the draft technical 
regulation and, taking into account proposals from the competent authorities of the 
EAEU member States, formed a working group on the development of the draft technical 
regulation.   
226.  In general, all EAEU legal acts on TBT, sa nitary, veterinary and phytosanitary measures 
had to be reviewed and approved by the relevant na tional authorities prior to their adoption by the 
Eurasian Economic Commission. 
227.  With regard to other areas, according to paragraph 44 of Annex No. 1 "Regulation on 
Eurasian Economic Commission" of the EAEU Treaty, the Collegium had the right to establish 
consultative bodies.  At present, the Collegium had established the following consultative bodies: 
- Consultative Committee on Natural Monopoly; 
- Consultative Committee on Transport and Infrastructure; - Consultative Committee on Trade; - Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Veterinary, Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
measures; 
- Consultative Committee on Tax Policy and Administration; - Consultative Committee on Customs Regulation; 
- Consultative Committee on Electro Power; 
- Consultative Committee on Oil and Gas; - Consultative Committee on Industry; 
- Consultative Committee on Agricultural Sector; 
- Consultative Committee on Statistics; - Consultative Committee on Macroeconomic Policy; - Consultative Committee on Migration Policy; 
- Consultative Committee on Entrepreneur Issue; and, 
- Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property. 
Consultative committees prepared proposals to th e Collegium and developed drafts of agreements 
and regulations.  Consultative committees consiste d of representatives of State bodies of each 
member State and independent experts.  Ch airman and Secretary of the Committee were 
EEC representatives.  Therefore, member States, through their representatives, participated in the 
decision making process of the EEC. 
228.  Asked whether there would be a common EEC procurement regime for "state and (or) 
municipal procurement", the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Agreement on State 
(Municipal) Procurement had granted national treatment for government procurement to other 
member States from 1 January 2014 on a reciprocity basis.  This treatment continued to be WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 73 - 
 
  authorised according to Section XXII "Governmen t (Municipal) Procurement" and Annex No. 25 of 
the EAEU Treaty. 
229.  Concerning the EEC competency on "mutual trade in services and investments" the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that trade in services and investments between the 
EAEU member States was regulated by Section XV "Trade in Services, Establishment, Activity and 
Investing" and Annex No. 16 "Protocol on Trade in Services, Establishment, Activity and Investing" 
of the EAEU Treaty.  The main objective of these provisions was to promote and liberalise trade in 
services between the EAEU member States, to create common principles and rules for mutual 
trade in services and create a favourable invest ment climate within the EAEU.  These provisions 
did not regulate trade in services and investments between the EAEU member States and third 
countries, and did not provide the EEC with the authority to regulate services and investments between the EAEU member States or with third countries.  
230.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify the auth ority of the EEC in intellectual property 
protection beyond border control.  The representa tive of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance 
with the EAEU Treaty, the EEC conducted general supervision over the implementation of 
provisions on intellectual property rights of the EAEU Treaty.  The EAEU Treaty established 
common principles of copyright, trademark and pate nt regulation within the EAEU.  Currently, the 
EEC had not been given any authority in intellectual property protection beyond border control.   
231.  In response to the request to elaborate on the scope of authority of the EEC in "labour 
migration" and in "financial markets (banking, insurance, foreign exchange market, stock market)", the representative of Kazakhstan said that relevant provisions could be found in Section 
XXVI "Labour Migration" of the EAEU Treaty.  Th e EAEU Treaty regulated procedures related to 
labour activity of migrant workers and social pr otection of migrant workers (medical assistance 
and social insurance), who were citizens of the EAEU member States.  The EEC was responsible for 
general supervision over the implementation of the provisions of the EAEU Treaty.  
The Consultative Committee on migration policy was established in order to develop proposals on 
the establishment of a unified legal regime for empl oyment of citizens of the EAEU member States 
and the formation of a common immigration policy legal framework. 
232.  As for the scope of authority of the EEC in "financial markets" (banking, insurance, foreign 
exchange market, stock market)", the representa tive of Kazakhstan explained that relevant 
provisions could be found in Chapter XIV "Monetar y Policy" and Annex No. 15 of the EAEU Treaty.  
Under the EAEU Treaty, the Commission was not dele gated a decision-making authority in the area 
of fiscal and monetary policy within the EAEU.  Decisions regarding policies in this area were made 
by each EAEU member State at the national level.  EAEU member States agreed that the 
coordination of exchange rate policy would be performed by a separate body, composed of heads 
of the national (central) banks of the EAEU me mber States.  Article 103 of the EAEU Treaty 
provided that this body would  be established in 2025. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 74 - 
 
  (h) Decision-making within the Bodies of the EAEU 
233.  In accordance with Article 18 and paragraph 13 of Annex No. 1 of the EAEU Treaty, the 
Commission within its authority took decisions mandatory for implementation by the 
EAEU member States, orders and recommendations .  Decisions of the Commission consisted of 
decisions made by the Council and the Collegium an d were included in the legal framework of the 
EAEU, and were directly applicable in the territories of the EAEU member States.  The Council and 
the Collegium adopted decisions, orders and re commendations of the Commission within their 
powers.  
234.  In accordance with paragraph 30 of the Annex No. 1 to the EAEU Treaty, any 
member State or member of the Council had the right to make a proposal to the Collegium on 
repealing or amending the decision within 15 calendar days from the date when the decision was 
adopted by the Collegium. 
235.  Upon receipt of all required documents from the Collegium, the Council had to make its 
decision within 10 calendar days.  A member State that did not agree with the adopted decision of 
the Collegium could send a letter signed by the Head of its Government to repeal or amend the 
decision of the Collegium by the Supreme Council.  This decision could not enter into force before 
its consideration by the Intergovernmental Council and (or) the Supreme Council. 
(i) The Court of the Eurasian Economic Union 
236.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Me mbers that provisions of the Statute of the 
Court of the Eurasian Economic Union (hereafter: Court of the EAEU) could be found in Annex No. 
2 to the EAEU Treaty.  In addition to establishi ng the Court of the EAEU, the Statute of the Court 
established the Court's competence and rules of procedure to be applied.  She explained that 
pursuant to provisions of the Statute, the Court was authorised to:  
- ensure uniform application and interpretation of international agreements within the 
EAEU, international agreements between the EAEU and third party and decisions taken by the competent bodies of the EAEU; 
- consider disputes arising on implementation of the Treaty, international treaties within the 
EAEU and (or) decisions of the bodies of the EAEU; and,  
- interpret provisions of international treaties in force within the framework of the EAEU. 
237.  In connection with the operating of the EAEU, the Court of the EAEU considered disputes 
regarding implementation of the EAEU Treaty, inte rnational treaties within the EAEU and decisions 
of the bodies of the EAEU: 
1) upon application of the member States of the EAEU: 
- on compliance of international treaties within the EAEU or their provisions with the EAEU 
Treaty; 
- on compliance by other member States with the EAEU Treaty, international treaties within 
the EAEU and (or) decisions of the bodies of the EAEU as well as  specific provisions of 
those international treaties and (or) decisions; 
- on compliance of decision of the Commission an d (or) its provisions with the EAEU Treaty, 
international treaties within the EAEU and decisions of the bodies of the EAEU; and, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 75 - 
 
  - on actions (omissions) of the Commission. 
2) upon application of  economic operator: - on compliance of decision of the Commission and (or) its provisions affected his rights and 
legal interests in the sphere of economic activity with the EAEU Treaty and (or) 
international treaties within the EAEU; 
- on actions or omissions of the Commission affecting his rights and legal interests in the 
sphere of economic activity with the EAEU Tr eaty and (or) international treaties within 
the EAEU. 
238.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that if the EAEU member State or the 
Commission did not settle the matter within 3 months, the dispute could then be referred to the 
Court.  By mutual consent of the parties dispute could be referred to the Court prior to the 
expiration of this period. 
239.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized  that the competence of the Court of the 
EAEU was defined by the provisions of Section IV "Jurisdiction of the Court" of Annex No. 2  
"Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Un ion" of the EAEU Treaty.  The Court of the EAEU 
did not have jurisdiction to opine directly on the member States' WTO obligations and the Court could not rule on compliance with such obligations.  She also noted that the competence of the 
Court could be enlarged or limited only if it was prescribed directly by an international agreement 
constituting part of the legal framework of th e EAEU.  The Treaty "On the Functioning of the 
Customs Union in the Framework of the Multilateral  Trading System" was such a Treaty.    Since 
this Treaty was part of the legal framework of the EAEU, an infringement by an 
EAEU member State, by the Supreme Council or by  the EEC of such rights and obligations under 
the Treaty to the extent that they were a part  of the legal framework of the EAEU could be 
challenged by an EAEU member State before the Co urt of the EAEU in accordance with the Court's 
Statute.  In addition, economic operators could assert breaches of the provisions of the above-
mentioned Treaty in the Court of the EAEU. 
240.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Statute of the Court of EAEU also 
authorised the Court to issue clarifications on th e EAEU Treaty, the provisions of the international 
treaties within the EAEU, as well as decisions of  the bodies of the EAEU.  Such opinions were 
issued at the request of the EAEU member States, or the bodies of the EAEU, and were in the form 
of advisory opinions that did not prevent me mber States from providing their own joint 
interpretations.   
241.  With regard to who could apply to have the Court hear a case, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that with regard to cases involving the EAEU, cases could be brought before 
the Court based on an application submitted by: 
- EAEU member States; and, 
- economic operators. 
242.  Under the EAEU Treaty, economic operators of the EAEU member States and of third 
countries were able to bring actions to the Court of the EAEU to:  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 76 - 
 
  - challenge decisions of the Commission in the sphere of economic activity if such decisions 
affected their rights and legal interests under the Treaty and (or) international treaties within the EAEU; and, 
- challenge the actions (omission) of the EEC in the sphere of economic activity if such 
actions (omission) affect their rights and legal interests under the Treaty and (or) 
international treaties within the EAEU.  
243.  The grounds to challenge acts of the EEC, or their individual provisions, or any action 
(omission) of the EEC were their non-compliance with international treaties concluded within the 
framework of the EAEU, which resulted in the vi olation of the rights and lawful interests of 
economic operators in the field of entrepreneurial and other economic activities, provided for by 
those international treaties.  She further explaine d that the Court of the EAEU would not consider 
applications to bring an action, if the decision of the Court on a previously considered case 
regarding the same subject and based on the same grounds was in effect.  A decision of the Court could be reviewed due to newly-discovered circumstances.  
244.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, member States had created an 
appeals chamber within the Court of the EAEU.  A party to the case had the right to appeal the 
decision of a panel of judges to the Appeals Chamber of the Court.  The Appeals Chamber 
consisted of judges of the Court from the member States, which had not participated in the panel 
that had taken the decision that was being appealed.  The decision of the Appeals Chamber was 
the final decision in the case and could not be appealed.   
245.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, with regard to disputes of an economic 
nature arising between the member States on the implementation of decisions of bodies of the 
EAEU, treaty provisions in force in the framework of the EAEU, and cases in connection with the 
EAEU, the decisions of the Court were binding on the Parties to the dispute.  The decision of a 
panel of judges, if not appealed, entered into forc e 15 days after the date of its pronouncement.  
Decisions of the Appeals Chamber were effective on the date of pronouncement.  If the decision of 
the Court was not implemented within the time-fra me specified by the Court, any EAEU Party to 
the case could apply to the Supreme Council for a decision on implementation.  In cases involving 
an economic operator where the EEC failed to im plement the decision of the Court of the EAEU, 
the economic operator had the right to file an application to the Court on introduction of measures 
on the execution of said decision.  The Court was obliged, within 15 days from receipt of the 
application from the economic operator, to addres s the Supreme Council with a request to take a 
decision on the issue. 
(j) Transparency 
246.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that proposals for the introduction, 
amendment, or elimination of a measure were prepared by the interested member State in 
accordance with its national legislation.  This member State consulted with interested stakeholders 
on the proposal as provided for in its applicable national legislation.  She also informed Members 
that such proposals by another member State, once submitted to Kazakhstan for consideration, 
would be promptly made subject to public consulta tions in the same way as proposals prepared by WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 77 - 
 
  Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third 
Countries", participants of foreign activity of member States could also provide their proposals and comments within the procedure of the development of draft Decision of the Commission on 
introduction, implementation or withdrawal of non-tariff measure concerning trade in goods with 
third countries.  Furthermore, interested persons could also participate in consultations and be 
informed on the results according to the proced ures and forms defined by  the Commission.    
247.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the date when a Decision of the 
EAEU bodies was published on the EAEU website was the basis for determining the date of entry 
into force of that decision.  Specifically, Decisi ons of the EEC, rather than recommendations, as a 
general rule, entered into force not earlier than  30 days after the date of publication on the 
EAEU website. Decisions of the EEC were post ed on the website www.eu rasiancommission.org 
within two working days from the date of their adoption.   
248.  Members expressed concerns regarding transparency, and also noted that it appeared that 
neither international agreements within the EAEU, nor EEC Decisions, including those promulgating 
Regulations and other acts, provided WTO Member s and interested persons of WTO Members with 
the right to consult with and provide views directly to EEC.  This deficiency raised concerns about 
whether international agreements within the EAEU and procedures complied with WTO 
requirements.  These Members requested that Kaza khstan explain how it intended to implement 
its commitments under the "Transparency" section of this Report in cases where EEC was 
responsible for proposing or adopting legal ac ts, including decisions, or other measures. 
249.  With regard to concerns raised by Members about transparency and access to EEC, the 
representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that nothing precluded WTO Members from 
providing comments directly to EEC.  She noted that Kazakhstan invited views from Members on 
proposals that it was presenting to EEC. 
250.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Commission Decision No. 308 
"Decision-Making at the Commission of the Customs Union" of 18 June 2010 had been amended to 
establish and put into effect a mechanism for publication of proposed EAEU legal acts covered 
under paragraph [ 903] of the "Transparency" section of this  Report before their adoption and to 
provide a reasonable period of time for Members and interested persons to provide comments to 
the competent EAEU Body, which was authorised to take these comments into account in its 
consideration of the proposed legal act.  Moreover , from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO, pursuant to this mechanism, no EAEU legal act covered under paragraph [ 909] of the 
"Transparency" section of this Report would become effective prior to publication as provided for in 
the applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.  
(k) Implementation of WTO Commitments under the EAEU Regime 
251.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the EAEU member States had concluded 
the Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union in the Framework of the Multilateral Trading WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 78 - 
 
  System of 19 May 2011 (hereinafter: - Treaty on the Multilateral System).  This interstate Treaty 
had entered into force in accordance with the provis ions of the Protocol on the Rules of Entry into 
Force of International Treaties Comprising the Le gal Basis of the Customs Union and continued to 
be in effect under the EAEU Treaty.  According to  the Treaty on the Multilateral System, from the 
date of accession of any EAEU member State to the WTO, the provisions of the WTO Agreement, 
as set out in its Protocol of Accession, including the commitments undertaken by that 
member State as part of the terms of its accession to the WTO, which related to matters that the 
member States had authorized the EAEU bodies  to regulate in the framework of the EAEU, as 
well as to the legal relationships regulated by the international treaties constituting the legal 
framework of the EAEU, became an integral part of the legal framework of the EAEU.  As such, 
these provisions were part of the single undertaki ng and were international agreements within the 
EAEU that were part of the single undertaking for each member State.  Under the Treaty on the 
Multilateral System , EAEU member States were obligated wh en making an international treaty in 
the framework of the EAEU to ensure that such EAEU  treaty or agreement was consistent with the 
WTO commitments of each EAEU member State.  Similarly, when EAEU bodies  adopted and 
applied EAEU acts, those acts had to comply with those commitments.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan further explained that the rights and obligations of the member States resulting from 
the WTO Agreement, as they were set-out in the Protocol of Accession of each member State, 
including the commitments undertaken by each member State as part of the terms of its accession 
to the WTO and that became a part of the legal framework of the EAEU could not be subject to 
abrogation or limitation by decision of the EAEU bodies , including the Court of the EAEU or by an 
international treaty of the member States.  When another EAEU member State became a 
WTO Member, the rights and obligations of that member State under the WTO Agreement also 
became an integral part of the legal framework of the EAEU.  She explained that WTO provisions 
which regulated the creation and functioning of cu stoms unions also applied.  She noted that an 
EAEU member State that was not a WTO Member could deviate from provisions of the 
WTO Agreement in certain cases.  When that member State became a WTO Member, however, 
any deviation from the WTO Agreement would be allowed only as specifically provided for in the 
terms of accession to the WTO of that member State.  Finally, the EAEU member States were 
required to adopt measures to adjust the EAEU legal framework and decisions of the EAEU bodies  
to comply with the WTO Agreement as set-out in the Protocol of Accession of each member State.  Until those measures were adopted, othe r EAEU treaties and decisions of the EAEU bodies  would 
apply only to the extent that they complied wi th the WTO Agreement.  Thus, the rights and 
obligations of an EAEU member State under the WTO Agreement would override prior and future 
EAEU treaties and agreements and decisions of the EAEU bodies .  
252.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  the Treaty on the Multilateral System was 
an EAEU Treaty and part of the domestic legal fr amework of each EAEU member State.  As such, 
the national courts would apply the provisions of the Treaty.  She also confirmed that the Treaty 
on the Multilateral System, established obligat ions on EAEU member States and the Supreme 
Council and the EEC regarding the commitments undertaken by each member State as part of the terms of its accession to the WTO and that beca me part of the legal framework of the EAEU.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 79 - 
 
  Thus, an infringement of such rights and obligations by an EAEU member State or the Supreme 
Council or the EEC could be challenged by an EAEU member State, or the EEC before the Court of the EAEU.  In addition, economic operators could a ssert breaches of the provisions of the Treaty 
on the Multilateral System in the Court of the EAEU, as provided for in provisions of the Statute of 
the Court and in the Treaty on Judicial Recourse.  
- Government Entities Responsible for Ma king and Implementing Policies Affecting 
Foreign Trade; Right of Appeal 
253.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that the Court of the EAEU and the 
national judicial system of the Republic of Kazakh stan were independent.  The Statute of the Court 
provided that the highest judicial authority of the Republic of Kazakhstan was authorised to apply 
to the Court of the EAEU for an opinion on interpretation of certain international treaties.  
The Court of the EAEU, however, did not serve as  an Appeals Court from the national judicial 
system.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted th at, in accordance with the Statute of the Court 
of the EAEU, the national Supreme Court of an EAEU member State could ask the Court of the 
EAEU to provide an advisory opinion in respect of implementation of EAEU legal acts.  
Subsequently, the national Supreme Court could reflect this opinion in a Normative Resolution, 
which would be taken into account by all lower national courts. 
254.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Decision of the Interstate Council of 
EurAsEC at the level of Heads of State No. 16 of 27 November 2009 had established the Experts 
Council of the Supreme Body of the CU and had al so adopted regulations on the operation of the 
Experts Council.  The Interstate Council Decision No. 69 of 9 December 2010 had appointed the 
members of the Experts Council.  Economic operators could apply to the Experts Council for an 
opinion on whether an EEC Decision complied with an international treaty that was part of the legal 
framework of the EAEU.  If the Experts Council acce pted an application, a Conciliation Commission 
was formed to examine the issue and to provid e an opinion to the EEC on whether the EEC 
Decision conformed with the legal basis of the EAEU and, if the Decision did not conform, 
recommendations on revising the EAEU Decision.  The EEC was required to inform the Supreme 
Council of the opinion of the Experts Council and the results of the consideration by the EEC of that 
opinion. 
255.  Some Members enquired about the administrati ve and judicial channels for appeal of 
administrative decisions made on WTO-related issues – namely how importers and exporters could 
appeal (i) customs and other WTO-related decisions within administrative channels; and, 
(ii) administrative rulings to a court or other "ind ependent tribunal" as provided for in Article X of 
the GATT 1994.   
256.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Kazakhstan applied the Customs Code of the 
Customs Union that had entered into force as of  1 July 2010.  According to Article 9 of the 
CU Customs Code, any person had the right to appeal against decisions made by the customs 
bodies, action (inaction) of the customs bodies and their officials.  At the same time, such persons 
had to appeal in accordance with the national legislation of the country where the customs body or WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 80 - 
 
  a n  o f f i c i a l  m a d e  a  d e c i s i o n .   T h u s ,  i n  a c c o r d a n c e  w i t h  A r t i c l e  1 2  o f  t h e  L a w  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  
"On Order of Review of Physical and Juridical Pers ons' Requests" physical and juridical persons had 
the right to appeal against actions (inactions) of the customs officials and decisions made by the 
c u s t o m s  b o d i e s  t o  a  s e n i o r  o f f i c i a l  o r  h i g h e r - l e v e l  b o d y  n o  l a t e r  t h a n  t h r e e  m o n t h s  f r o m  t h e  
moment a physical or juridical person learned about an action or decision made by the relevant 
customs body or an official.  In case there was no senior official or an appellant did not agree with 
the decision, an appellant could appeal to the cour t in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure 
of Kazakhstan (CCP).  The CCP (Article 278) defined the common judicial procedure for appeals, 
including administrative appeals, as well as for special proceedings.  According to Article 280 of the 
CCP, physical and juridical persons had the right to  appeal to the court within three months from 
the date it had become known that their rights, freedoms and interests protected by law, were abused.  Besides, in both cases, a failure of a physical or juridical person to submit an application 
for appeal within the stated term of three months could not constitute a ground for rejecting an 
application.  The reason for failure to submit an application within the term of three months had to 
be investigated when considering a complaint and could be one of the grounds for rejection of the 
complaint.  The review of judicial decisions – of Rayon (district), Oblast (regional) and other local 
courts made at first instance – was carried out through an appeal/supervision procedure.  
Prior appeal to higher bodies did not constitute a mandatory precondition for a direct appeal to the 
courts.  Irrespective of whether or not they participated in the hearing, the Prosecutor-General, 
Oblast, Rayon and other public prosecutors of equal stature, as well as their deputies, had the right to appeal against court judgments which had not yet come into force (other than judgments 
of the Supreme Court).  Parties to a case, as well as other parties affected by the decision, could 
also appeal against such decisions.  Appeals must be made within one month of the date of 
infringement and were heard no later than one mont h from the date of receipt of the appeal by the 
court of first instance.  The court of appeal was authorised to make new findings of fact within the 
limits of the claim and investigate new evidence, which, for valid reasons, had not been presented 
at first instance.  Court decisions, rulings, decrees and orders, which had already come into force, 
could be reviewed and appealed within a year, on grounds stipulated in the CCP (e.g. discovery of 
new facts), in line with the judicial supervisio n procedure.  Reviews of decisions made by the 
supervisory board of the Supreme Court, and a se cond review of the case by the supervisory 
board of the Supreme Court, were also allowed in certain cases.   
257.  As regards appeals and complaints in the sphere of technical regulation (including 
SPS issues), the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, under the EAEU, there was a 
common system of technical regulations, including SPS matters, and thus the Court of the EAEU 
had jurisdiction over appeals covered by the rele vant EAEU agreements, EEC Decisions, including 
those promulgating EAEU Regulations and other EAEU  measures.  With regard to decisions, actions 
or inaction of the authorised bodies of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan related to technical regulation, 
including SPS issues, she explained that legal measures were in place to allow appeals to be made 
via the independent judicial system against any decisions of the relevant authorities of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and to ensure corrective action was taken, in accordance with decisions by the Court, when a complaint was justified. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 81 - 
 
  IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
- Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations 258.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the right of all domestic and foreign natural 
and juridical persons to carry out foreign trade activity in Kazakhstan, and any exceptions or 
restrictions upon those rights, were stipulated in the EAEU Treaty, CU Commission and EAEU Decisions, other EAEU legal acts and national legislation.  In general terms, Article 2 of the 
Civil Code of Kazakhstan No. 269-XIII of 27 December 1994 provided that goods, service and 
money moved on a free basis within the territory of  Kazakhstan, and the Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 296-IV "On Customs Procedures" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter:  "the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan") elaborated on that mandate.  She stated that from 1 January 2015, as a 
result of the entry into force of the EAEU Trea ty, the principal requirements for importing goods 
into and exporting goods from Kazakhstan were based on Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff 
Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU  Treaty which replaced the provisions of the 
following CU documents: the Agreement "On Co mmon Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in 
Respect of Third Countries" of 25 January 2008, the Agreement "On the Procedure of Introduction 
and Implementation of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common Customs 
Territory in Respect of Third Countries" of 9 June 2009, the Agreement "On the Rules of Licensing 
in the Area of Foreign Trade in Goods" of 9 June 2009 which were terminated when the EAEU 
Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  The following documents remained in force: Decision 
No. 132 of 27 November 2009 "On a Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the 
Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of the CU Commission 
(hereinafter: "CU Decision No. 132 of 27 November  2009") and Decision of the Collegium of the 
Eurasian Economic Commission No. 134 "On Normative Legal Acts in the Area of Non-Tariff 
Regulation" of 16 August 2012 (hereinafter: "Colle gium Decision No. 134").  The procedure for the 
importation of specific products, such as ethyl spirits and alcohol products, products with cryptographic capabilities ("encryption products"), and medicines and pharmaceutical ingredients, 
were set-out in Regulations of the CU Comm ission approved by CU Decision No. 132 of 
27 November 2009 and re-approved by Collegium Decision No. 134.  Specific sections in this 
Report relating to the import and export regimes of Kazakhstan provided descriptions of the 
provisions of the EAEU Treaty, Commission Decisions and other EAEU legal acts, including 
requirements for non-automatic import or export licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits).  
The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, from 1 January 2015, pursuant to Annex No. 7 to 
the EAEU Treaty, these Decisions and Regulati ons, the authorised body of each EAEU 
member State was responsible for issuing non-automatic import and export licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits), as well as activity licenses.   
259.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  only declarants (importers or exporters), 
or their representatives registered for that purpose, could perform the customs activities 
associated with the importation or exportation of goods (presenting customs documents, declaring 
origin and valuation, paying tariffs and taxes, securing release of the goods, right of appeal, etc.).  
The requirements and rights of declarants (impor ters/exporters) were regulated by the Agreement WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 82 - 
 
  on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Customs 
Code") and the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  Pu rsuant to Article 284 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, as well as Article 186 of the CU Cust oms Code, the declarant had to be a natural or a 
juridical person of one of the EAEU member States who either had a contract for importation or 
exportation (or had had the contract concluded on  his behalf) or owned the goods being imported 
or exported.  The requirements for a person or an entity to register as a juridical person of 
Kazakhstan were provided in Law No. 2198 "On State Registration of Juridical Persons and 
Statistical Record-Keeping Registration of Bran ches and Representative Offices" of 17 April 1995 
(hereinafter:  "the Law on State Registration"), Law No. 57-III "On Currency Regulation and 
Currency Control" of 13 June 2005 (hereinafter:  "the Law on Currency Regulation"), Budget Code 
of Kazakhstan No. 95-IV of 4 December 2008 (hereinafter:  "the Budget Code of Kazakhstan") and Code of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget 
(Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008 (hereinafter:  "the Tax Code of Kazakhstan").   
260.  A Member raised concerns about the ability of natural and juridical persons located outside 
Kazakhstan to act as a declarant (importer of record) when importing goods into Kazakhstan.  
This Member noted, in particular, that Kazakhstan's regime did not appear to permit such natural 
and juridical persons to serve as a declarant (importer of record) so as to be responsible for 
clearing all customs formalities in connection with their imports.  This Member asked Kazakhstan 
what steps it would take to provide such rights.  
261.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at Articles 186-194 of the CU Customs Code 
set forth the requirements for persons to import goods into the customs territory of the EAEU and 
perform all necessary customs procedures, including payment of customs duties and charges.  
Article 186 of the CU Customs Code provided that only a juridical person of an EAEU member State 
could become a declarant.  Therefore, a subsidiary  of a foreign company registered as a juridical 
person of Kazakhstan could become a declarant.  However, a foreign natural person could act as a 
declarant of goods for personal use without registering as a juridical person of Kazakhstan. 
262.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at requirements for actual registration of 
natural and juridical persons for commercial acti vity, including importing and exporting, were 
strictly a matter of the national legislation of each EAEU member State and this situation was not 
expected to change.  She emphasized that the re quirement to be registered in Kazakhstan was 
necessary to ensure proper implementation of customs legislation, including its provisions on conditional release of goods into the territory of Kazakhstan and post-entry control that permitted 
accelerated customs procedures at the entry and destination customs checkpoints.   
263.  Concerning registration requirements, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
pursuant to Article 3 of the Law on State Registration, State registration was mandatory for all 
juridical persons established on the territory of Kazakhstan regardless of the purpose and type of 
their activities.  Registration was necessary for:  (i) certifying and keeping a record on creation, 
reorganization and liquidation of juridical persons, branches and representative offices; (ii) keeping 
a single State Register of Juridical Persons, and a Register of Branches and Representative Offices; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 83 - 
 
  and, (iii) dissemination of the data on juridica l persons, branches and representative offices 
registered in Kazakhstan (other than confidential information and commercial secrets) in the order established by the national legislation.   
264.  Pursuant to Article 9 of the Law on State Registration, State registration of small 
businesses, as well as medium and large-scale enterprises operating on the basis of a Model 
Charter, was performed within one business day and their re-registration within three business 
days from the date of submission of a complete set of application documents.  State registration 
(re-registration) of medium and large-scale enterprises not operating under a Model Charter was 
performed within seven business days from the date of submission of a complete set of application 
documents.  According to Article 6 of the Law on State Registration, to apply for registration, 
juridical persons had to submit three copies of th e following documents:  (i) standard application; 
(ii) articles of incorporation (charter); (iii) proof of payment of the registration fee; (iv) document 
certifying location/address of its office or its agent's office; and, (v) for juridical persons 
established as a result of restructuring, the act of transfer, including proof that creditors had been 
notified about the restructuring.  In response to a specific question, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that pursuant to Article 6 of the Law on State Registration, either of the 
following documents was recognised as a document certifying location/address of a juridical 
person:  a notarised copy of (i) a leasing contract, (ii) a sales contract, or, (iii) other documents 
confirming the property right.  If the owner of the leased office was a natural person, a notarised 
document confirming consent of the natural person for the use of the office as a place of location 
of the juridical person had to be presented.  She noted that pursuant to Law No. 60-V 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of 
State Registration of Juridical Persons and Statistical Record-Keeping Registration of Branches and 
Representative Offices" of 24 December 2012, state registration of all commercial juridical 
persons, except for Joint Stock Companies, was performed within one business day.  Furthermore, 
article of incorporation (charter), except for Joint Stock Companies (article of incorporation 
(charter) was required), and document certifying location/address of its office or its agent's office 
were no longer required for state registration as a juridical person. 
265.  In addition to submitting the documents de scribed above, and unless otherwise provided 
by international treaties, juridical persons of Kazakhstan with foreign participation had to submit:  
(i) a notarised and consularized (legalised) document certifying that the applicant was established in accordance with the legislation of the foreign country, accompanied by a notarised translation in 
Kazakh and Russian languages; and, (ii) a copy  of the identification papers of the person 
registering the company (e.g., passport, identification card, or residency permit), accompanied by 
a notarised translation in Kazakh and Russian languages.  These requirements applied in a uniform 
manner to all juridical persons with foreign participation and did not constitute actual 
discrimination against them.  
266.  Registration could only be refused for la ck of compliance of the company's founding 
documents with Kazakhstan's legislation and breaching the legal rules on the establishment of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 84 - 
 
  juridical persons.  The basis for refusal of registration (or re-registration) was provided in 
Article 11 of the Law on State Registration.  Refusals were communicated in writing within 10 working days, with a reference to the underlying reasons, and could be appealed to the courts.   
267.  Pursuant to Law No. 537 "On Amendments and Addenda to Legal Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on State Registration of Juridical Pe rsons" of 18 March 2004, juridical persons, their 
branches and representative offices, obtained all certificates from the justice authorities on the 
basis of the "one-stop-shop" principle.  These certificates included a State registration certificate, a 
taxpayer registration certificate and a statistical certificate of registration in the State Statistical 
Register.  Registration certificates were issued for an unlimited period and a single registration was 
valid on the entire territory of Kazakhstan.  A registration certificate would be replaced only at 
re-registration or when there had been a change in location.  A table summarising the requirements for registration of juridical person s, including the duration of the procedure and 
applicable fees, is provided in Annex 5(A) of this Report. 
268.  Some Members raised concerns about the requirement for re-registration and duplicate 
registration, since this requirement would amount to an ad valorem  fee that appeared to place an 
extra burden on foreign businesses/entities.  These Members of the Working Party asked 
Kazakhstan to confirm that it would bring its registration fees into conformity with the 
requirements of Article VIII of the GATT 1994 prior to WTO accession, given that commercial 
registration was a requirement to import or to export goods other than for personal use in 
Kazakhstan.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to the Methodology for Calculation of Fees and Fees for State Registration of Juridical Persons (approved 
by Order of the Ministry of Economy and Budget Pl anning No. 135 of 28 October 2005) registration 
fees for juridical persons, including small busine sses, reflected the cost of services rendered.  
The same criteria were applied to the calculation of fees for activity licenses necessary for 
importation or for exportation.  Fees for State registration of juridical persons were calculated 
based on the Monthly Calculated Indices (hereinafter:  "MCI") defined by the Tax Code of 
Kazakhstan.  The registration fee for small businesses was set at 2 MCI (approximately US$20 
in 2014); the rate for other juridical persons was 6.5 MCI (approximately US$65 in 2014).  
This difference was caused by the different level of costs/resources involved.  Less time and 
resources were required for the assessment of a registration for small businesses due to the lesser 
number of documents required for the registration of small businesses.  Therefore, the cost of 
service rendered was less than for the registration of other juridical persons.  All registration fees 
were applied uniformly on the territory of Kazakhstan.  The methodology for the calculation of fees 
is provided in Annex 5(B) of this Report.   
269.  A Member noted the substantial difference between the time required for registration of 
small businesses and other juridical persons and encouraged Kazakhstan to implement further 
reform so that the turnaround time for registration applications was equal for all business entities.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that simplified State registration procedures 
applied to small businesses, including a reduced li st of documents required for registration, and, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 85 - 
 
  consequently, a shorter registration period and smaller registration fee.  These simplified 
procedures were based on the fact that all such enterprises operated on the basis of a simplified Model Charter.  To date, her Government had not received any complaint on these procedures.  
These preferential terms for small businesses were part of the Government's broader efforts aimed 
at addressing the strategic goal of reducing po verty and social disparity, and strengthening the 
middle class, a policy goal shared by other countries that provided special help to the formation 
and development of small businesses.  She held the view that these policy measures were applied 
on a non-discriminatory basis to both domestic and foreign entities and natural persons applying 
for registration and as such, did not, in her view, contradict WTO norms.  She further recalled that 
pursuant to Law No. 60-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Issues of State Registration of Juridical Persons and Statistical Record-Keeping Registration of Branches and Representative Office s" of 24 December 2012, state registration of all 
commercial juridical persons, except for Joint Stock Companies, was performed within one 
business day. 
270.  In response to another question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that an "authorised economic operator" was a juridical entity of an EAEU member State 
that met certain conditions, set forth in Article 39 of the CU Customs Code and Chapter 6 of the 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan, including provision of a guarantee for the payment of customs 
duties and taxes, a history of engaging in fore ign economic activity, the absence of unfulfilled 
obligations or debts to the customs authority, the absence of administrative offences in the year prior to the application date, the availability of sufficient record-keeping procedures, and 
compliance with other relevant requirements of the EAEU member State, in this case, Kazakhstan, 
under which the entity was established.  According to Article 41 of the CU Customs Code and 
Article 65 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, an authorised economic operator enjoyed simplified 
and expedited customs procedures, including thos e concerning goods in transit.  Authorised 
economic operator status and access to simplified procedures applied only in the territory of the 
EAEU member State, which granted that status.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that 
an authorised economic operator could use simplified procedures provided that this operator had 
the right to act as the declarant of goods, toward s which such special simplifications were applied. 
271.  A Member asked the representative of Kaza khstan whether a firm or an enterprise 
registered in Kazakhstan was considered a "resident" for the purposes of preferential trade with other CIS countries.  This Member asked Kazakhstan to provide a clear distinction between 
juridical personhood in Kazakhstan through registration and being a "resident".  The representative 
of Kazakhstan replied that when a ratified international agreement did not contain a definition of 
the term "resident" for the purposes of the give n agreement, the "residency" status was regulated 
by the provisions of the Budget Code, the Law on Currency Regulation and the Tax Code of 
Kazakhstan.  According to these legal acts, companies were eligible to benefit from preferential 
trade under Free Trade Agreements, including among the CIS, if they were registered in 
Kazakhstan as resident tax payers.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 86 - 
 
  272.  Several Members noted that laws and regulations relating to the right to trade in goods, 
"registration requirements" or "activity licensing" had not to be more burdensome than necessary and, thus, restrict imports in violation of the general prohibition on quantitative restrictions under 
Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994, nor should they discriminate against imported goods in violation of 
the provisions of Article III:4 of the GATT 1994.  Furthermore, fees and charges levied on the right 
to import had to be limited to the cost of services rendered as under Article VIII:1(a) and 
Article VIII:4(c) of the GATT 1994, and internal taxes or other internal charges on the right to 
trade in imported goods had not to lead to discrimination in favour of like domestic products as 
required by Article III:2 of the GATT 1994.   
273.  Members also asked Kazakhstan to confirm that foreign juridical persons could be the 
"importer and exporter of record" and that fore ign importers and exporters could legally sign 
import/export contracts with foreign entities with a physical presence in Kazakhstan.  In reply, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that foreign juridical person who registered their 
commercial presence in the form of juridical persons of Kazakhstan could be the importer and 
exporter of record, and such importers and expo rters could legally sign import/export contracts 
with foreign entities and act as declarants for the purposes of importation and exportation.   
274.  In response to further questions from Member s, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that the Government, in respect to measures a ffecting trade in goods with other WTO Members, 
would continue its policy of maintaining an expeditious registration process, and applying 
transparent and predictable requirements that were  not burdensome to satisfy.  She added that 
Kazakhstan would not apply registration requiremen ts to limit the possibility for juridical persons 
to engage in importing and exporting, and that once  registered in the form of juridical persons of 
Kazakhstan, they could import or export products as described in this Report.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would not make the procedures or overall requirements 
to register as a juridical person more burdensome than necessary, would not discriminate between 
foreign and domestic applicants in approving requests for registration, would not apply procedures 
and requirements in a restrictive manner and would also comply with other applicable provisions of 
the WTO Agreement including transparency obligat ion.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
275.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, before the conclusion of negotiations, 
Kazakhstan would amend the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Private Entrepreneurship (No. 124- III ZRK of 31 January 2006, with subsequent amendments) and any legislation (domestic, CU 
o r  E E U )  a s  m a y  b e  r e q u i r e d  t o  a l l o w  n a t u r a l  p e r s o n s ,  W T O  M e m b e r s '  c i t i z e n s ,  t o  r e g i s t e r  a s  
individual entrepreneurs in Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, 
from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would allow the stay of up to 30 calendar days to citizens 
of WTO Members, without any registration with any state authority and would exempt them from WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 87 - 
 
  filling out migration card (cards) if their stay does not exceed 30 days from the date of entry.  The 
Working Party took note of these commitments].14 
- (a) Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products 
276.  Some Members expressed concern over the restrictive consequences of the activity 
licensing system for the sale of alcoholic bevera ges.  They requested information on the current 
legislation and Kazakhstan's intention to introduce new legislation in this area.  In particular, these 
Members sought information on the activity licensing fees charged for the right to import alcoholic beverages and on any plans for establishment of a State monopoly on alcohol beverages. 
277.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that pursuant to Law No. 461-IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues 
of Improvement of Permissible System" of 15 July 2011 amending  the Law on Licensing, the 
requirement for an activity licence for importation of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, which was 
used as a condition for obtaining an import licence for ethyl spirits and alcohol products, had been 
eliminated as of 30 January 2012.  She noted, however, that importers into Kazakhstan of ethyl 
spirits and alcohol products were still required an activity licence for production, distribution, or 
storage of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, and to  obtain and apply strip stamps for the purposes 
of excise tax payments, as described in the section "Application of Internal Taxes to Import" of this 
Report.   
278.  In addition, in accordance with CU Commission Decision No. 747 "On Amendments to 
Normative Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Non-tariff Regulation in Relation to 
Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 August 2011, upon accession of any EAEU member State 
to the WTO, non-automatic import licensing requirements to ethyl spirits and alcohol products 
would be eliminated and replaced by an automatic licensing requirement.  As a consequence, 
existing domestic legislation requiring non-automatic import licensing for these products would be 
amended accordingly, including the following legislation:  Law No. 429 "On State Regulation of 
Production and Turnover of Ethyl Spirits and Al cohol Products" of 16 July 1999 (hereinafter:  Law 
No. 429 "On Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products").  With the aim to eliminate import licence of ethyl spirits and alcohol products from the List of Goods Subject to Export and Import 
Licensing, Resolution of the Government of Ka zakhstan No. 578 "On Approval of the Rules on 
Export and Import Licensing, including Licensing of Goods Subject to Export Controls, and the 
Rules on Automatic Import Licensing of Certain Goods, Qualification Requirements for Licensed 
Activities and Approval of the List of Goods Subject to Export and Import Licensing" of 
12 June 2008, had been amended by Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1320 of 
17 October 2012. 
279.  In response to a question from a Member, th e representative of Kazakhstan said that 
according to Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 57 "On Certain Issues of Activity 
                                               
14 Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 88 - 
 
  Licensing for Production of Ethyl Spirits and Production, Storage, Wholesale and (or) Retail Sales of 
Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and (or) Retail Sale of Alcohol Products within the Territory of Production" of 29 January 2013, the prerequisites for obtaining an activity licence for 
storage and distribution of alcohol products incl uded the requirement that the applicant had to 
either own or lease specialised premises for storag e and distribution of alcohol products provided 
that they complied with qualification requirements.  In this case, the applicant had to submit a 
copy of a sales or leasing contract.  
280.  A Member asked whether importers of non-food products containing denatured alcohol, 
e.g., cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, pain ts and stains, etc. were required to obtain an 
activity licence for the "manufacture of alcohol pr oducts", the "storage, wholesale and (or) retail 
sale of alcohol products", and the "import of ethyl alcohol and alcohol products".  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the terms "manufacture of alcohol products", 
"storage, wholesale and (or) retail sale of alco hol products" (found in Article 36 in the Law on 
Licensing) did not include non-food products containing denatured alcohol, e.g., cosmetics, 
fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, etc.  Pursuant to Law No. 429 on Regulation of 
Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products, the term "alcoh ol product" was defined as a food product with 
alcohol by volume of more than 1. 5% produced with the use of ethyl spirits from food raw material 
and (or) alcohol-containing food product, except for those of medical purpose registered as 
medicine in accordance with the legislation of Kazakhstan.  The Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl 
Spirits and Alcohol Products and EAEU legal acts did not regulate the importation of non-food products containing denatured alcohol, such as cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints 
and stains, etc.  
- (b) Pharmaceuticals 
281.  A Member asked if the requirement for an ac tivity licence to perform "pharmaceutical 
activities:  production, manufacture, wholesale and retail sale of medical preparations" included 
the act of importation only without the right to distribute in Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that activity licensing in respect of pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, was maintained on production and distribution of  pharmaceutical products because of potential 
damage of such activity to human or animal life and health.  Pursuant to Article 80 of the Code 
No. 193 "On People's Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009, the right to import 
pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, wa s granted to the following Kazakhstan entities, 
including foreign-invested enterprises, registered as a juridical person of Kazakhstan:  
- producers holding an activity licence for production;  
- enterprises holding an activity licence for wholesale of pharmaceuticals;  - R&D organizations and laboratories import ing pharmaceuticals for the purposes of 
development and State registration of the pharmaceuticals;  
- foreign producers or their authorized representatives for the purposes of conducting 
clinical trials, State registration, and exhibitions; and, 
- medical organizations for provision medical services.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 89 - 
 
  More detailed information regarding registration and import licensing procedures for 
pharmaceuticals, including veterinary drugs, coul d be found in the section "Import Licensing" of 
this Report. 
- (c) Products containing cryptograp hic capabilities, including goods   
  with encryption technology  and special technical devices 
282.  Some Members noted that Kazakhstan required an  activity licence to engage in production 
or distribution of goods with encryption technolo gy, and required that applicants for a licence to 
import certain goods with encryption technology also to have an activity licence.  In the opinion of 
a Working Party Member, an activity licence requirement imposed by Kazakhstan as a condition of 
importation or exportation for encryption products, as opposed to domestic distribution, 
constituted an unnecessary impediment to the ri ght to import and export.  The Working Party 
Member asked how Kazakhstan would bring its import licensing regime for encryption products 
into conformity with WTO requirements.  Working Party Members also asked for assurances that 
the requirement to have an activity licence as a condition for obtaining an import licence, i.e., simply to import such goods, would not be applied as an unjustifiable restriction on imports.   
283.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that the term "distribution" in this 
case did not include the term "import".  Under the Law on Licensing, production and domestic 
distribution of encryption products were licensed activities in Kazakhstan, and an activity licence 
for production or distribution of encryption produc ts was required to import encryption products.   
284.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled the se nsitivity of the goods that were subject to 
the import licensing requirement, and noted that many WTO Members regulated trade in 
encryption goods.  She added that no discrimination against imports was intended by this licensing 
system.  Moreover, the representative of Kazakhst an explained that pursuant to the Regulation 
"On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territo ry of the Customs Union and Removal of the 
Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption (Cryptographic) Means" approved by Collegium Decision No. 134 (hereinafter:  "the Encryption Regulation"), and as described in part 
(iii) of the section "Quantitative Import Restrictions, Including Prohibitions and Quotas, and Import 
Licensing Systems" of this Report, many goods with  encryption technology no longer required an 
import licence and hence their importation did not require an activity licence either.   
285.  In response to a specific question, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan informed Members 
that to obtain an activity licence related to production and sale of encryption products, a company, 
including a foreign-invested company, registered as a juridical person of Kazakhstan, had to have 
in its structure one expert with high education in engineering.  The expert could be a citizen of 
Kazakhstan or a foreign national.   
286.  A Member stated that pursuant to Article 18 of the Law on Licensing, the "technical 
protection of State secrets", including the "repair and servicing of technical means for protection of 
State secrets" and the "development and selling (including another transfer) of means for 
information cryptographic protection" both required  a n  a c t i v i t y  l i c e n c e .   T h i s  M e m b e r  a s k e d  i f  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 90 - 
 
  these activities included:  importation, wholesale, or retail sales and leasing of commercially 
available electronic equipment and software with encryption technology used for purposes other than protecting State secrets, e.g., computers,  smart cards, cell phones, etc.; or service and 
repair of after-sales or leased commercially available electronic equipment and software containing 
encryption technology used for purposes other than protecting State secrets.  In reply, the 
representative of Kazakhstan noted that the requirement for an activity licence for the "technical 
protection of State secrets", including "repair and servicing of technical means for protection of 
State secrets" had been eliminated by Law No. 36-V "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on th e Issues of Reduction of Licensing Documents and 
Optimization of Control and Supervisory Functions Of State Bodies" of 10 July 2012.  
The representative of Kazakhstan noted that wi thin the framework of the EAEU, pursuant to 
paragraph 11 of the Encryption Regulation, the importation of certain goods with encryption 
technology, including "mass market goods", was subject to a one-time notification and hence did 
not require an import licence or an activity licence.  Maintenance and repair services of goods were 
not subject to licensing.  However, for distributi on of goods with encryption technology in both 
wholesale and retail sales on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, an activity licence was 
required for both domestic and imported goods.  
287.  An activity licence was a prerequisite to obtain a licence to import a special technical 
device as defined in the Regulation "On the Order of Importation into the Customs Territory of the 
CU and Exportation from the Customs Territory Special Technical Devises Designed to Search Technical Channels of Information Leakage" approv ed by Collegium Decision No. 134.  An activity 
licence for development and production or repair and distribution of special technical devices was 
required when imported or produced domestically special technical devices were supplied to 
Operative-Investigation Agency entities in the territory of Kazakhstan.  To obtain an activity 
licence, the founders of such company had to have access to State secrets of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  
288.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan said that domestically 
produced special technical devices had to undergo the same approval procedure at the National 
Security Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan as imported special technical devices.  
An activity licence was required for "development and manufacturing" and "repair and distribution" 
of special technical devices.  She confirmed that the term "distribution" in this case did not include importation as a separate action, but that importers of special technical devices were required to 
hold one of the other actively licenses due to the sensitivity of the goods.  Previously, an activity 
licence had been issued within 45 days.  However, pursuant to Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments 
and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of th e Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of 
Improvement of Permissible System" of 15 July 2011, the period for issuing an activity licence had 
been reduced to 15 days.  Activities subject to licensing are listed in the last column of Annex 14 
of this Report.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 91 - 
 
  - (d) Conclusion 
289.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, the 
application of all laws, regulations and other measures affecting importation or exportation of 
goods, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bo dies of the EAEU, would be in conformity with 
relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and Articles I, III, VIII, and XI of  the GATT 1994.  She confirmed that, upon its 
accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure th at the person who had the right, according to 
the EAEU Treaty, EAEU legal instruments, Commi ssion Decisions or Kazakhstan legislation, to 
declare the imported goods would be permitted to  pay relevant customs duties, fees and charges 
in connection with importation of alcohol products, pharmaceuticals or products with encryption 
technology without presenting an import and/or ac tivity license(s) to the customs authorities, and 
that these goods would be permitted to be withdr awn from the territory of the customs checkpoint 
for the purpose of free circulation in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan by the holder of 
the respective import and/or activity licenses.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
A. IMPORT REGULATIONS 
- Ordinary Customs Duties 
290.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that from 1 January 2015, the legal basis for 
the customs tariff of Kazakhstan was Article 42 "Common External Tariff of the Eurasian Economic 
Union" and Annex No. 6 "Protocol on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation" of the EAEU Treaty.  
The Common External Tariff (CET) was established by Decision No. 18 of 27 November 2009 "On the Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of the Interstate Council of EurAsEC 
(hereinafter:  Decision No. 18).  According to Ar ticle 42 of the EAEU Treaty, the main objectives 
and purposes of the CET were:  (i) to rationalise the structure of the import of goods to the 
customs territory of the EAEU; (ii) to maintain a rational proportion of imported and exported 
goods on the customs territory of the EAEU; (iii) to create conditions for progressive changes in 
the structure of manufacturing and consumption of goods in the EAEU; (iv) to provide conditions 
for effective integration of the EAEU into the worl d economy; and, (v) support of the sectors of the 
economy of the EAEU. 
291.  Pursuant to Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 18 "On the Common Customs 
and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union between the Republic of Belarus, Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009, tariff rates were established by the 
Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – EEC).   Furthermore, the rules for granting tariff 
preferences to developing and least-developed countries were stipulated in the Protocol on 
Common System of Tariff Preferences of the Cu stoms Union of 12 December 2008 (hereinafter:  
Protocol on Tariff Preferences).  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 92 - 
 
  292.  According to the EAEU Treaty, the Commission issued decisions on CET rates based on the 
results of negotiations among the EAEU member States.  From 1 January 2010, the EAEU member States had no authority to change import customs duty rates 
unilaterally.  The representative of Kazakhstan fu rther explained that the tariff exemptions applied 
by the EAEU member States were described in se ctions "Investment Regime", "Tariff Exemptions" 
and "Trade-related Investment Measures" of this Report. 
293.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that decisions on CET rates would normally be 
taken by the EEC by a two thirds qualified ma jority vote, except for sensitive products 
(the 5,012 specified tariff lines listed in Annex 6 of this Report) on which consensus was required.  
Consensus might also be required in other cases specified in the agreements comprising the legal 
basis of the EAEU.  She added that the position of Kazakhstan on trade policy issues that had been delegated to the competence of the EEC, includin g changes proposed by Kazakhstan or other EAEU 
member States in CET and non-tariff measures, was reviewed and approved by the Government 
Inter-Agency Commission on Trade Policy Issues and Participation in International Economic 
Organizations.  
294.  In response to the request of a Member to remove from Article 1 of the Agreement on 
Customs Regulation the provision stating the obje ctive of the CET as "to protect the economy of 
the Customs Union from unfavourable influence of  foreign competition", the representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that this provision was not inco rporated into the EAEU Treaty and therefore no 
longer existed as of 1 January 2015. 
295.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that  Kazakhstan had replaced a 9-digit tariff 
nomenclature with a 10-digit nomenclature on 1 January 2004, which had been based on the 
2002 revision of the Harmonized Description and Coding System (HS 2002).  Later, new import 
duties had been established by Government Resolution No. 1317 "On Customs Tariff and 
Goods Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Acti vity of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
28 December 2007 and these had been applied until 1 January 2010.  Asked to provide the 
Customs Tariff schedule in HS 2007, including the concordance table between HS 2002 and 
HS 2007, the representative of Kazakhstan said that CET rates could be found on the official 
website of the Eurasian Economic Comm ission (http://www.eu rasiancommission.org/ 
ru/act/trade/catr/ett/pages/default.aspx).  The concordance table HS 2002-2007 had been  
provided separately to the WTO Secretariat.    
296.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, from 1 January 2010, CET applied tariff 
rates had been established in the Common Tariff Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity of 
the Customs Union, which had been based on th e HS 2007 nomenclature, as provided for in the 
Agreement "On Common Tariff Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the EurAsEC" 
adopted on 11 June 2003.  As of January 2012, according to CU Commission Decision No. 850 
"On New Version of the Common Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the 
Customs Union and Common External Tariff of the Customs Union" of 18 November 2011, 
Kazakhstan applied CET tariff rates based on the HS 2012 nomenclature.  WTO tariff negotiations WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 93 - 
 
  were conducted in the HS 2002 nomenclature, refl ecting the tariff nomenclature Kazakhstan was 
using at the time these negotiations had commenced.  Based on the results of bilateral market 
access negotiations on goods, the WTO Secretariat had completed the Draft Consolidated Schedule 
of Tariff Concessions and Commitments and had converted it into the HS 2007 nomenclature.    
297.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  currently the CET consisted of 11,170 tariff 
lines.  A significant majority of tariff lines (9,208 items) were subject to ad valorem  duties and 
216 tariff lines were subject to specific duties.  The ad valorem  rates ranged from 0 to 30%, 
except for a limited number of products, including meat products, i.e. beef, pork and poultry, 
towards which EAEU member States applied tariff rate quotas, where in-quota rates were 
established at the level between 0 and 25%, and out-of-quota rates were between 50 and 80%.  
Tariff items subject to specific rates included apples, chocolate, beer, and strong alcoholic beverages. 
298.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the remaining 1,746 tariff items in the 
CET were subject to combined (mixed) duties.  She explained that combined duties were 
expressed in terms of alternative rates, one as an ad valorem  rate and the other as a specific rate 
that served as a minimum rate of duty, e.g., 5%, but no less than €1 per kilogram.  Either the 
ad valorem  duty rate or the specific duty rate was applied depending exclusively on the customs 
value of the good.  In response to a question, she noted that combined tariff rates were applied 
to:  live swine, meat, certain species of fish, fermented or acidified milk and cream, whey, butter 
and cheeses, bird's eggs, flowers, tomatoes, cucumbers, bananas, citrus fruits, coffee and tea, rice, malt and starches, preserved vegetables, plan t oils, sausages and other preparations of meat, 
juices, tea and coffee extracts, yeasts, food preparations not elsewhere specified (ex. HS 2106), 
waters and ethyl alcohol, preparations used in animal feeding, cigars and cigarettes, sodium 
sulphides, resorcinol and its salts, maleic anhy dride, bleaches and soap, dextrin and modified 
starches, plastics and articles thereof, tyres of rubber, leather and fur articles, articles of paper 
and paperboard, nonwovens, carpets and textile floor  coverings, coated fabrics, textiles, footwear, 
headgear, artificial flowers, ceramic products, imitation jewellery, aluminium and articles thereof, 
tin and articles thereof, apparels, home electronics, cars, watches and furniture.   
299.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at for goods subject to a combined duty, it 
would be ensured, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, that the 
ad valorem  equivalent of the specific duty rate for each tariff line, calculated based on the average 
customs value, would be no higher than the alternative ad valorem  duty rate for that tariff line in 
the Schedule of the Republic of Kazakhstan in accordance with the following provisions: 
(i) On an annual basis, it would be determined, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent 
bodies of the EAEU, whether it was necessary to  reduce the applied specific duty rate to 
ensure that it was no higher than the applied ad valorem duty rate; 
(ii) This calculation would be done two months before the end of each calendar year, 
beginning in the first calendar year after the date of the accession of Kazakhstan; 
(iii) Data for the calculations would be from a three-year period, determined by taking trade 
data from a recent five-year representative period and excluding data for years with the highest and lowest trade for that period; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 94 - 
 
  (iv) Data on trade with countries or territories with which Kazakhstan had a customs union or 
free trade agreement would be excluded from the calculation; and, 
(v) Data would be drawn from the Official Customs Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
notified to the WTO Integrated Database (IDB) unless such data was unavailable.  In such 
case, IDB and COMTRADE data would be used. 
 Kazakhstan would inform Members of the results of these calculations on a tariff line basis 
and, if the results showed that it was necessary to  reduce the specific duty rate alternative, this 
reduction would be made and would go into effect automatically, beginning on 1 January of the 
year following the calculation.  In no case would the applied duty (whether expressed in 
ad valorem  or specific terms and whether determined by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of 
the EAEU) exceed the bound rate of the combined duty.  If, after reductions based on the annual 
re-calculation and changed circumstances, the spec ific duty rate alternative became significantly 
lower than the ad valorem  alternative rate of duty, Kazakhstan reserved the right to modify 
permanently the form of the duty to a purely ad valorem  duty, at a level that complied with the 
binding for the relevant tariff line.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
300.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirms th at upon accession to the WTO, the CET will 
be brought into compliance with Kazakhstan's tariff commitments, with regard to the entire 
commodity nomenclature, in accordance with the results of the ongoing "adjustment" negotiations 
aimed at unification of tariff commitments of the Russian Federation and the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.]15 
301.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that the provision allowing for the 
application of the customs duties at the double MFN rate to the import of goods of undeterminable 
country origin had been eliminated pursuant to Law No. 211 of 8 January 2007.  Subsequently, 
such imports were subject to the normal MFN rate.  She further stated that in accordance with 
Article 36 "Tariff preferences in respect of goods originating from developing and (or)  least-
developed countries" of the EAEU Treaty and the Protocol on Tariff Preferences, Kazakhstan applied the common EAEU Scheme of Tariff Preferences for developing and least-developed 
countries (EAEU GSP Scheme).  The lists of deve loping countries beneficiaries of the EAEU GSP 
Scheme (Annex 7 of this Report), least-develope d countries beneficiaries of the EAEU GSP Scheme 
(Annex 8 of this Report) and goods originating and imported from developing and least-developed 
countries subject to the EAEU GSP Scheme (Annex  9 of this Report) were established by the 
Commission Decision No. 18 and adopted by the CU Commission Decision No. 130.  Under the 
EAEU GSP Scheme, the import duties applicable to products included into Annex 9 of this Report 
and originating from developing countries were at the level of 75% of the MFN duty rates and from 
least-developed countries - at the level of 0%.  
302.  In response to a question by a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
tariff preferences for goods originating from deve loping or least-developed countries, that were 
subject to the EAEU GSP Scheme, would be granted if the goods were purchased in that country 
                                               
15 Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party.    WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 95 - 
 
  from a resident of the country.  Such goods had to be delivered directly or in transit through third 
countries to the territory of the EAEU, without them being put into free circulation in those third countries in case of transit.  As provided fo r in the Annex to the CU Agreement on Rules for 
Determining the Origin of Goods from Developing and Least-Developed Countries of 
12 December 2008, goods were also considered purchased in the country of origin if they were 
purchased at an exhibition or fair. 
303.  In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, 
upon its accession to the WTO, the GSP Scheme for developing and least-developed countries 
would be applied, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, in conformity 
with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment. 
304.  Some Members expressed concerns that paragraphs 2 and 7 of the CU Commission 
Decision No. 130 could allow the application of import duties in a discriminatory manner, either 
vis-à-vis  third countries or in relation to certain imports exempted from duties for investment 
projects.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all import tariffs were applied by 
Kazakhstan in a non-discriminatory manner vis-à-vis  third countries on the basis of trade and 
cooperation agreements, except if otherwise provid ed for under regional trade agreements or the 
EAEU Generalised System of Trade Preferences.  Exemptions from the CET within the framework of 
investment projects were described in the sections "Investment Regime", "Tariff Exemptions" and 
"Trade Related Investment Measures" of this Report, as appropriate.   
305.  In response to requests from Members, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
Kazakhstan would submit its Information Technology Agreement (ITA) Schedule to the 
ITA Committee for verification, in accordance with ITA procedures, in order to enable Kazakhstan 
to join the ITA when it became a WTO Member.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
306.  Kazakhstan undertook bilateral market access negotiations on goods with Members of the 
Working Party.  The results of these negotiations were contained in the Schedule of Concessions 
and Commitments on Goods and form Annex 1 to the Protocol of Accession. 
- Other Duties and Charges 
307.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that Kazakhstan had bound all tariffs 
in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments  on Goods.  She confirmed that from the 
date of its accession to the WTO, Kazakhst an would not apply other duties and charges 
within the meaning of Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994 and would bind such duties and 
charges at zero in relation to all goods.  Th ese bindings were recorded in the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments on Goods of th e Republic of Kazakhstan annexed to the 
GATT 1994.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.   
308.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that duties on imports were applied in 
accordance with Article 42 "Common External Tariff of the Eurasian Economic Union" and Annex WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 96 - 
 
  No. 6 "Protocol on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation" of the EAEU Treaty, the EurAsEC 
Interstate Council Decision No. 18 "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union" of 27 November 2009 and the CU Commission Decision No. 130 "On Common Customs and 
Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union" of 27 No vember 2009.  These provisions authorised the 
Commission to establish and change the customs tariffs of the EAEU member States, including 
Kazakhstan, as described in the section "Ordinary Customs Duties".  No other duties and charges 
were authorised.  Therefore, she confirmed that Kazakhstan did not apply any other duties and 
charges on imports within the meaning of Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994.   
309.  Noting this statement, some Members asked Kazakhstan to bind at zero other duties and 
charges (ODCs) in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods and to undertake a 
commitment that it would not apply such measures except in conformity with WTO obligations. 
310.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan had bound all tariffs in its 
Schedule of Concessions and Commitments for Goods.  She confirmed that from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would not apply other duties and charges within the meaning of 
Article II:1(b) of the GATT 1994 and would bind such  duties and charges at zero in relation to all 
goods.  These bindings were recorded in the Schedule of Concessions and Commitments of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan annexed to the GATT 1994.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
- Tariff Exemptions 
311.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that from 1 January 2015, the legal basis for 
granting tariff exemptions imported into the EAEU could be found in Article 43 "Tariff exemptions" 
and Part II of Annex No. 6 "Protocol on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation" of the EAEU 
Treaty.  Part II of Annex No. 6 of the EAEU Treaty provided a framework for a unified list of tariff 
exemptions.  Article 45 of the EAEU Treaty auth orised the EEC to establish the unified lists.  
More specific provisions regarding the unified list of tariff exempted goods were elaborated in the 
Intergovernmental Council Decision No. 18 "O n Common Customs Tariff Regulation of the 
Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" 
(hereinafter - Decision No. 18) and the CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009 
"On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union between the Republic of 
Belarus, Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian  Federation" (hereinafter - Decision No. 130).  
The CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 approved the list of temporarily imported 
goods fully exempt from payment of customs duti es.  The EAEU Treaty and the Decisions also 
provided for other types of exemptions, e.g., for investment purposes (further described in the 
sections "Trade-related Investment Measures" and "Industrial Policy including Subsidies" of this 
Report), tariff preferences for developing and least- developed countries, tariff rate quotas (further 
described in the section "Tariff Rate Quotas").  Special limited derogations for individual EAEU 
member States from the CET were elaborated in the Protocol on Conditions and Procedure for Use 
in Exceptional Cases of the Rates of Import Customs Duties Other than Common Customs Tariff WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 97 - 
 
  Rates of 12 December 2008 (hereinafter - Protocol on Exceptions from the CET), which expired on 
1 January 2015. 
312.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that pr ior to 1 January 2010, the granting of tariff 
exemptions was regulated by the Customs Co de of Kazakhstan, and Resolutions of the 
Government of Kazakhstan. No. 668 "On Adoption of the List of Temporarily Imported Goods 
Exempt from All Customs Duties and Taxes and Temporarily Exported Goods from All Customs 
Duties" of 8 July 2003, and No. 1092 "On Adoption of the List of Leasing Objects Subject to the 
Customs Regime of Temporary Importation and Temporary Exportation of Goods" of 
21 August 2001.  The Customs Code of Kazakhstan (Article 330) had provided for tariff 
exemptions for (i) diplomatic imports; and (ii) goods imported for implementation of investment 
projects granted for a period of up to five ye ars.  The Investments Committee under the Ministry 
of Industry and Trade  had been in charge of providing investment preferences, including 
customs duty exemptions. 
313.  In accordance with Part II of Annex No. 6 of the EAEU Treaty and the relevant provisions 
of the CU Customs Code, tariff exemptions could be granted to the following goods imported into 
the customs territory of the EAEU:  (i) goods imported under the customs control within the 
customs regimes established by the customs legislation; (ii) goods imported as a contribution to 
the charter capital by foreign investor within th e time-frame determined by the charter documents 
for capital formation; and, (iii) goods imported within the framework of international cooperation 
of the member States with third countries in the field of research and exploration of space, and 
also within the agreements regarding services in spacecraft launch.  The specific list of above-
mentioned goods to be exempted was approved by CU Commission Decision No. 727 of 
22 June 2011. 
314.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  goods could be exempted from the customs 
duty within the framework of customs regimes provided for in relevant customs legislation e.g., 
the CU Customs Code.  Article 80 of the CU Customs Code listed the situations when customs 
duties need not to be paid, which reflected circumstances faced by customs officials in the course 
of customs processing.  These circumstances included:  (i) when it was provided for in accordance 
with the legislation of the member States or the provisions of the CU Customs Code; (ii) when 
customs duties had already been paid or when the amount owed was less than EUR5; (iii) when 
goods were exempted from customs duties during th e period of validity of such an exemption and 
when fulfilling the conditions, under which such exemption was granted; (iv) when goods were 
placed under customs procedures (regimes) not pr oviding for such payment; (v) when the total 
customs value of goods, imported by one person on one invoice did not exceed EUR200; (vi) when 
goods had been destroyed or irretrievably lost as a consequence of an accident, force majeure , or 
as the result of natural deterioration under normal transportation and storage prior to their 
release; (vii) when goods had been converted into property of a member State in accordance with 
its national legislation; and, (viii) when goods were not released.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 98 - 
 
  315.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that  Annex No. 6 of the EAEU Treaty and the 
relevant provisions of the CU Customs code provided that for the list of exemptions from the customs tariff rates, the following categories of goods were exempt from import customs duty:  
(i) means of transport of international shipment s of freight, baggage and passengers, and goods 
that maintained  them; (ii) products of fishing operations owned or leased by entities and 
individuals of the member States; (iii) goods imported for official or personal use by third 
countries' diplomats; (iv) currency and securities in accordance with the Parties' national 
legislation; (v) goods imported as humanitarian or disaster aid; (vi) goods imported as assistance 
(including technical assistance) and charity from third countries and international organizations; 
(vii) goods covered by import customs regimes which called  for such duty exemption; (viii) goods 
imported by individuals for their own use, in accordance with customs regulation legislation; and, (ix) goods subject to Government expropriation by  the member States as provided for in their 
legislation.  Tariff exemptions may also be provided in other cases established by the EAEU Treaty, 
international agreements of the EAEU with third parties and acts of the Commission. 
316.  Tariff exemptions in cases not stipulated in Annex No. 6 of the EAEU Treaty were applied 
only by the Commission decisions based on consensus.  The CU Commission Decision No. 130 
approved tariff exemptions applied by the member States apart from tariff exemptions stipulated 
in Annex No. 6 of the EAEU Treaty. 
317.  The EEC was authorized by the EAEU Treaty and the Intergovernmental Council Decision 
No. 18 to operate the CET, including the authority to add or remove goods from the list of exemptions.  A consensus vote was required, if  the EEC Decision concerned the changes in 
customs duty levels on goods included into the List of sensitive products, or where the decision on 
granting of tariff exemptions was taken.  
318.  She added that, in accordance with Article 2 of the Protocol on Exceptions from the CET, 
the EEC could decide that a higher duty rate than the CET would be applied by one of the 
member States in case  if such a measure was a necessary condition for development of the 
relevant industry of that member State.  A lower duty rate would be applied in the following 
cases :  (i) the concerned member State faced critical shortage of goods; (ii) such a measure was 
necessary to address the social needs of the popula tion for the concerned member State; or (iii) to 
address the needs of industries, which depended largely on imports from third countries and could 
not be replaced with the production of supplemen tary or similar goods produced in the EAEU.  
Article 4 of the above-mentioned Protocol provided that the EEC Decisions, in these cases, were 
adopted by consensus and that a different tariff rate by one member State could be applied for no 
longer than six months, unless extended, followi ng the relevant procedures foreseen in the 
Protocol.   
319.  A Member asked if there was a process for third parties to challenge such exceptions from 
the CET.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the EEC took a decision on application of a 
h i g h e r  o r  l o w e r  t a r i f f  r a t e  u p o n  p r o p o s a l  b y  a  m e m b e r  S t a t e ,  p r o v i d e d  t h a t  s u c h  m e a s u r e  w a s  
justified and other member States did not agree to change the CET tariff rate.  She added that WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 99 - 
 
  exceptions from  the CET applied in "exceptional circumstances" should be based on an MFN 
principle and should not be higher than the import duty bound rates committed by any member State upon accession to the WTO.  Therefore, Kazakhstan did not see a basis for 
challenging the exceptions  by third parties.   
320.  The CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009 had initially included a list of 
409 tariff lines, towards which Kazakhstan applied import customs duty rates different from the 
CET during various transitional periods of up to fi ve years.  Subsequently, taking into account that 
for some goods the transitional period had already expired, as well as due to difficulties with 
monitoring the movement of goods across the border after the formation of a common customs 
territory and the removal of customs border check-points between the Russian Federation and the 
Republic of Kazakhstan as of 1 July 2011, the lis t had been revised and significantly reduced down 
to 72 tariff lines (see Annex 10 of this Report).  These exemptions expired on 1 January 2015. 
321.  She further added that CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009 allowed 
duty-free importation of raw cane sugar (HS 1701 11) in 2010-2019 for processing in 
sugar-processing plants on the territory of the Re public of Kazakhstan.  Raw cane sugar could be 
imported only upon obtaining a permit from the au thorised body of Kazakhstan (the Ministry of 
National Economy).  The permit prescribed the end-use of raw cane sugar.  The raw cane sugar 
and white sugar produced from such raw cane suga r could not be exported to the territories of 
other member States.  Government Resolutions No. 146 "On Certain Issues of Importation of 
Sugar and Raw Sugar to the Territory of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan" of 1 March 2010 and No. 34 
"On Certain Issues of Importation of Raw Sugar to the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
26 January 2011 determined the duty-free quota for imported raw cane sugar for 2010 and 2011 
respectively and approved the list of sugar pr oducers to which the quota was allocated.   
322.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that in case the member State defined individual 
beneficiaries of a tariff exemption, this member State had to present to the EEC its proposals on 
the control mechanism over the use of the imported goods with a view to preventing their misuse 
and release into free circulation on the territory of other member States.  The exemption was 
granted by approval of the EEC.  
323.  A Member enquired about Government Resolutions Nos. 668 and 1092.  In particular, this 
Member asked Kazakhstan to specify the goods falling within the scope of Government Resolutions 
Nos. 668 and 1092 and clarify the terms of the 3% charge per month on other temporary goods:  if this was 3 percentage points of the total tariff level or 3% of the duties that would have been 
collected and if the total charge applicable capped at the amount of the normally payable duty.  
This Member also asked if this covered "trade in transit" or if "temporary importation" was a 
separate customs regime from transit.  In repl y, the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
Government Resolutions No. 668 and No. 1092 were no longer in force.  
324.  She further explained that goods temporarily imported to Kazakhstan (i.e., subject to 
subsequent exportation) could be exempt from cu stoms duties and taxes, either in whole or in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 100 - 
 
  part.  The list of temporarily imported goods fu lly exempt from payment of customs duties and 
taxes had been approved by CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 and included the following groups of goods:  (i) containers and ot her returnable containers; (ii) goods imported to 
assist foreign trade and international cooperation; (iii) goods temporarily imported for application 
in science, culture, cinematography, sports and tourism; (iv) goods imported for humanitarian aid; 
and (v) other goods.  While goods falling within the scope of the CU Commission Decision No. 331 
of 18 June 2010 were fully exempt from payment of duties, other temporarily-imported goods as 
stipulated in Article 282 of the CU Customs Code we re subject to a fee of 3% of the amount of the 
import customs duty and taxes payable, that would have been collected if the goods were released 
for domestic consumption, for each month the goods remained on the customs territory of the 
EAEU.  The term of temporary importation was de termined by the customs body on the basis of 
the objectives and circumstances of the importatio n, and could not exceed a period of two years 
from the date the goods were placed under the customs procedure of temporary importation.  
The term of temporary importation could be extended beyond two years at the written request of 
an applicant.  To conform to the provisions of the temporary importation procedure, goods had to 
remain unchanged during the period of temporary importation.  The total charge applicable capped 
at the amount of the normally payable duty.  Sh e added that the provisions established for the 
customs procedures of "temporary import of good s" did not extend to the customs procedures of 
"transit of goods".  
325.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that CU Commission Decisions No. 130 of 
27 November 2009 and No. 331 of 18 June 2010 granted certain tariff exemptions for imported 
civil aircraft (for more details, see "Trade in Civil Aircraft").   
326.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that Kazakhstan did not apply any 
other tariff exemptions than those described in this and other relevant sections of this Report. 
- Tariff Rate Quotas 
327.  Some Members considered that the introduction of tariff rate quotas (TRQs) had been a 
step backward from the trade liberalisation that sh ould be expected by the country acceding to the 
WTO and that, in their view, a tariff-only regime would be preferable as it would allow for the 
market to select suppliers that provided the best combination of price, quality, and stable offer of 
goods.  They requested a description of the current and prospective legal authority for introducing 
TRQs and determining the rules for allocating quota among importers as well as any related 
licensing procedures in Kazakhstan and in the EAEU.   
328.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Article 44 "Tariff rate quotas" and Part III of 
Annex No. 6 "Protocol on Common Customs and Tariff  Regulation" of the EAEU Treaty provided the 
general legal framework for the introduction of tariff rate quotas in the EAEU member States, 
including Kazakhstan.  The national legislation included the Law "On Regulation of Trade Activity" 
and other measures adopted on the basis of CU Ag reements and other CU and EAEU legal acts.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 101 - 
 
  329.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, pursuant to paragraph 2 of Part I of Annex 
No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty, a tariff rate quota was a measure of control over the importation into the customs territory of the EAEU of certain kinds of agricultural products originating in third 
countries applied within a fixed period of time.  Such measures provided for application of 
differentiated rates of the CET with regard to goods imported within the established volume (in 
kind and in value) within a fixed period of time and in excess of that volume.  The criteria for 
introduction of TRQs were provided for in Article 44 of the EAEU Treaty.  TRQs could be introduced 
for agricultural products originating in third countries if the like goods were produced (extracted, 
cultivated) on the customs territory of the EAEU.  Pursuant to this Article, volumes of imported 
goods exceeding quota levels were levied at rates of the Common External Tariff.  Between 2010 
and 2012, the CU Commission had allocated TRQs on an annual basis among the member States 
based on proposals from the member States.  Starting from 1 February 2012, the member States 
delegated this authority to the Eurasian Economic Commission. 
330.  The CU Commission Decision No. 865 of 9 December 2011 had approved the list of 
products subject to TRQs (beef, pork and poultry), had allocated TRQs, and had fixed the volumes 
of TRQs for importation of these goods to the terri tory of each CU Party for 2012.  Resolution of 
the Government of Kazakhstan No. 269 "On Certain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas 
Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat" of 24 March 2011 approved the rules for 
allocation of TRQ volumes among suppliers.  Kazakhstan had not applied any TRQs to imports 
before 2010.  
331.  In accordance with paragraphs 7 and 8 of Pa rt III of Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty, the 
method of TRQs allocation among participants of foreign trade activity (suppliers) had to be 
non-discriminatory with respect to the form of ownership, place of registration or market share.  
The Eurasian Economic Commission, when taking a decision on application of TRQs to agricultural 
products, had to observe the following terms:  (i) TRQs had to be established for a specific period 
of time; (ii) if TRQs had to be distributed among third countries, all the interested third countries 
had to be duly informed of the allocated TRQ volumes; and (iii) information on the establishment 
of TRQs, its global volume and duration, in-quota im port duty rates, as well as on the distribution 
among third countries had to be published.   
332.  According to paragraphs 5 and 6 of Part III of Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty, the TRQ 
volume established by the Eurasian Economic Commission on imports of goods into the customs 
territory of the EAEU could not exceed the di fference between the volume of consumption and 
production of the like product on the customs territo ry of the EAEU.  If the production volume of 
the like product was equal to the volume of cons umption on the customs territory of the EAEU, or 
exceeded it, TRQs could not be established.  However, if the production volume of the like product 
was equal to the volume of consumption of the product or exceeded it in one of the 
EAEU member States, such difference was not considered when allocating the TRQ volumes for the 
customs territory of the EAEU.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 102 - 
 
  333.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that customs clearance of goods 
subject to TRQs had to be made in the EAEU member State where the supplier received its TRQ share.  The goods had to be accompanied with an original licence issued by the authorized 
government body, the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In this 
context, she noted that Annex No. 7 of the EAEU  Treaty contained provisions on the licensing 
procedure.  Licenses were issued within 15 business days from the date of submission of the 
following set of documents:  (i) an application for a licence; (ii) an electronic copy of the 
application; (iii) a copy of a foreign trade agreement (contract); (iv) a copy of the registration 
document in tax authorities; and, (v) a document confirming payment of a licensing fee.  The set 
of documents for a licence had to be submitted to the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan.  Licenses remained valid until th e end of the calendar year in which they were 
issued.   
334.  The Eurasian Economic Commission also determined that the TRQs in the 
EAEU member States were to be administered by the governments of the EAEU member States in 
accordance with their respective national legislation.  In Kazakhstan TRQs were regulated by Law 
No. 544 "On Regulation of Trade Activity" and Re solution of the Government of Kazakhstan 
No. 269.  Resolution No. 269 approved the rules for allocation of volumes of TRQs between 
suppliers, which provided for allocation based on the "historical principle", i.e. allocations 
proportionate to the volume of imports in the previous period.  She stated that the Resolution of 
the Government of Kazakhstan No. 269 also contained the following definitions:  
(a) TRQ volume - the volume of imported goods determined by the Government of Kazakhstan 
annually which were subject to the in-quota import duty rate; 
(b) participants of foreign economic activity (suppliers) - juridical or physical persons that had 
been importing beef, pork or poultry during the previous period in accordance with the 
following criteria:  it had been importing beef, pork or poultry (i) from the 
countries-suppliers; (ii) in volumes not less than 25 kg during the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; and, (iii) during the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; 
(c) the previous period – two years prior to the year of TRQs establishment;  
(d) countries-suppliers - the countries that had no free trade agreements with the 
EAEU member States or had exemptions from the free trade regime with regard to beef, pork or poultry under TRQ; and, 
(e) the supplier's import volume - the actual volume of beef, pork or poultry under the 
TRQ imported by the supplier from the countries-suppliers, which was determined on the basis of foreign trade statistics; 
335.  Some Members expressed concern that the TRQ regime that Kazakhstan applied under the 
EAEU, did not appear to allocate any in-quota volume to new entrants.  As the representative 
stated above, it appeared that an importer newly entering the market had to import at the 
over-quota rate which acted to limit the quantity of imports.  Thus, in subsequent years, this 
importer would qualify only for a small in-quota allocation, since allocations were based on imports 
over the previous year.  In these Members' view, this did not provide sufficient flexibility in the 
market.  These Members further emphasized that al locating the TRQ only to historical suppliers 
could be problematic as some suppliers were no longer participants in the market. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 103 - 
 
  336.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Resolution of the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 1189 "On Certain Issues of Allocation  of Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas 
on Imports of Certain Kinds of Meat" of 8 November 2013 , had introduced the mechanism 
of allocation of tariff rate quotas for new suppliers.  Pursuant to this Resolution, the volumes of 
tariff rate quotas were allocated among new suppliers in the order of priority of application of new 
suppliers for import licences.  Import licences were issued by the authorized body in the field of 
regulation of trade activity until exhaustion of  volumes of tariff rate quota established for new 
suppliers.  She also noted that allocation of the in-quota volume per supplier should not exceed 
20% of the total volume of tariff rate quota established for new suppliers. 
337.  In response to a specific question regarding the "economically viable quantities", the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that in calculation of the share of historical suppliers within the total volume of imports during the two preceding years, all supplies exceeding 25 kg were 
taken into account.  Thus, tariff rate quotas were allocated between historical suppliers in 
proportion to the shares determined based on mathematical formulae.  Suppliers could annually 
apply for the in-quota volume not exceeding their yearly share within the in-quota volume 
annually established by the Government.  Therefore, in her opinion, the TRQs allocation 
mechanism established by Government Resolution No. 269 was fully consistent with the provisions 
of the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.   
338.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in accordance with the rules approved 
by the Resolution of the Government of Kaza khstan No. 269, TRQ volumes for beef, pork, or 
poultry were allocated in two stages:  at stage 1, annually by 31 December of the year preceding 
the year when a TRQ entered into force, 25% of the total annual TRQ volumes were allocated 
among suppliers according to the formula; and at stage 2, annually by 1 April of the year when a 
TRQ entered into force, 100% of the total annual TRQ volumes were allocated according to the 
formula, which deducted the TRQ volume allocated du ring stage 1.  TRQs for imports of beef, fresh 
or chilled (HS Code 0201) were allocated on a "first  come, first served" basis.  The formulae used 
for allocation of TRQ volumes between suppliers, are provided in Annex 11 of this Report.   
339.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled that TRQ volumes were determined on an 
annual basis.  She stated that the CU Commission Decisions No. 505 of 18 November 2010 and 
No. 865 of 9 December 2011 had allocated TRQs fo r beef, pork and poultry, and had established 
the TRQ volumes for each CU Party in 2011 and 2012 respectively.  The TRQ volumes established for Kazakhstan had been the same in 2010 and 2 011.  In 2012, TRQ volumes for beef and pork 
had been increased.  The EEC Decision No. 229 "On the List of Products, towards which Tariff Rate 
Quotas, and the Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas to the Territories of the member States of the 
Customs Union and Common Economic Space for 2013 are Established" of 20 November 2012, had 
introduced a tariff rate quota on milk whey and established TRQ volumes for 2013.  The EEC 
Collegium Decision No. 242 "On the List of Goods, towards which Tariff Rate Quotas, and the 
Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas for Imports to the Territories of the member-States of the Customs WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 104 - 
 
  Union and the Common Economic Space for 2014 are Established" of 29 October 2013 had 
provided for TRQ volumes for 2014.  The TRQ volumes for 2010-2014 are provided in Table 1 .   
Table 1:  TRQ Volumes for 2010 – 2014 
HS Code Product Name TRQ volumes for 2010 – 2014, thousand tonnes 
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
0201 Beef, fresh or chilled 0.02 0.02 0.02  
15.4 0.02 
0202 Beef, frozen 10.0 10.0 13.9 15.3 
0203 Pork 
7.4 7.4 9.4 9.7 9.7 0203 29 550 2, 
0203 29 900 2 Pork trimmings 
0207 Poultry 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 
340.  A Member expressed concern regarding delays in allocating the 2012 TRQ volumes and 
that this delay was precluding trade.  This Member reported that according to industry sources, the 
Government Resolution allocating the quota volu mes had not been signed.  The Member requested 
information on when the Resolution would be sign ed and requested that the situation be resolved 
quickly to allow for trade.  Further, the Member requested assurances that these types of delays 
would not occur in the future.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Government 
Resolution No. 1085 on allocated TRQs volumes for the year 2012 had been signed on 
24 August 2012.  The delay was caused due to problems related to the accuracy of customs 
statistics.  She further stated that in accordance  with Law No. 239-V “On Amendments 
and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of th e Republic of Kazakhstan on the Issues of 
Delimitation of Competence between the Le vels of Public Administration” of 29 
September 2014, the substantial part of state decision-making authority had been 
delegated from the level of the Government to the central and local executive bodies.  
Thus, the Law delegated to the body responsi ble for regulation of trade activities the 
authority to establish TRQs on imports an d/or exports of certain kinds of goods, 
determine allocation methods and procedures, the volume and period of application of 
TRQs.  The representative of Kazakhstan recalled that the Ministry of National Economy of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan was the authorised body issuing import licenses for beef, pork or poultry 
under TRQs.  The State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan had to report to the Ministry of Nati onal Economy quarterly on the actual volume of 
imported beef, pork and poultry, respectively.   
341.  A Member expressed concern regarding the imposition of TRQs for poultry products and 
stated that imposition of new trade restrictions during the course of WTO accession was contrary 
to the general principle of standstill with regard to trade restrictions during accession negotiations.  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan stated  that production of poultry was one of the key 
segments of agricultural sector in Kazakhstan, which provided thousands of jobs in rural areas.  
Hence for Kazakhstan, it was important to preserve the right to apply TRQs on poultry.  She noted 
that Kazakhstan had been working closely with Working Party Members in order to elaborate a mutually acceptable solution. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 105 - 
 
  342.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the TRQ mechanism set-out in Section I-B of Part I of the Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan contained the information on in-quota tariff rates and 
quantities eligible for the in-quota tariff rates for TRQs for beef, pork and poultry.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further explai ned that currently Kazakhstan did not allocate 
country-specific TRQs.  Therefore, TRQs were allocated on the basis of the "historical principle" 
among suppliers - residents of Kazakhstan - proporti onally to the volume of the goods imported in 
the previous period.  Thus, at this time, Kazakhstan had no need for a re-allocation mechanism 
and did not have one in place.   
343.  One Member emphasized that the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures 
required that in the administration of quotas by means of licensing, quota allocations make provision for new entrants to the market and the issuing of licenses for imports in commercially 
viable quantities.  This Member stated that provision also needed to be made for the re-allocation 
of unused quantities of the TRQ s by the original recipients of the licenses in the cases of country 
specific allocations.  This Member stated that Kazakhstan should establish a  mechanism to allow 
for access to the TRQ s by new entrants, that ensured that allocated amounts were commercially 
viable, and that dealt with the issue of reallocation of unused quota designations to ensure full 
utilisation of the TRQ s when allocations were made on a country-specific basis.   
344.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession of Kazakhstan 
to the WTO, import TRQs applied in Kazakhstan would be administered, whether by the competent 
Bodies of the EAEU or by authorities of Kazakhstan, in a manner that was consistent with 
the GATT 1994 and other relevant WTO Agreements, including the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures and the Agreement on Agriculture.   She further confirmed that, in implementing TRQs, 
Kazakhstan would provide opportunity for new entrants seeking access to in-quota allocations 
under the TRQ s, and would provide for allocations under the TRQs in economic quantities 
as provided for in paragraph 5 of th e "Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota 
Administration Provisions of Agricultural Products, as Defined in Article 2 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture"
16.  In case, if Kazakhstan decided to allocate TRQs on a 
country-specific basis, it would provide for a transparent, predictable and timely reallocation 
mechanism that allowed for full utilisation of TRQs by WTO Members.  The Working Party took note 
of these commitments. 
- Fees and Charges for Services Rendered 
345.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that Article 72 of the Customs Union 
(CU) Customs Code left the authority for the application of customs fees to the 
EAEU member States.  In Kazakhstan, customs f ees and charges currently were regulated by the 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296- IV "On Customs Procedures" of 30 June 2010 
(hereinafter:  "Customs Code of Kazakhstan") and Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption of 
                                               
16 WT/MIN(13)/39; WT/L/914. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 106 - 
 
  Rates of Customs Fees Levied by Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011.  Government Resolution 
No. 669 "On Adoption of Rates of Customs Fees , Charges and Payments Levied by Customs 
Bodies" of 8 July 2003 was no longer in force.   
346.  The representative of Kazakhstan further note d that before adoption of the Customs Code 
of Kazakhstan, which had entered into force as of  1 July 2010, customs fees had been levied for 
(i) customs clearance; (ii) customs escort of goods; and (iii) customs warehousing of goods.  Fees 
also had been levied for issuing preliminary decisions on the classification of goods and the 
methodology used for identifying the origin and customs value of goods.  In accordance with 
Article 116 of  the Customs Code, customs fees were levied only for (i) customs clearance at the 
time of declaration of goods; (ii) customs escort of goods; and (iii) issuing preliminary decisions.   
347.  The Customs Code of Kazakhstan had abolished the old customs clearance fee levied at 
0.2% of the customs value.  Customs clearance fees and customs escort fees applied in 
accordance with Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption of Customs Fee Rates Levied by 
Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011, which established customs clearance fees levied at the time 
of declaration in fixed amounts (euro) per declarat ion and levied customs escort fees on the basis 
of distance.  The methodology used for calculating customs escort fees included travel expenses of 
customs officials, costs of fuel for transportation, and depreciation costs of vehicles; and it did not 
cover the salaries of customs officials.  In her view, the fees were calculated on the basis of the 
actual cost of services rendered and theref ore were in conformity with Article VIII of 
the GATT 1994.  Customs fees levied for customs declaration of goods, customs escort, and issuing of preliminary decisions were paid to the budget and were non-refundable. 
348.  The customs clearance of goods (and vehicles) in Kazakhstan included, (i) registration of a 
customs declaration; (ii) verification of the application of tariff and non-tariff regulations; 
(iii) verification of accuracy of the declared customs regimes (such as customs transit, customs 
warehouse, etc.) with customs requirements; (iv) administration of customs fees; determination of 
customs value; and, (v) classification of g oods for the purpose of customs examination and 
customs expert evaluation.  According to para graph 3 of Article 115 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, the amount of customs clearance fees levied could not exceed the actual costs 
incurred by customs bodies during the customs cl earance process.  Customs clearance fees were 
set based on the customs declaration at €60 for the main list of goods in the customs declaration, 
and at €25 for every additional list, in case of declaring more than one type of goods at once.  
Pursuant to Article 120 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, customs clearance fees had to be paid 
before or at the time of submission of the cust oms declaration.  The fee for issuing preliminary 
decisions on the classification of goods and the or igin of goods by the customs body was set at €70 
and had to be paid before the issuance of such deci sion.  In response to a specific question from a 
Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan applied a fixed fee for all 
customs clearance activities irrespective of the type of good, clearance place, time, and 
transportation mode.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 107 - 
 
  349.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
only transit escort fees were levied on the basis of distance.  According to Article 322 of 
the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, "customs escort" was a measure used by the customs bodies or 
other organizations stipulated by the legislation of Kazakhstan to convey goods in accordance with 
the customs procedure of the customs transit.  Th e customs bodies could authorise this procedure 
in cases (i) determined on the basis of the risk management system; (ii) when customs duties and 
taxes had not been paid or had not been paid in full; (iii) when the carrier repeatedly had failed to 
fulfil duties with regard to the delivery of goods in accordance with the customs procedure of 
customs transit; and, (iv) as provided for in international agreements to which the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was a party.   
350.  The customs escort was initiated no later than within 24 hours of the time the customs 
bodies made the decision on the need for customs escort.  Customs escort fees were calculated on 
the basis of the distance between the customs po int of departure of the goods to the customs 
point of destination (e.g., ranging from EUR 11 for a distance of up to 50 km to EUR 878 for a 
distance of over 2,000 km).  The methodology for ca lculation of customs escort fees is provided in 
Annex 12 of this Report.  The fees charged covere d the travel expenses of customs officials, the 
cost of fuel used for transportation, and depreciation cost of vehicles; it did not cover the salaries 
of customs officials.  If customs escort was provided to the goods transported by several vehicles, 
the customs fee was applied proportionally depend ing on the number of vehicles.  Customs fees 
for customs escort had to be paid after the decision on customs escort was made, but no later than on the day that the customs escort began.  
351.  The following items were exempt from payment of customs fees:  (i) vehicles transporting 
passengers and baggage internationally on a regular basis as well as other property necessary 
during transportation; (ii) maintenance items, fu el, food and other property exported from the 
customs territory of the EAEU in order to provide for the work of Kazakhstan's vessels or vessels 
chartered by Kazakhstan's persons used for marine fishery, as well as products of marine fishery 
imported into Kazakhstan; (iii) national and foreign bills and coins (except for bills and coins of 
cultural and historical value), and securities; (iv) goods (except for excisable goods) imported as 
humanitarian aid; (v) goods (except for excisable goods, excluding  cars for medical purposes) 
imported for charity purposes; (vi) materials imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan for the 
production of bills and coins; (vii) goods impo rted and exported for official use of foreign 
diplomatic missions and consular establishmen ts, diplomatic, administrative and technical 
personnel of these establishments, including their family members who were not citizens of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan; (viii) goods declared under the customs procedure of refusal in favour of 
the State; and, (ix) goods acquired using the grants of governments and international 
organizations in accordance with the tax legislation of Kazakhstan. 
352.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would, from the date of 
accession, ensure that any fees and charges for services rendered imposed on or in connection 
with importation and exportation, including those listed in paragraph [ 347] and Annex [12] of this WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 108 - 
 
  Report, or introduced in the future would be applied in conformity with the relevant provisions of 
the WTO Agreement, in particular Articles VIII and X of the GATT 1994.  She further confirmed 
that, from the date of accession, all laws and regulations regarding the application and level of any 
such fees and charges would be published.  Fu rther, upon receipt of a written request of a 
concerned Member, Kazakhstan would provide to that Member information on the revenue 
collected from a specific fee or charge and on the costs of providing the associated services.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Application of Internal Taxes to Imports 
353.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as of 1 January 2015, the legal framework 
governing the application of indirect taxa tion on imports (and exports) among the 
EAEU member States was contained in the EAEU  Treaty:  Section XVII "Taxes and Taxation" 
(Articles 71-72), and Annex No. 18 "The Protocol on the Procedure of Levying Indirect Taxes and 
on the Mechanism of Control over their Paymen t while Exporting/Importing Goods, Performing 
Works And Rendering Services" (hereafter – Protocol).  These provisions replaced the Agreement 
on the Principles of Indirect Tax Collection at Export and Import of Goods, Performing Works and 
Rendering Services in the Customs Union of 25 January 2008, as amended by the Protocol on 
Amending the Agreement on the Principles of Coll ection of Indirect Taxes on Exports and Imports 
of Goods, Performing Works and Rendering Services  in the CU of 11 December 2009, the Protocol 
on the Procedure of Levying Indirect Taxes upon Performing Works and Rendering Services in the 
Customs Union of 11 December 2009, and the Protocol on the Procedure of Collection of Indirect 
Taxes and on the Mechanism of Carrying Out the Control over their Payment while 
Exporting/Importing Goods from/to the Customs Union of 11 December 2009, which were 
terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.   
354.  From 1 January 2015, Section XVII and the Protocol established that goods entering 
from an  EAEU member State to another member State were  subject to excise and value-
added taxes (VAT) and that goods from an  EAEU member State destined to another member 
State  were exempted from excise taxes and (or) subject to VAT at a zero rate applied by the 
exporting Party, provided that documentary confirma tion of the fact of the export and payment of 
indirect taxes (VAT and excise taxes) to the budget of the importing EAEU member State was 
submitted to the exporting Party's tax authorities.  Article 72 of the Treaty also confirmed that the 
rate of duty of these indirect taxes applied to imports did not exceed the rate applicable to 
domestic goods.  Application of indirect taxes to imports into Special Economic Zones and Free 
Warehouses was established in the "Agreement on  Free (Special) Economic Zones on the Customs 
Territory of the Customs Union and the Customs Procedures of the Free Customs Zones" and the 
"Agreement On Free Warehouses and Free Warehouse Customs Procedure" of 18 June 2010, 
respectively, as well as in the CU Customs Code.  Article 70 of the Customs Code of the Customs 
Union, adopted on 27 November 2009 (hereafter  the CU Customs Code) and in force as of 
1 July 2010, confirmed that customs bodies of the EAEU member States collected  VAT and 
excise taxes on imports into the Customs Union from third parties.  Articles 74, 75 and 76 of the 
CU Customs Code  stated that the levels, method of collection and taxable base for these taxes WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 109 - 
 
  on imports were regulated by the national legisl ation of the EAEU member States.  Thus, within 
the framework of the EAEU, Kazakhstan's national legislation determining the application of indirect taxes to imports and exports prior to 1 January 2010 continued to apply.   
355.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  the Tax Code provided the legal framework 
for application of internal taxes (VAT and excise taxes) on imported goods in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  Local authorities did not have the right to introduce import taxes, as these taxes 
could only be introduced by the Government th rough the adoption of new legislative acts or 
amendments to the Tax Code.  The Tax Code had entered into force on 1 January 2009, and was 
based on the following key principles:  (i) reductio n of the tax burden of the non-extracting sectors 
of economy; (ii) reduction of administrative barriers; and (iii) increase in the effectiveness of the 
tax administration. 
 - Value Added Tax 
356.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that VAT was set at a general rate of 12%, which 
was levied uniformly on domestic and imported products, including those originating in the EAEU 
member States.  VAT was levied on domestic products on the basis of the volume of taxable 
turnover, while for imports VAT was levied on the sum of the customs value of goods, as well as 
other taxes and mandatory payments.  In reply to a specific question from a Member, she 
specified that in case of excisable goods, excise taxes were included in the taxable base of both 
domestic and imported goods for the purposes of applying VAT.  In reply to a request to detail the 
"other taxes and mandatory payments", the repr esentative of Kazakhstan replied that her 
Government applied excise taxes, import duties and, where applicable, customs levies for customs 
clearance, customs escort, issuing of preliminary decisions.  Kazakhstan applied the "country of 
destination" principle to imports originating from all trading partners, including the EAEU 
member States and CIS countries.  Specifically, as of 1 January 2005, all imports of oil, natural 
gas and gas condensate had been subject to the no rmal VAT rate, irrespective of the country of 
origin.  Pursuant to Article 242 of the Tax Code, all exported goods were zero-rated for VAT 
purposes.  Specifically, since 1 January 2005, the export of ferrous and non-ferrous scrap had 
been zero-rated for VAT purposes.   
357.  She noted that, in accordance with Article 248 of the Tax Code, the sales turnover of 
certain goods (works, services) was exempted from  the payment of VAT.  Goods (works, services) 
with sales turnover exempt from the payment of VAT were listed in Annex 13(A) of this Report.  
She further said that the application of VAT within special economic zones and free warehouses 
was discussed in the section "Free Zones, Special Economic Zones". 
358.  She further explained that, pursuant to Articl e 255 of the Tax Code, VAT was not levied on 
the imports of:  (i) national and foreign currency (except for currencies of cultural and historic 
value), and securities; (ii) goods, imported by natural persons under duty-free regulations of the 
EAEU and the Republic of Kazakhstan; (iii) humanit arian aid, except for excisable goods, imported 
in accordance with procedures established by th e Government; (iv) goods, except for excisable WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 110 - 
 
  goods, imported as charitable assistance through official channels from States, Governments, and 
international organizations, including for technical assistance purposes; (v) goods imported by diplomatic missions and accredited consular offices for official use, as well as goods imported for 
personal use by the diplomatic and administrative personnel of these missions, by consular officers 
and employees, and members of their families living  with them, that were exempted in accordance 
with international agreements , ratified by Kazakhstan ; (vi) goods subject to declaration under 
the customs regulation of the EAEU and/or the Republic of Kazakhstan under customs regimes 
providing for tax exemptions - customs transit, customs warehouse, processing on the customs 
territory, processing for domestic production, te mporary importation, re-importation, duty-free 
trade, refusal of the good in favour of the State, free warehouse, destruction and free customs 
zone; (vii) Government-approved medicines, includ ing medicinal substances; articles intended for 
medical (veterinary) use, including prosthetic an d orthopaedic devices, devices for the deaf and 
blind, medical and veterinary equipment; mate rials and components for the production of 
medicines, including substances, medical (vet erinary) products, including prosthetic and 
orthopaedic devices, and medical (veterinary) equipment; (viii) postage stamps (except for 
collectibles); (ix) raw materials for production of banknotes by the National Bank and its 
subordinate bodies; (x) goods imported under the grants provided by States, Governments of 
States and international organizations; (xi) imported investment gold, except for investment gold 
imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan under certain conditions; and (xii) investment gold 
imported by the National Bank of Kazakhstan.  
359.  A Member asked the representative of Kazakhstan to confirm that the general rate of VAT 
was applied equally to all goods, imported and domestic.  In particular, this Member enquired if 
Kazakhstan exempted small businesses and entrep reneurs from VAT payments based on the (low) 
level of their revenues.  Kazakhstan was also asked if there were exemptions from application of 
the VAT on domestic raw agricultural produce at its first point of sale from the farm.  This Member 
further stated that such exemptions for sales of domestic agricultural produce, but not for similar 
imported articles, appeared to conflict with obligations that Kazakhstan would assume under 
Article III of the GATT 1994.  This Member asked how Kazakhstan would alter or eliminate the tax 
exemption on domestic agricultural output to restore non-discriminatory treatment vis-à-vis  
similar and identical imported goods.  
360.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that VAT was applied equally to imported and 
domestic goods.  Kazakhstan maintained a simplified taxation system for small businesses, 
including farmers that were not required to register as VAT payers due to their small annual 
turnover (less than 30,000 MCI).  She stated th at this minimum threshold was an accepted 
international practice applied to small producers with limited technical capacity to apply complex 
tax methodologies.  
361.  The representative of Kazakhstan further added that producers and processors of 
agricultural products could qualify for the following tax regimes:  (i) a regime applicable to peasant 
farms; (ii) a regime applicable to juridical persons - producers of agricultural products, products of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 111 - 
 
  aquaculture (fish-breeding) and rural consumer  cooperatives (hereinafter – agricultural 
producers); or, (iii) a regime applicable to processors of primary agricultural products.   
362.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the first regime applied to peasant 
farms17 producing agricultural goods or processing and selling their own agricultural produce.  
This regime was based on a "single land tax" (set at 0.1 to 0.5% of the assessed value of the land) 
which replaced the individual income tax, land ta x and charges for its use, property tax, transport 
tax, and value-added tax.  To be eligible for this tax regime peasant farms had to own land plots 
on the basis of property rights and (or) land use rights.  Farms that chose to use this tax regime 
did not have to register as VAT payers.   
363.  The second tax regime was applied to juridical persons - producers of agricultural 
products.  To be eligible for the tax regime, juridical persons had to (i) produce agricultural products, products of aquaculture with the use of land, process and sell these products of own 
production; (ii) produce animal products and poultry products (including breeding) in a full cycle of 
production (starting from rearing), products of beekeeping, aquaculture (fish farming) and process 
and market these products of own production.  According to this regime, the VAT payable was 
determined normally, i.e., by the difference between  the VAT charged in the price of product sold 
and the VAT paid for inputs (works, services).  Th e amount of the VAT payable by the agricultural 
producer to the budget after sale of its product co uld be reduced by 70%, as a result, they paid to 
the budget only 30% of VAT.  The price of  these agricultural goods to the first 
purchaser/consumer, including food processing enterprises, incorporated the full 12% VAT.  
364.  Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that in the third tax regime,  based 
on the provisions of Article 267 of the Tax Code, pr ocessors of agricultural primary products could 
also reduce the amount of the VAT payable to the budget by 70%, whereas, the price of final 
products to the first purchaser/consumer included the full 12% VAT.  To be eligible for the 
preference, agricultural processors had to receive not less than 90% of their aggregate annual 
income from carrying out the following types of businesses:  (i) production of meat and meat 
products; (ii) processing and canning of fruits and vegetables; (iii) production of vegetable and 
animal oils and fats; (iv) processing of milk and production of cheese; (v) production of flour and 
cereal industry products; (vi) production of ready fodder for animals; (vii) production of bread; 
(viii) production of baby foods and dietetic nourishments; and /or, (ix) production of starch and 
molasses.  The representative of Kazakhstan note d that the preference was aimed at addressing 
the current social situation in the agricultural sector.  She explained that almost 97% of domestic 
agricultural producers that supplied their products to processors of agricultural primary products 
were small farmers and households with annual turn over of less than 30,000 MCI, i.e. they were 
not VAT payers.  This meant that in the absence of the preference, the processors would have to 
pay larger amounts of VAT than in the normal situation, because they had no VAT to deduct when 
                                               
17 Peasant farm is a labour union of individuals exercising individual entrepreneurship that is inextricably 
linked with the use of agricultural land for agricultural production an d processing and marketing of their 
products.  The subjects of the peasant farms are ci tizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan engaged in 
entrepreneurial activities without forming a legal entity. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 112 - 
 
  they calculated VAT payable to the budget.  Thus , the VAT preference was aimed at compensating 
the losses of the processors incurred as a result of purchase of primary agricultural products from small farmers and households not registered as VAT payers.   
365.  One Member expressed its concern that the scheme to provide revenue from VAT 
payments directly to the agricultural producers and processors at the time of first sale to 
consumers might allow the producer or processor to charge less for his/her goods based on the 
expected subsidy.  This Member maintained that, as applied, it could operate as a discriminatory 
measure against imports.  This Member held the view that VAT preferences should either be 
eliminated or brought into conformity with WTO provisions. 
366.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that around 46% of Kazakhstan's 
population lived in rural areas and almost one third of the working population was engaged in agricultural production.  Along with this, over 93% of agricultural producers were households and 
small farms that lacked financial and technical resources.  Thus, existing VAT preferences for 
agricultural producers and processors played an important role in addressing social challenges and 
ensuring food safety, and as such formed an integral part of Kazakhstan's agricultural support 
system.  At the same time the Government of Kazakhstan planned to reform the VAT 
preference sfor agricultural producers and processors by introducing alternative WTO compatible 
agricultural subsidy mechanism.  In this regard, the transitional period until 1 January 2018 was 
required to introduce amendments into the Ta x Code with the purpose to eliminate the VAT 
preferences and, thus, ensuring that the tax treatment for imported agricultural products was no less favorable than that applied to similar domestic goods, and develop a WTO compatible subsidy 
mechanism for agricultural producers.   
 - Excise Tax 
367.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the legal framework for excise taxation in 
Kazakhstan was provided in Section 9 of the Tax Code.  It set the list of products which were 
subject to excise taxes and established the tax rates (see Annex 13(B) of this Report).  Asked 
about the target date for unification of excise taxes (which for many years had been applied at 
higher rates on imported goods than on domest ic goods), she responded that, according to the 
Tax Code, excise taxes for domestic and imported goods had been fully unified as of 
1 January 2012.   
368.  A Member requested more details on the taxable base for domestic and imported goods for 
the application of excise taxes.  This Member also sought more information on the process that 
had been used to unify excise taxes and asked Kazakhstan to provide a table listing all excise 
taxes currently applied.  If necessary, an implementation table for Kazakhstan's progressive 
unification of excise taxes where the rates of such taxes now differed as applied to domestic 
production or imported goods should also be pr ovided.  Moreover, this Member enquired whether 
Kazakhstan's tax regime expressed (and collected) excise taxes in different currencies for 
domestically produced products and imports.  If this was the case, how did Kazakhstan ensure that WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 113 - 
 
  exchange rate shifts did not result in different excise tax rates.  This Member also enquired 
whether the unified tax would be payable in local currency for all goods.  Finally, this Member considered that, to ensure their conformity with  Article III of the GATT 1994, the excise tax regime 
should not impose different currency requirements for taxes on domestic goods and on imports as 
payment of taxes in euro might  result in less favourable treatment in terms of the actual revenue 
collected.  Some Members asked the representative of Kazakhstan to confirm that there were no 
additional excise tax exemptions, namely that excise tax was applied to all similar goods imported 
from all countries in a non-discriminatory manner.  Members emphasized that Kazakhstan should 
eliminate any remaining differential excise taxes from the date of accession to the WTO, i.e., it 
would unify all of its excise rates in terms of their application to domestic and imported goods or 
otherwise bring their application into conformity with the provisions of Articles I and III of the GATT 1994. 
369.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the taxable base for domestic goods for 
application of excise taxes was defined as the amount (volume or quantity) of excisable goods 
produced or sold in physical (measurement) units (Article 283 of the Tax Code).  The taxable base 
for imported excisable goods was defined as the volu me or quantity of imported excisable goods in 
physical (measurement) units (Article 297 of the Tax Code).  In general, excise taxes were applied 
to domestic goods upon their sale.  In accordance with Article 282 of the Tax Code, the date of 
sale was the date of unloading (transfer) of exci sable goods to the recipient.  Excise taxes on 
domestic goods, except for alcohol and tobacco products, had to be paid to the budget no later than 20
th day of the month following the tax reporting period.  For goods imported from the 
territory of other EAEU members, except for alcohol and tobacco products, excise taxes had to be 
paid no later than 20th day of the month following the date of record of imported excisable goods.  
Excise taxes on goods imported from third countries, except for alcohol and tobacco products, had 
to be paid when goods were crossing the customs border.  In case of alcohol (except for wine 
material and beer  for which there was no requirement to apply excise stamps) and tobacco 
products, both imported and domestic, excise taxes had to be paid prior to (three days before) the 
receipt of excise stamps from the tax authorities.  
370.  She further stated that according to the Tax Code - as amended by Law No. 297- IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislativ e Acts on Issues of Customs Regulation and 
Taxation" of 30 June 2010 - excise tax rates on spirits and alcohol beverages had been unified since 1 January 2012.  The excise tax rates for automobiles and fuel had already been unified 
since 2009, on tobacco products - since 2011.  She added that only motor vehicles with engine 
capacity over 3,000 cm
3 were subject to excise taxes.  This was aimed primarily at addressing 
environmental concerns and had no discriminatory effect on imports.  As of 2009, excise taxes 
were levied on all eligible goods, both domestically produced and imported, in the national 
currency (Tenge).  She also confirmed that excise taxes were applicable to domestic and imported 
goods regardless of the country of origin.  Current ly applied excise taxes are listed in Annex 13(B) 
of this Report. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 114 - 
 
  371.  She further noted that Kazakhstan did not apply excise tax on imports of (i) excisable 
goods imported by natural persons within the limits set by the Government; (ii) excisable goods required for the operation of vehicles involved in international transportation, en route and at 
intermediate locations; (iii) goods damaged prior to being transported across the customs border 
and rendered unusable as products and materials; (iv) goods imported for use (including personal 
use) by foreign diplomatic representative office s and offices of the same status, exempted from 
excise taxes under international Agreements to which Kazakhstan was party; (v) goods moving 
across the customs border of the EAEU and placed under the following customs procedures 
established by the customs legislation of the EA EU and customs legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan - customs transit, customs warehouse, processing on the customs territory, processing 
for domestic production, re-importation, duty-free trade, refusal of the good in favour of the State, destruction, free warehouse, free customs zone, ex cept for the customs procedure "issue of goods 
for domestic consumption"; and, (vi) products containing alcohol used in medicine (except for 
balm), registered in accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation.    
372.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to describe the customs regime of "duty-free trade" and 
explain why it allowed for the non-application of excise taxes on otherwise excisable goods citing 
the domestic or EAEU legislation that provided  for this treatment.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that in accordance with paragraph 4, Article 299 of the Tax Code of 
Kazakhstan, excisable goods imported to the EAEU were exempt from excise taxes if they were 
placed under customs procedures which provided fo r excise tax exemption in accordance with the 
customs legislation of the EAEU and (or) the cust oms legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
except for the customs procedure for release for domestic consumption.  In accordance with 
Article 302 of the CU Customs Code, duty -free trade was the customs procedure  under which 
goods were sold at retail duty-free shops to indi viduals leaving the customs territory of the EAEU 
or foreign diplomatic representative offices, representative offices of international organizations 
equivalent to them, consular establishments as well as diplomatic agents, consular officials and 
members of their families living with them, without payment of customs duties and indirect taxes 
(VAT and excise taxes) and without application of any non-tariff regulation measures.  Thus, all 
goods placed under this regime were exem pt from payment of excise taxes.   
373.  A member asked to provide information on ef forts of member States of the EAEU to 
gradually harmonize excise taxes.  The representati ves of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance 
with the provisions of the EAEU Treaty, from 1 January 2015, the EAEU member States had to 
determine directions, forms and procedures of ha rmonization (approximation) of excise tax rates 
for the most sensitive excisable goods.  At the same time, the harmonization process should not 
lead to restriction of competition and should not impede free movement of goods, works and 
services within the EAEU and its member States.  There was no specific deadline established for 
harmonization of excise tax rate s among the EAEU member States. 
374.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide information on the scope and nature of the excise 
tax increases, and the date when they would be implemented.  The representative of Kazakhstan WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 115 - 
 
  explained that the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Amendments and Addenda into the 
Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Tax Issues" No. 152-V of 5 December 
2013 (hereinafter – the Law) envisaged gradual increase of excise tax rates for imported and 
locally produced tobacco and alcohol products on a uniform and non-discriminatory basis as 
provided in the following tables.  
Table 2:  Excise Tax Rates for Tobacco and Alcohol Products 
Types of tobacco products: 2014(tg/kg) 2015(tg/kg) 2016(tg/kg) 
Filter-tipped cigarettes 3000 3900 5000 
Non-filter cigarettes, smokables 3000 3900 5000 
Cigarillos 3700 4800 6225 
Cigars 475 620 565 
Tobacco 3800 4900 7345 
 
Types of alcohol products 2014(tg/l) 2015(tg/l) 2016(tg/l) 
Alcohol products 1000 1200 1600 
Cognac, brandy from imported cognac 
spirit  250 250 250 Cognac, brandy from domestic cognac 
spirit 
375.  Asked about Kazakhstan's plans to introduce transport tax, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that according to the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, automotive vehicles were subject to transport tax based on engine size.  She noted that the transport tax was 
distinct from the excise tax.  She further explaine d that the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 
5 December 2013 No. 152-V "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" provided for an increase in tax rates for automotive vehicles with an 
engine capacity of more than 3,000 cubic centimeters, which was paid on an annual basis.  
The Law had entered  into force on 1 January 2014.  The following increased tax rates were 
applied to automotive vehicles produced (manufactured or assembled) in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and (or) imported to the Republic of Kazakhstan after 31 December 2013. 
Table 3:  Transport Tax 
No. 
  Tax rate 
(monthly calculation index) 
1. Automotive vehicles with an engine capacity of (cubic centimeters):  
 over 3 000 to 3 200 inclusive 35 
 over 3 200 to 3 500 inclusive 46 
 over 3 500 to 4 000 inclusive 66 
 over 4 000 to 5 000 inclusive 130 
 Over 5 000 200 
376.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply its domestic taxes and exemptions thereof, including VAT, excise taxes, and other 
taxes, in a non-discriminatory manner in compliance with Articles I and III of the GATT 1994 
[, except for VAT preferences for agricultural producers and processors described in paragraphs [ 363] and [ 364].  The Republic of Kazakhstan would bring these VAT preferences 
applied to agricultural producers and proce ssors into conformity with the WTO rules 
by 1 January 2018, as laid out in paragraph [ 366].  She added that during this period, the scope WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 116 - 
 
  of the exemption would not be increased, either in terms of coverage or level of exemption.]  
The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- Quantitative Import Restrictions, incl uding Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing 
Systems 
377.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, as a result of the entry into force of the EAEU 
Treaty on 1 January 2015, legal authority for the im position of quantitative import restrictions in 
the Republic of Kazakhstan was based on Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures 
Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU Treaty, which replaced the following legal acts:  the 
Agreement "On Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries" of 
25 January 2008 (hereinafter:  "the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation"), the Agreement "On 
the Procedure of Introduction and Implementation of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries" of 9 June 2009, the 
Agreement "On the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Trade in Goods" of 9 June 2009, 
which were terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  The following 
documents remained in force:  Decision No. 19 of the CU Interstate Council "On a Common Non-
Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009 and Decision of the Collegium of the Eurasian 
Economic Commission No. 134 "On Normative Legal Ac ts in the Area of Non-Tariff Regulation" of 
16 August 2012 (hereinafter:  "Collegium Decision No. 134").  As a consequence, decisions to 
apply non-tariff measures on third-country imports into the EAEU were taken by the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC).  The EEC Collegium had re-approved the Common List of Goods that 
are Subject to Bans and Restrictions on Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Customs 
Union of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Third Countries (hereinafter:  "the 
Common List") by the Collegium Decision No. 134, which had come into force on 
16 September 2012 (see Annex 14 of this Report for the Common List).  Previously, the Common 
List had been approved by CU Commission Decision No. 132 "On a Common Non-Tariff Regulation 
of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belaru s, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation" of 27 November 2009.  From 1 January 2015, according to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU 
Treaty, non-tariff measures could include quantitative restrictions, bans, exclusive import licenses, 
automatic licenses (permits) or non-automatic licenses.  The non-tariff measures listed in 
Annex 14 of this Report were comprehensive, and Kazakhstan did not have additional such restrictions in the national legislation. 
378.  Prior to the establishment of the CU, application of non-tariff measures was governed by 
Law No. 544 "On Regulation of Trade Activity" of  12 April 2004.  This Law had been amended by 
Law No. 297-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Cert ain Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
on Issues of Customs Regulation and Taxation" of 30 June 2010 and Law No. 400-IV 
"On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of 
Regulation of Trade Activity" of 26 January 2011 upon enforcement of the CU Agreements WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 117 - 
 
  regulating non-tariff measures.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan noted that the 
EAEU member States did not apply non- tariff measures in mutual trade.   
379.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  in addition to goods that had been subject 
to non-tariff regulation in Kazakhstan prior to the establishment of the CU, the Common List had 
added the following goods:  certain products with encryption capabilities (hereinafter:  "goods 
containing encryption technology") and implements for catching aquatic biological resources and 
skins of Greenland seals and baby seals.  Weak and medium distillates, which had been subject to 
import licensing in Kazakhstan prior to establishment of the CU, were not included in the Common 
List, and hence were no longer subject to non-tariff regulation.  Finally, she noted that upon 
establishment of the CU, Kazakhstan's import ban on certain types of narcotic drugs and 
psychotropic substances and their precursors had been replaced by an import licensing regime.  
In response to a Member's question, she stated that Kazakhstan did not apply any prohibition on 
imports of second-hand clothes and tires.   
380.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that Government Resolution No. 681 
"On Bans Imposed on Goods and Vehicles Imported to and Exported from Kazakhstan, Lists of 
Goods Prohibited to be Placed under Certain Customs Regimes, and Bans and Restrictions for 
Conducting Operations with Goods Placed under Certain Custom Regimes" of 10 July 2003, 
banning imports of:  (i) military weapons and ammunition, materials and equipment which could 
be used in the production of weapons of mass destruction; (ii) certain kinds of narcotics, 
psychotropic agents and precursors, as well as instruments for their consumption; (iii) printed and illustrative materials aimed at creating propaganda for war, terrorism, violence, racism, as well as 
pornographic materials; (iv) certain ozone-de pleting substances; and (v) goods containing 
ozone-depleting substances, had been repealed  by the Government Resolution No. 272 of 
25 March 2011.  She added that a quota on imported grinding and forged spheres (imposed by 
Government Resolution No. 1243 "On Introduction of Restriction for Import And Export of Certain 
Goods" of 5 December 1998), and restrictions on imports of ethyl spirits and alcohol products 
(imposed by Government Resolution No. 1031 "On Import Licensing of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol 
Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of  27 June 1997) also had been abolished on 
1 January 2003 and 17 June 2004, respectively.   
- (a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas 
381.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan did not maintain any quantitative 
import restrictions, prohibitions or quotas within the meaning of Article XI of the GATT 1994, nor 
was any such measure in place in the EAEU.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under the EAEU legislation, import restrictions co uld be applied pursuant to Section VII of Annex 
No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and in accordance with national laws and international treaties of 
Kazakhstan, if those measures: (i) were  necessary  to maintain public morals or law and order; 
(ii) were necessary  to protect the life or health of citizens, environment, life or health of animals 
and plants; (iii) were required  to prevent the exhaustion of irreplaceable natural resources and 
implemented simultaneously with curtailment of the domestic production or consumption WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 118 - 
 
  associated with the utilisation of irreplaceable natural resources; (iv) were applied  to protect 
cultural valuables and heritage; (v) were linked  to a limitation of exports of domestic raw 
materials to provide sufficient quantity of such materials for the domestic manufacturing industry 
in periods when domestic prices for such materials were kept lower than world prices as the result 
of a stabilization plan implemented by the Government; (vi) were essential  to acquire or 
distribute goods in case of their general or local shortage; (vii) were essential  to comply with the 
international obligations; (viii) were essential  to ensure the defence of the country and security 
of the State; and, (ix) were necessary  to ensure regulatory legal acts not contravening 
international commitments and related to the applic ation of the customs law, preservation of the 
environment, protection of intellectual property and other legal acts; and (xii) were related to 
imports of gold or silver.  
382.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that pursuant to paragraph 12 
Section III of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, quanti tative import restrictions could be introduced 
on agricultural or fishery products imported into the EAEU in accordance with Article XI:2 of 
the GATT 1994, when such measures were necessary : (i) to reduce the production or sale of 
similar domestic goods; (ii) to reduce the production or sale of domestic goods that could be 
directly replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale production of similar 
domestic goods; (iii) to remove from the market a temporary surplus of similar domestic goods by 
providing the available surplus of such goods to so me groups of consumers either free of charge or 
at prices lower than  market prices; (iv) to remove from the market a temporary surplus of 
domestic goods that may be directly replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale 
production of similar domestic goods by providing the available surplus of such goods to some 
groups of consumers either free of charge or at prices lower than  market prices.  In addition, 
import prohibitions and restrictions could be applied if they were necessary to the application of 
standards or regulations for the classification, grading or marketing of commodities in international 
trade, as stated in paragraph 12.2 of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.  In response to a question 
from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that "domestic good" in this context 
meant a good produced in any EAEU member State.  
383.  A Member enquired whether any import restrict ions on agricultural products under Article 
XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 had been or were being applied.  This Member requested Kazakhstan to 
enter a commitment to comply with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, which had superseded Article XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994, as from the date of its accession and to remove any 
measures that could be inconsistent with that Article.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said no import restrictions under Ar ticle XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 were applied under 
the national legislation of Kazakhstan or Commission Decisions.  She further stated that in order to 
align with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, paragraph 12 of Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty did not contain a provision on import restrictions of agricultural products. 
384.  She further stated that, pursuant to Section II of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the 
Commission was authorised to apply quantitative import restrictions and prohibitions to protect the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 119 - 
 
  external financial situation and safeguard the bala nce of payments.  To meet these obligations, the 
Commission was authorised to apply quantitative import restrictions or grant exclusive licenses to import or export based on proposals from the EAEU member State.  Such measures would be 
taken in accordance with the laws of Kazakhstan and the international agreements to which 
Kazakhstan was a Party.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of 
Kazakhstan explained that the list of general except ions stipulated in Section VII of Annex No. 7 to 
the EAEU Treaty was exhaustive and no other document within the EAEU provided for such 
exceptions.  
385.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that, as of 1 January 2015, pursuant to 
Section II of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the authority to impose non-tariff measures on 
third-country imports in the EAEU was transferred from the individual Parties to the Commission.  A proposal to apply a non-tariff measure could be filed by an EAEU member State or the 
Commission.  The Commission was required to make its determination within 30 days from the 
date the proposal was submitted, and the decision would come into force within 45 days from the 
date of publication.  Any non-tariff measure wa s applied to goods originating in third countries, 
and applied equally to imports from all countries.  In response to a question from a Member, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that all ch anges to EAEU Treaty an d EAEU legislative acts 
(including the Common List) were published on th e EAEU website (www.eurasi ancommission.org).   
386.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under Section X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, an EAEU member State could unilaterally impose temporarily a non-tariff measure if such a measure was due to the reasons stipulated 
in paragraphs [381] and [382] .  Furthermore, Section VIII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty 
provided further grounds to introduce unilateral non-tariff measures with a view to protecting an 
external financial position and safeguarding the balance of payments.  Such a unilateral measure 
could be imposed for only six months.  The EAEU member States not imposing the non-tariff 
measure were to take the necessary steps to prevent the importation of the subject concerned  
goods into the Party which unilaterally applied the non-tariff measure. 
387.  Some Members stated that certain elements of Section VII of Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty, such as paragraph 6, reached beyond grounds provided for under the GATT, in 
particular Articles XX and XI.  Those Members requested a commitment that Section VII of Annex 
No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, whether applied by Ka zakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, 
would be in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.   
388.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, paragraph 6 of 
Section VII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty was in conformity with Article XX(j) of the 
GATT 1994.  She also confirmed that measures appl ied on the basis of that provision would be in 
conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, whether applied by Kazakhstan or 
the competent bodies of the EAEU.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 120 - 
 
  - (b) Import Licensing 
389.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that as  of 1 January 2015, the licensing regime in 
Kazakhstan was governed by Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and its Appendix, by Commission 
Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this section and by Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty 
(TRQs).  The purpose of the licensing regime was to monitor and control imports of goods which, 
for various reasons, were classified as sensitive by the EAEU member States and/or by the 
international community.  Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and these Commission Decisions did not cover the issues of technical regulation, application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures, or 
anti-dumping, safeguard and countervailing measures .  These issues were regulated by separate 
provisions of the EAEU Treaty and (or) national  legislation.  The procedure for importation of 
specific goods included in the Common List, such as goods containing encryption technology, ethyl 
spirits and alcohol products, etc. were set-out in EAEU regulations and national legislation.  
The authorised body of each EAEU member St ate was responsible for issuing and monitoring 
implementation of non-automatic licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits). 
390.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the national legislation of Kazakhstan 
continued to apply to the extent that it did not contradict the EAEU Treaty, Commission Decisions 
and other EAEU legal acts.  Kazakhstan's national legislation in this area included Law No. 214 
"On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, as amended by Law No. 400-IV "On Amendment and Addenda 
to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of  Kazakhstan on the Issues of Trade Activity 
Regulation" of 26 January 2011 and Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan  on Improvement of th e Regulatory Approval 
System" of 15 July 2011 (hereinafter:  "the Law on Licensing"), and Government Resolution 
No. 578 "On Certain Issues on Import and Export Licensing of Goods" of 12 June 2008, as 
amended by Resolution of the Government  of Kazakhstan No. 1320 of 17 October 2012 
(hereinafter:  Resolution No. 578). 
391.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that an import licence or permit authorised the 
licensee or permit holder to import the relevant good into only the EAEU member State that issued the licence or permit; the licence or permit did not authorise the licensee to import the relevant 
product into other EAEU member States.  She further explained that the licence or permit did, 
however, give the licensee/permit holder the righ t to transit the product through the other EAEU 
member State's territory to the territory of the EAEU member State that issued the licence or 
permit.  
392.  According to Section IX of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, licensing was required:  (i) in 
the event of temporary quantitative restrictions on imports of certain types of goods; (ii) to 
regulate the importation of certain goods for re asons of national security, health, safety or 
environmental protection; (iii) to grant an exclusive right to import certain goods; or, (iv) to carry 
out international obligations.  Import licenses were also required to regulate the importation of 
goods subject to tariff rate quotas.  The type of non-tariff restrictions and the list of goods subject 
to these restrictions were established by the Commission.  The current list of such goods is set-out WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 121 - 
 
  in Annex 14 of this Report.  The Commission could decide to add or remove goods from this list 
upon request of an EAEU member State or on its own initiative. 
393.  The procedure for obtaining automatic and non-automatic import licenses (permits) was 
unified throughout the territory of the EAEU, including uniform licence and permit applications and 
forms, the list of documents to be submitted when applying for licence, the list of goods subject to 
import licensing, and the licensing procedures for each category of goods. 
394.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that according to Section IX of Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty, the "authorized State bodies of executive power" (hereinafter:  "the authorized 
body") issued three types of non-automatic licenses:  one-time, general and exclusive, as well as 
permits in case of automatic licensing.  In Kazakhstan, the "authorized body" responsible for 
granting the licence depended on the type of licence and product subject to licensing.  The authorized bodies responsible for issuing import licenses are listed in Annex 14 of this Report. 
395.  One-time licenses were issued by the authoriz ed body of the Government of Kazakhstan to 
foreign trade participants on the basis of a foreign trade contract related to goods subject to 
import licensing and granted the right to import ce rtain types of goods in the quantity determined 
by a licence.  A licence was issued for the quantity of goods specified in a foreign trade contract 
and was valid up to one year from the date of its entering into force.  Import licenses issued for 
goods subject to temporary quantitative restrictions were valid until the end of the calendar year 
for which a quota was established.  One-time licence holders had to submit to the authorized body 
a certificate of performance within 15 days after the expiration date of the licence.  
396.  General licenses were issued by the authorized body of the Government of Kazakhstan to 
participants of foreign trade and granted the right to import certain types of goods subject to 
licensing in the quantity determined by a licen ce.  According to the CU Commission Decision 
No. 168 "On Ensuring Functioning of the System  of Common Non-Tariff Regulation of the 
Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, Republ ic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 
27 January 2010 (hereinafter:  "CU Commission Decision No. 168"), only products described in 
Sections 2.9 (precious metals and precious stones), 2.10 (unpolished precious metals, scrap and 
wastes of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals, and raw materials containing 
precious metals), 2.25 (goods subject to authorization procedures), 2.27 (goods subject to tariff 
rate quotas) of the Common List could be imported under a general licence as amended by 
Collegium Decision No. 134.  A general licence was valid up to one year from the date of its entering into force; for goods subject to quantitative restrictions, a general licence was valid until 
the end of the calendar year for which a quota was established.  General licence holders had to 
submit to the authorized body a certificate of perf ormance on a quarterly basis.  In response to a 
question, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that at the moment Kazakhstan did not issue 
any general licenses.   
397.  Exclusive licenses were issued by the author ized body of the Government of Kazakhstan 
for a period not exceeding the term established in a decision of the Commission and gave the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 122 - 
 
  applicant the exclusive right to import/export certain types of goods.  According to CU Commission 
Decision No. 168, exclusive licenses could be granted only for products in Section 2.26 (goods subject to exclusive rights) of the Common List, an d were issued consistent with the laws of the 
relevant EAEU member State.  In response to a question, the representative of Kazakhstan noted 
that Kazakhstan had not issued any exclusive licenses.   
398.  Pursuant to Section II of the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, all types of non-
automatic import licenses were issued within 15 wo rking days from the date of submission of the 
complete set of documents.  These documents consisted of an application for a licence, an 
electronic copy of the application,  a copy of the contract, a copy of a certificate confirming that the 
applicant was registered with a regional tax authority as a tax-payer, a copy of the activity licence 
(if applicable) and other documents, as required.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that other documents were specified in separate 
Regulations adopted by Decision of the Collegium No. 134, which merely repeated in content the 
Regulations approved by Decision No. 19 of the Eu rAsEC Interstate Council of 27 November 2009.  
For instance, additional documents related to safety requirements for a limited number of specific 
goods were established in Regulations on th e order of movement of goods, such as 
ozone-depleting destroying substances, hazardous wastes, plant protection chemicals, special 
technical devises, etc.  Licenses had to be rene wed in cases of change of the legal form of the 
licence holder, change of name or place of regi stration or residence, or loss of the licence.  
Kazakhstan applied uniform import licensing fees for all goods.  According to the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the licensing fee was equal to 10 Monthly Calculated Indices 
(hereinafter:  "MCI").  In 2014, the import/export licensing fee was equal to 18,520 tenge 
(approximately US$100). 
399.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  pursuant to Section III of the Appendix to 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, permits were issued without restriction to all applicants within 
three working days from the date of the submission  of the draft permit in a format approved by 
the CU Commission Decision No. 168, and remained  valid until the end of the calendar year in 
which they were issued.  No other documents were required for issuance of a permit.  Application 
could be submitted on any working day before cu stoms clearance.  The list of goods subject to 
permits was approved by the Commission (Section 2.25 of the Common List).  
400.  Non-automatic import licenses were issued by the Ministry of Investments and 
Development, except for import licenses for narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their 
precursors that were issued by the Ministry of In ternal Affairs; import licenses for ozone-depleting 
substances that were issued by the Ministry of Energy; and import licenses for human organs and 
tissues, blood and its components that were issued  by the Ministry of Public Health and Social 
Development.  In accordance with CU Commission Decision No. 747 of 16 August 2011 
"On Amendments to Normative Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Non-Tariff 
Regulation in Relation to Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" (hereinafter:  "CU Commission 
Decision No. 747"), upon accession of any EAEU member State to the WTO, non-automatic import WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 123 - 
 
  licensing requirements to spirits and alcohol pr oducts would be eliminated and replaced by 
automatic licensing requirement.  At this stage,  however, all import licensing requirements for 
ethyl spirits and alcohol products had been eliminated in Kazakhstan as of 22 August 2012.  
In case of application of the automatic import licence in the future, the "authorised body" would be 
the State Revenue Committee of the Ministry of  Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
401.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
proprietary and/or confidential information contained in an import licence application would be 
protected under the applicable laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
402.  A Member expressed concern that import licenses expired at the end of each calendar year 
and that importers could submit applications for renewal only as from the 15th January of the 
following year and would thus face an up to six-week hiatus from supply due to renewal procedure as opposed to domestic producers that were not required to obtain an import licence.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that because Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty did not 
provide a separate procedure for the renewal of licenses, a licence holder wishing to renew a 
licence had to submit a new application, along with  the full set of required documents and for the 
same fee of 10 MCI.  An applicant could apply for a new licence at any time before the expiration 
of the current licence in order to avoid a disruption of supply of goods. 
403.  Section II of the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty established the grounds for 
refusing licenses.  A licence could be refused on the following grounds:  (i) incomplete or 
inaccurate information in the documents submitted by the applicant to obtain a licence; (ii) non-compliance with the requirements stipulated in the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU 
Treaty; (iii) termination or suspension of one or more documents that served as the basis for 
issuance of a licence; (iv) violation of international obligations of an EAEU member State, which 
could occur as a result of performance of the cont ract which required a licence; (v) exhaustion of 
quota (in the case of registration of a licence for goods subject to quotas); and (vi) in cases 
established by the Commission.  The decision to refuse a licence had to be justified and presented 
by the authorized body to the applicant in writin g.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed 
that licenses would not be refused due to minor documentation errors.  
404.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that a decision to terminate or suspend an import 
licence was made by the authorized body of Ka zakhstan based on the criteria established in 
CU Commission Decision No. 488 "On Approval of  the Provision on the Procedure of License 
Suspension or Termination" of 8 December 2010.  Pursuant to this Decision, the authorized body 
of Kazakhstan had the right to terminate or suspend an import licence in the cases stipulated by 
the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty including a change in the constituent documents 
of a licensee registered as a juridical person (e .g., a change of the organizational-legal form, 
name, or its location) or a change in the passport information of a licensee registered as a natural 
person.  In such circumstances, the Appendix to Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty provided that the 
licensee could request that the authorized body te rminate the existing licence, and register a new 
licence.  In order to register a new licence, the licensee was required to submit a new application WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 124 - 
 
  and documents confirming the above-mentioned chan ge(s).  In case of loss of the licence, the 
licensee was entitled to a duplicate licence, which would be issued within three working days from the date of submission of the request explaining  the causes and circumstances of the loss of the 
licence.   
405.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in order to obtain an import licence for 
certain goods, the importer was required to have an activity licence.  The Law on Licensing 
provided a complete list of activities subject to licensing.  Activity licensing requirements were 
established for:  (i) national security reasons; (ii) implementation of State monopoly functions; 
(iii) strengthening the rule of law; or (iv) protec tion of the environment, property, and the life and 
health of citizens.  Goods for which an activity licence was required in order to obtain an import 
licence are indicated in the last column of Annex 14 of this Report.  
406.  A Member noted that pursuant to Article 4.9 of the Law on Licensing, certain 
"State bodies", autonomous educational organizations and related foreign entities, and the 
Kazakhstan Development Bank were not required to have an activity licence for certain activities 
that would otherwise require one.  This Member asked if "State bodies" included State-owned or 
State-controlled enterprises or if they were limited to official agencies of the Government of 
Kazakhstan and asked for an explanation as to why these exemptions existed, how the exempted 
potential licensees were otherwise regulated and if these exemptions provided discriminatory 
preferential treatment.  The representative of Ka zakhstan replied that these laws did not provide 
for preferential treatment for domestic entities with regard to activity licenses required for 
obtaining import licenses, nor did the exemptions cover activities involving imports or exports.   
407.  A Member asked if Article 40 of the Law on  Licensing authorised the requirement for 
import licenses for goods under international agreements (e.g., CITES, Kimberley Process) and 
what specific circumstances were contemplated for the use of import licenses "for the purposes of 
protection of home manufacturers of the goods and economic safety of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
without application of quantity restrictions".  Th e representative of Kazakhstan explained that the 
Law on Licensing had been amended in accordance with the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Measures 
and now in accordance with Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.  Specifically, Articles 39 and 40 had 
been excluded from the Law on Licensing by Law No. 400-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to 
Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakh stan on the Issues of Regulating Trade Activity" 
of 26 January 2011.  Goods subject to the inte rnational agreements (e.g., CITES, Kimberley 
Process) could be regulated according to Section VII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.   
408.  Similarly, a Member expressed concern with Article 40 of the Law on Licensing, which 
permitted introduction of import licenses "i n order to protect domestic producers of the 
commodity", and such justification did not appear consistent with Kazakhstan's WTO obligations.  
The Member asked Kazakhstan how it would bring its import licensing regime into compliance with 
the WTO rules.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Article 40 had been eliminated by 
Law No. 400-IV of 26 January 2011.  She reiterated that Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty set forth 
the only reasons for which import licenses could be required.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 125 - 
 
  409.  Some Members expressed concerns that the current application of licensing requirements 
to products such as ethyl spirits and alcohol prod ucts, goods containing encryption technology, and 
special technical devices operated to restrict imports.  A Member requested that Kazakhstan 
explain how these restrictions would be modified or eliminated to comply with the 
WTO requirements.  In response, the representative  of Kazakhstan stated that the grounds upon 
which import licensing for those goods was introduced complied with the exemptions stipulated by 
Article XX of the GATT 1994.  In her view, the import licensing procedures had been brought into 
compliance with the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.   
- (i) Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products 
410.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that since 1 January 2015, the importation 
into the Republic of Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products had been governed by 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this section, as well 
as Kazakhstan's domestic legislation, Law No. 429 "On State Regulation of Production and 
Turnover of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products" of 16 July 1999 (hereinafter:  "the Law No. 429 on 
Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol Products") and Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan 
No. 57 "On Certain Issues of Activity Licensing for Production of Ethyl Spirits and Production, 
Storage, Wholesale and (or) Retail Sales of Alcohol Products Except for Storage, Wholesale and 
(or) Retail Sale of Alcohol Products within the Territory of Production" of 29 January 2013.   
411.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, pursuant to CU Commission 
Decision No. 747, upon accession to the WTO of any EAEU member State, non-automatic import 
licensing requirement for ethyl spirits and alcohol products (Section 2.18 of the Common List) 
would be eliminated and replaced by an automatic licensing procedure whereby licenses would be 
issued upon submission of the appropriate and complete documentation.  She further noted that 
pursuant to Law No. 461-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Improvement of Permissible System" of 15 July 2011 
amending the Law on Licensing, the requirement fo r an activity licence for importation of ethyl 
spirits and alcohol products, which was used as a condition for obtaining an import licence for ethyl spirits and alcohol products, had been eliminated as of 30 January 2012.  As of 22 August 2012, 
non-automatic licensing of imports of ethyl spirits and alcohol products was not applied 
in Kazakhstan in accordance with CU Commission Decision No. 747 . She noted, however, 
that importers into Kazakhstan of ethyl spirits and alcohol products were still required to hold an 
activity licence for production, distribution, or storage of ethyl spirits and alcohol products, and to 
obtain and apply strip stamps for the purposes of excise tax payments, as described in the section 
" A p p l i c a t i o n  o f  I n t e r n a l  T a x e s  t o  I m p o r t s "  o f  t h i s  R e p o r t .   I n  r e s p o n s e  t o  a  q u e s t i o n  f r o m  a  
Member, the representative confirmed that Law No . 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits and Alcohol 
Products would be amended to reflect the changes in licensing regime applied to imports of ethyl 
spirits and alcohol products  by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  In response to a 
question from another Member concerning licensing requirements for non-food products containing denatured alcohol, e.g., fuel mixtures, cosmetics, fragrances, cleaning products, paints and stains, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 126 - 
 
  the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that  the Law No. 429 on Regulation of Ethyl Spirits 
and Alcohol Products and EAEU legal acts did no t regulate importation of these products.   
- (ii) Pharmaceuticals 
412.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that since 1 January 2010, the importation of 
medicines and pharmaceutical substances (hereinafter:  "pharmaceuticals") into Kazakhstan was 
regulated by Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty and Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this 
section, and more specifically by the Regulation "On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Medicines and Pharmaceutical Ingredients" (hereinafter: "the CU 
Regulation on Import of Pharmaceuticals"), the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193 "On 
People's Health and Healthcare System" of 18 Sept ember 2009 (hereinafter: "the Code on Health") 
and Resolution of the Government of the Republ ic of Kazakhstan No. 711 "On Approval of the 
Rules on Importation and Exportation of Medicine s, Products of Medical Purposes and Medical 
Equipment" of 31 May 2012.   
413.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to CU Commission Decision No. 748 
"On Amendments to the Regulations on the Order of Importation of Medicines and Pharmaceutical 
Substances to the Customs Territory of th e Customs Union" of 16 August 2011, as of 
1 October 2011, pharmaceuticals were no longer subject to an import licensing requirement.  
Pharmaceuticals were, however, still subject to a registration requirement.  Pursuant to the CU Regulation on Import of Pharmaceuticals, only pharmaceuticals included in the national registries 
of pharmaceuticals of the EAEU member States could be imported into the EAEU.  The national 
registry of Kazakhstan was administered in accordance with the national legislation, and only 
pharmaceuticals registered in Kazakhstan (i.e., in accordance with the Code on Health) could be 
imported into the territory of Kazakhstan; non-registered pharmaceuticals could be imported only 
with a conclusion (permit) as described in paragraph [ 418].  In response to a question from a 
Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that as described in sub-section (b) of the 
section "Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations" of this Report, importation 
of pharmaceuticals was restricted to juridical pe rsons of Kazakhstan meeting the requirements of 
Article 80 of the Code on Health, which included holding an activity licence to engage in production 
or distribution of pharmaceuticals.   
414.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's registration process was burdensome and constituted a 
problem for its exporters.  A major concern was registration for imported products took about a 
year to renew, whereas a registration for locall y produced generic products was renewed in about 
a month.  In addition, the renewal process required the same procedures as the original 
registration.  This Member asked how Kazakhstan would ensure that the import licensing 
procedures for pharmaceuticals would conform to WTO requirements.   
415.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that there could be no such 
discrimination under national legislation or EAEU legal instruments either in the process for the 
registration or re-registration of pharmaceuticals in Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Government WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 127 - 
 
  Resolution No. 351 "On Approval of Standard of St ate Service 'State Registration, Re-registration 
and Introduction of Changes in Registration Record  of Medicines, Products of Medical Purpose and 
Medical Equipment'" of 4 April 2011, (i) State registration was conducted within 227 days; and, 
(ii) State re-registration took 137 days.  For the procedure of re-registration fewer documents and 
procedures were required.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that conditions for State registration and re-registration were identical for locally produced and 
imported pharmaceuticals in Kazakhstan.  The same list of documents was required in Kazakhstan 
for registration of locally produced and imported pharmaceuticals.  The term "simplified list of 
documents" did not exist in the legislation of Kazakhstan. 
416.  With regard to a concern raised by a Me mber on the renewal of registration, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, at present, the "Rules on State Registration, Re-registration and Introduction of Changes in Re gistration Record of Medicines, Products of 
Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment" (hereina fter:  "the Rules"), approved by the Order 
No. 735 of the Minister of the Public Health of Kazakhstan of 18 November 2009, envisaged 
simplification of one of the stages of re-registrat ion procedures – analytical expertise.  Analytical 
expertise was not required for pharmaceuticals ma rketed in Kazakhstan for over 15 years if the 
pharmaceuticals had received no complaint relating to its safety, quality and efficacy.  At the same 
time, a registration record of pharmaceuticals, produced in accordance with Good Manufacturing 
Practice (GMP), was prepared in the form of a common technical document consisting of 
5 modules.  All 5 modules (1-5) were required for the State registration and 1-3 modules were required for the State re-registration.  Therefore, fewer documents had to be submitted for 
re-registration.  Additionally, the State Programme "On Developments of Pharmaceutical Industry 
for the Period of 2010-2014" envisaged implementa tion of the GMP by pharmaceutical companies 
in Kazakhstan.  In addition, the State Progra mme of the Development of Public Healthcare 
"Salamatti Kazakhstan" (Healthy Kazakhstan) envisaged accession of national inspectorate into the 
Pharmaceutical Inspection Convention and Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme 
by 2015.  Implementation of the goals stipulated in these programmes would allow Kazakhstan to 
introduce a one-time State re-registration procedure.  
417.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that information confirming that 
pharmaceuticals intended for importation were in the State registry had to be provided in the 
customs declaration.  Registration of medicinal products for medical purpose and medical equipment in the State registry was permitted only  after a review conducted to evaluate safety, 
effectiveness, and quality of the medicine on the ba sis of an expertise.  The list of pharmaceuticals 
currently registered could be found on the website of the National Center for Expertise of 
Medicines, Products of Medical Purpose and Medical Equipment:  
http://www.dari.kz/index.php? lang=eng&uin=1282274831.  
418.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that  non-registered pharmaceuticals could be 
imported only with a conclusion (permit) issued by the authorised body (the Ministry of Public 
Health and Social Development in Kazakhstan) for the purpose of:  (i) State registration; (ii) WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 128 - 
 
  exhibitions without the rights to sell them afte rwards; (iii) life-saving treatment and rendering 
medical aid to patients having rare and (or) severe pathology; (iv) prevention and elimination consequences of emergency situations; (v) equipping organizations of public health service with 
unique medical equipment that had not analogously registered in Kazakhstan; and, (vi) conducting 
clinical research as stated in Article 80.3 of the Code on Health.  The list of documents required to 
obtain a conclusion (permit) for each of the above-stated categories of pharmaceuticals was 
provided in Government Resolution No. 711 .   
419.  She noted, however, that pharmaceuticals (including non-registered pharmaceuticals) 
could be imported without a conclusion (permit) issued by the authorized body (the Ministry of 
Public Health and Social Development) if they we re imported for personal use by natural persons, 
diplomats or representatives of international organizations, as part of first-aid kits of vessels, international airlines, trains and vehicles arriving to the EAEU customs territory, or for medical aid 
to participants of international expeditions, cultural and sport events.   
420.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and thei r precursors (Section 2.12 of the Common List) 
were still subject to import licensing.  Importation into the EAEU customs territory of narcotic 
drugs, psychotropic substances and their precurso rs were regulated by the separate Regulation 
"On the Order of Importation, Exportation and Transit of Narcotic Drugs, Psychotropic Substances 
and their Precursors across the Customs Territory of the Customs Union".  According to the 
Regulation, juridical persons could import narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors to the EAEU customs territory provided they obtained a licence issued by the authorized 
body (the Ministry of Internal Affairs) in coordination with the Ministry of Public Health and Social 
Development.  Physical persons could import narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances as 
prescribed medicine for personal use in limited quantities.  The following could be imported without 
licenses:  (i) narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors intended for first aid in 
emergency situations, (ii) first-aid kits of vessels, international airlines, and, (iii) precursors used 
as supplies in quantity necessary for operation of equipment and technical devices of air, sea 
(river) and railway transport. 
- (iii) Products containing cryptographi c capabilities, including goods with  
  encryption technology an d special technical devices 
421.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that within the framework of the CU and 
EAEU, since 1 January 2010 imports of certain pr oducts containing cryp tographic capabilities 
(goods containing encryption technology, listed in Annex 15(A) of this Report) previously not 
subject to import licensing were now covered by the licensing regime and included in the Common List.  Special technical devices designed for the clandestine interception or extraction of 
information (listed in Annex 15(B) of this Report) were included on the Common List and remained 
subject to import licensing.  
422.  Some Members requested information on the application by Kazakhstan of requirements 
for importation of goods containing encryption technology.  These Members noted that most WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 129 - 
 
  countries did not limit imports of these products and questioned the need and justification for 
licensing, in particular, non-automatic licensing of commercially traded, mass-market goods, and goods that were covered under the Information Technology Agreement (ITA).  Members expressed 
concern that such licensing requirements could nullify or impair the market access commitments 
on a wide-range of products of undertaken by the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Members stated that to 
the extent that the Republic of Kazakhstan intended to establish or apply licensing requirements, 
such requirements should apply only to products  that clearly presented a threat to security.  
In such cases, licensing procedures should be applied in a non-discriminatory manner and comply 
with all WTO requirements. 
423.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, prior to 1 January 2010, the importation 
of goods containing encryption technology had only been subject to an activity licence; pursuant to the Resolution of the Government of Kazakhst an No. 1160 "On Approval of Licensing Rules and 
Qualification Requirements for Activity in the Sphere of Development and Sale (including other 
Transfer) of Devices for Cryptographic Protection of Information" of 30 November 2007, no import 
licence had been required.  Currently, the importat ion of goods containing encryption technology 
was regulated by Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty an d the Decisions listed in the first paragraph of 
this section, and by the Regulation "On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the 
Customs Union and Removal of the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption 
(Cryptographic) Means" (hereinafter: "the CU Encryption Regulation").  She further stated that the 
CU Encryption Regulation had been amended by Decision of the Collegium of the EEC No. 103 
"On Amendments to the Regulations on the Applic ation of Restrictions" of 14 May 2013 with the 
purpose to include the definition of "mass market go ods", as defined in Annex 15(C) of this Report.  
A Member stated that the amendment to the CU Encryption Regulation in EEC Collegium Decision 
No. 103 narrowed the definition of "mass market goods" as defined in Annex 15(C) of this Report 
and introduced additional hurdles for products that qualified for mass market treatment.  It also 
created additional barriers that would affect th e ability of goods covered by the Information 
Technology Agreement to access the market.  This Member asked that these inconsistencies with 
the agreed definition be corrected prior to conclusion of the negotiations.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that the CU Encryption Re gulation had been amended by Decision of 
the Collegium of the EEC No. 103 "On Amendments to the Regulations on the Application 
of Restrictions" of 14 May 2013 with the pu rpose to include the definition of "mass 
market goods", as defined in Annex 15(C) of this Report. 
424.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at any procedures or requirements relating 
to licensing imports of goods containing encryp tion technology, whether by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be applied on a non-discriminatory 
basis and in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, in particular, Articles I 
and III of the GATT 1994, and that procedures re lated to the notification, evaluation, approval, 
and licensing of goods containing encryption tec hnology, would be transparent and predictable and 
would not impose unreasonable or burdensome requirements on such goods.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 130 - 
 
  425.  In response to a concern raised by a Member that Kazakhstan's import licensing regime for 
goods containing encryption technology was now more restrictive than prior to the formation of the customs union, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, in order to facilitate trade, 
Kazakhstan and its EAEU partners had developed an d applied an interim system of regulation of 
goods containing encryption technology.  Unde r this interim system, all goods containing 
encryption technology were divided into three groups:  (i) certain goods containing encryption 
technology could be imported without any formalit ies related to encryption; (ii) other goods with 
encryption technology would be subject to a on e-time notification requirement; and, (iii) a 
category of goods with encryption technology woul d be subject to an expert evaluation and require 
an import licence.  The import licence was issued  by the Ministry of Investments and Development, 
based on a "conclusion" issued by the executive body  in the field of national security of the EAEU 
member State (the National Security Committee in the case of Kazakhstan), following an "expert 
examination".  She noted that other formalities, such as customs or those necessary to implement 
technical regulations would continue to apply in respect of imports of all these goods. 
426.  In response to a request by a Member to clarify the meaning of the wording "without any 
formalities related to encryption" in the previous paragraph, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that such formalities were understood as the formalities concerning the goods listed in 
Annex 15(C) of this Report and described in the second and subsequent sentences of 
paragraph [ 428], and the formalities listed in paragraph [ 431] concerning the goods which were 
subject to import licensing and expert evaluation .  She further explained that "formalities" not 
related to encryption that could be applied to go ods containing encryption technology could relate 
to the requirements resulting from application of the legislation on customs regulation, technical 
regulation, intellectual property rights, and other legal acts, which were usually applied with 
respect to the imported goods or goods designed for internal circulation in the market.   
427.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the conditions for importation of goods 
containing encryption technology, subject to current and any future exemptions, indicated in all of 
the Notes to Category 5, Part 2 "Information Security" of the Wassenaar Arrangement Dual Use 
List, whether imposed by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would not be more 
restrictive than those in effect on 1 June 2012.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
428.  With respect to goods falling into the categories set-out in Annex 15(C) of this Report, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, within the framework of the interim system, any 
restrictions existing before 1 January 2010 would be eliminated and no new restrictions, such as 
expert evaluations, approvals, and licenses, for the importation of those goods would be adopted 
or applied, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU.  She further informed 
Members that within the framework of the interim system, importation of goods in the categories 
set-out in Annex 15(C) of this Report would be permitted based on a one-time submission of a 
notification.  To comply with this requirement, the manufacturer of the good would submit a 
completed paper copy of a form containing information specified in Annex 15(D) of this Report.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 131 - 
 
  Further, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that no licenses would be required, whether 
by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, for imports into Kazakhstan of goods containing encryption technologies included in Annex 15(C) of this Report, and the exemptions 
set-out in paragraph [ 427].  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
429.  Addressing a request from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all 
goods with encryption technology released by fu ture Wassenaar Arrangement Category 5, Part 2 
"Information Security" de-controls would be allowed to be imported "without any formalities 
related to encryption".  Goods subject to a noti fication requirement, in accordance with the 
preceding paragraph were listed in Annex 15(C) of this Report.  In response to a question from a 
Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, consistent with Wassenaar practice, the 
regulating country (Kazakhstan) would determine which goods qualified as "mass market goods", as defined in Annex 15(C) of this Report.  She added that the data to be submitted for a "one-time 
notification" application were listed in Annex 15(D) of this Report.  She confirmed that, if a good 
had been imported subject to the "one-time notification" process, that good would not be subject 
to any other notifications by any parties importing that good.  The information on goods approved 
for import through the "one-time notification" process would be available to the public on the 
websites of the National Security Committee of Kazakhstan and the EAEU. 
430.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that, if proprietary information was submitted in the notification, and the manufacturer identified 
that information as proprietary, that information would be protected.  Confirmation of notification would be automatic, unless the manufacturer or its authorised representative in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan were contacted within ten working days after submission of the notification regarding 
its compliance with the requirements, including whether the product was correctly subject to 
notification, set-out in paragraph [ 428].  In the Republic of Kazakhstan, the National Security 
Committee would maintain a public internet site where such confirmations would be posted; the 
EAEU would also maintain a public internet site wh ere this list would be available to the public.  
Any importer or shipper could rely on a relevant confirmation.  Once a good was notified and 
confirmed, that good would not be subject to any other notifications by any parties importing that 
good; rather an importer/shipper would be required to indicate only that the good appeared on the 
internet site in the relevant customs declaration.  She further explained that this notification 
procedure was intended to facilitate the entry of the goods listed above and would not result in any delays or additional approval procedures. 
431.  For goods containing encryption technology  t h a t  n e e d e d  a n  i m p o r t  l i c e n c e ,  t h e  
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, within the framework of an interim system, such 
goods would need to undergo expert evaluation and approval (conclusion) only once.  If an expert 
evaluator needed additional information for its evaluation, it was required to notify the 
manufacturer or his authorised representative in the Republic of Kazakhstan and request such 
information within ten working days of the application.  Manufacturers would not be obligated to 
submit source code and failure to submit such code alone, would not result in denial of an WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 132 - 
 
  application.  After the good was approved, the same good, or a good used for the same purpose 
with identical encryption, could be imported into the Republic of Kazakhstan with a licence issued in a manner consistent with Article 2 of the WT O Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  
The time period for completing import licensing procedures, including the time required to obtain 
an experts' evaluation, to receive approval and th e import licence, would not exceed three months.  
Fees for experts' evaluations and licensing wo uld be transparent and based on the costs of 
services rendered.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
432.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would engage interested 
Members in a review of the operation of this interim system.  The purpose of this review would be 
to clarify and refine procedures for notification, confirmation, and licensing of goods with 
encryption technology and, where possible, to further improve and expand the products covered 
under paragraph [424] and Annex 15(C) of this Report.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
433.  To obtain an import licence, along with standard set of documents indicated in the 
Appendix to  Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, an applicant had to submit to the authorised body a 
conclusion (described in paragraph [428]) issued by the National Security Committee on the 
permissibility of importing the specific encrypti on product.  Pursuant to the CU Encryption 
Regulation, in order to obtain a conclusion, an applicant had to submit to the National Security 
Committee an application for a conclusion on the import of a cryptographic device, indicating the 
product's full name and identifying characteristics such as model name and serial number; a copy of the required activity licence; technical documentation on the encryption devices; and if 
requested, a sample of the encryption device.  The National Security Committee conducted a 
technical analysis of imported devices to determ ine only if the product contained cryptographic 
capabilities, and issued a document with its expert conclusion.  
434.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the procedure for technical analysis and 
obtaining the import and activity licenses for goods containing encryption technology did not 
require an applicant to disclose its confidential bu siness information, including the source code of 
the product.  The submission of a product sample was not mandatory.  In practice, most of the 
approvals were made on the basis of detailed description of the product's non-secret technical 
characteristics.   
435.  Members of the Working Party thanked Kazakhstan for reporting this change, but noted 
that this was a more restrictive system than had previously been in place.  They expressed 
concern about how Kazakhstan would ensure that goods not containing encryption technology 
would be excluded from any requirements relating to importation of goods containing such 
technology.  In their view, goods that did not contain encryption technology should not be subject 
to any encryption-related requirements or formalities.  Further, Kazakhstan should not require an 
activity licence for the importation of encryption goods subject only to notification requirements.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 133 - 
 
  436.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that goods that did not contain encryption 
technology would not be subject to any encryption-related requirements or formalities.  She further confirmed that activity licenses would not be required as a condition for importation of 
goods that were not subject to requirements or fo rmalities related to encryption and goods subject 
only to notification requirements.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
437.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
the importation of STDs (Section 2.17 of the Common List) was regulated by  Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty and Decisions listed in the first para graph of this section, including the Common List 
approved by Collegium Decision No. 134 and in particular the Regulation "On the Order of 
Importation to the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Exportation from the Customs 
Territory of the Customs Union of the Special Technical Devices Designed for the Clandestine Interception or Extraction of Information".  Th e list of STDs subject to import licensing was 
contained in Annex 15(B) of this Report.  EAEU legal instruments regulating the licensing of STDs 
superseded Kazakhstan's national legislation.  STDs were defined as special software and technical 
products containing hardware or software features designed only for the clandestine interception 
or extraction of audio-, video- and other informat ion as well as devices designed to detect the 
technical channels of leakage of information.  In response to a Member's question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that special technical devices differed from cryptographic 
devices by their intended purpose and use.  Cryptographic devices were designed to protect 
confidential information whereas special technical devices were designed to obtain information clandestinely.  She further confirmed that devices designed for open use, but which as a result of 
modification, unintended use, or some other way, could be used for clandestine interception of 
information, for example voice recorders or normal  surveillance cameras, were not considered to 
be special technical devices. 
438.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, from the date of accession, quantitative 
restrictions on imports, such as quotas, bans, permits, prior authorisation requirements, licensing 
requirements or other requirements or restrictions having equivalent effect that could not be 
justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement would be eliminated and not introduced, 
re-introduced or applied, whether by the Republic  of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the 
EAEU.  From the date of accession, any such requ irements or restrictions on imports, whether 
applied by the Republic of Kazakhstan or th e competent bodies of the EAEU, would be in 
conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agre ement.  She confirmed that the administrative 
procedures of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the operation of its import licensing regime and their 
application would, from the date of accession, be in compliance with all relevant provisions of the 
WTO Agreement, including the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments. 
- Customs Valuation 
439.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the basic provisions relating to customs 
valuation principles and policies in Kazakhstan were contained in the Agreement "On the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 134 - 
 
  Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across the Customs Border of the 
Customs Union" of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter:  "t he CU Agreement on Customs Valuation"), the 
Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 (hereinafter:  "the CU Customs Code") 
and the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 29 6-IV "On Customs Procedures in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter:  "the Customs Code of Kazakhstan").  The CU 
Agreement on Customs Valuation and the CU Customs Code had entered into force in Kazakhstan 
on 1 July 2010.  These legal instruments remained in force after 1 January 2015.  Prior to 1 July 
2010, customs clearance and control in Kazakhstan, including customs valuation, had been carried 
out in accordance with the national legislation, mainly the former Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
No. 401 of 5 April 2003.  The CU Agreement on Customs Valuation specified those areas that were 
to be implemented through national legislation.  In other cases, the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation applied directly as law.  Provisions of  Code No. 155-11 "On Administrative Violations" of 
30 January 2001 and Law No. 221 "On Order of Revi ew of Requests of Natural and Juridical 
Persons" of 12 January 2007 related to customs valuation also continued to apply after 
1 July 2010.   
440.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, as provided in Article 1.3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the relevant  provisions of the CU Agreement and national 
legislation were based on the provisions of the WTO Agreement on the Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994 (hereinafter:  "the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation") and that, 
in her view, the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation had been  drafted to fully implement the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  All six methods of customs valuation applied were based 
on the provisions of Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, 
including most of the provisions of the Interpretati ve Notes.  The rest of the Interpretative Notes 
were incorporated in EAEU legal instruments.  The provisions of Articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 16 
of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation were also implemented in EAEU legal instruments 
and Kazakhstan's national legislation.  She noted, in particular, that in accordance with Article 2 of 
the CU Customs Code, the term "customs territory of importation", as defined in Article 15.2 of the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, was the customs territory of the EAEU, consisting of the 
territories of the EAEU member States, as well as artificial islands, installations and other objects 
located beyond the territory of the EAEU member States in respect of which those 
EAEU member States enjoyed exclusive jurisdicti on.  Article 3 of the CU Agreement on Customs 
Valuation confirmed that goods "produced" in the customs territory (including identical or similar 
goods) included those extracted, raised, or manufactured, as defined in Article 15.1 of the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  She stated that the term used in Article 3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, i.e., that these goods belonged to "one or the same group of 
goods or a line of commodities, including identical and similar goods, which are manufactured 
within the framework of a certain economic acti vity", was based on th e meaning of the term 
"goods of the same class or kind" set-out in Article 15.3 of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation.  She further added that terms such as identical goods, similar goods, and 
related parties were used as described in Article 15 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, and their definitions could be found in Article 3 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 135 - 
 
  441.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the customs value of goods imported to the 
EAEU customs territory was declared by a declar ant when submitting a customs declaration of 
goods as provided for in the Agreement "On the Declaration Order of the Customs Value of Goods 
Transferred through the Customs Border of th e Customs Union" of 12 December 2008, and 
Article 65 and Chapter 27 of the CU Customs Code .  The Agreement "On the Declaration Order of 
the Customs Value of Goods Transferred through the Customs Border of the Customs Union" of 
12 December 2008 was terminated as of 1 January 2015.  The importer declared the customs 
value of imported goods by providing the following information:  the method chosen by the 
declarant for customs valuation of imported good s, the customs value of goods, conditions and 
circumstances surrounding the transaction related to the customs valuation of goods and 
documents confirming such information.  The repr esentative of Kazakhstan noted that the customs 
value of imported goods was determined in accordance with six methods listed in the priority 
order:  (i) transaction value; (ii) transaction value of identical goods; (iii) transaction value of 
similar goods; (iv) deductive method; (v) comp uted method; and, (vi) fall-back method, as 
provided for in Articles 4 and 6 to 9 and 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
The customs value of imported goods was as much as possible based on the price of transaction 
with these goods as provided in Article 2 and Article 4 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, 
which established that the "customs valuation of imported goods shall be, as a matter of principle, 
based on the price of transaction with these goods ..." and "the customs value of goods imported 
to the customs territory of the EAEU was the pric e of the respective transaction, i.e., the price 
actually paid or payable for these goods sold for export to the country of importation to the 
customs territory of the EAEU".  The customs valu e of goods and the information related to their 
valuation was based on reliable and computable data and supported by documentary evidence.  
The procedure of customs valuation was universal, i.e. did not differ depending on the source of 
goods (country of origin, type of goods, participants of a transaction, etc.).  
442.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the transaction value method established the 
customs value of goods on the basis of the price actually paid or liable to be paid for these goods 
at their sale for importing to the EAEU customs te rritory, and had priority over other methods of 
customs valuation.  She further noted that the methods of valuation provided for in the 
WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation other than the transaction value were contained in 
Articles 6 to 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Va luation.  She further explained that Article 10 
of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and Article 107 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
provided for the use of the fall-back method.  If the customs value of the imported goods could not 
be determined under the provisions of Arti cles 4 and 6 to 9 of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation (Articles 101 to 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan), the customs value 
would be determined using reasonable means consistent with the principles and provisions of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
443.  The methods of customs valuation used under the fall-back method were provided by 
Articles 101 to 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan and were consistent with the provisions of 
Articles 4 and 6 to 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, and Article 7 of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 136 - 
 
  WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  The use of the fall-back method of customs valuation of 
goods was described in Article 10 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and was the same as the other methods; however, it could be app lied with some flexibility.  For example: 
- determination of customs value could be based on the transaction value of identical or 
similar goods produced in the country other than the country of production of the goods being valued;  
- in determining customs value using the transaction value of identical or similar goods, a 
reasonable flexibility was allowed in respect of the interpretation of the requirement of Articles 6 and 7 of the CU Agreement on Cu stoms Valuation and Articles 103 and 104 of 
the Customs Code of Kazakhstan that the identical or similar goods should be exported at 
or about the same time as the goods being valued, as a rule, up to 90 days;  
- customs values of identical or similar imported goods already determined under the 
provisions of Articles 8 and 9 of the CU Ag reement on Customs Valuation and Articles 105 
and 106 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan could be used in determining customs value; and, 
- in determining customs value using the de ductive method, the "90 days" requirement 
established by paragraph 3 of Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and 
paragraph 3 of Article 105 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan could be administered flexibly (in accordance with the Interpretative Note to Article 7.3(c) of the WTO Agreement 
on Customs Valuation). 
444.  At the same time, customs valuation of goods using the fall-back method could not be 
based on the following:  (i) the price of goods in the internal market of the EAEU produced on the 
territory of the EAEU; (ii) the system of choos ing for customs purposes the higher price from 
two alternatives; (iii) the price of goods in the do mestic market of the exporting country; (iv) costs 
other than those included in the estimated cost determined for identical or similar goods in the 
computed method; (v) the price of goods delivered from the exporting country to third countries; 
(vi) minimum customs value; and (vii) arbitrary or fictitious customs value.  
445.  In addition, the representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that, pursuant to 
Articles 68 and 69 of the CU Customs Code, if the customs officer  discovered signs suggesting 
that the information on customs value of the goods stated by the declarant could contain inaccurate details, the customs officer could perform additional measures of control, including 
inspection of the documents and/or goods.  Rele ase of the goods was permitted by customs bodies 
on condition of presentation of a guarantee of the dutiable payments and taxes.  Pursuant to 
Article 1.2 of the CU Agreement on Customs Va luation and Article 113 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, these payments included:  (i) impo rt customs duty; (ii) export customs duty; 
(iii) value-added tax levied upon importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; 
(iv) excise tax levied upon importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; and, 
(v) customs fees (fees for customs declaration, escort, or preliminary decision).  For confirmation 
of the stated information, the declarant, upon request of the customs body, provided additional 
documents, information and explanations.  She further added that the declarant had the right to 
prove the correctness of the selected method of determination of the customs value of the goods 
and the authenticity of the information presen ted to the customs body.  In cases when the 
transaction value was rejected, the customs body proposed to the declarant that the customs 
value of the goods be determined by using anothe r method.  In such situations, the customs body 
and the declarant could hold consultations with regard to the method applicable for determination WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 137 - 
 
  of the customs value of the goods.  Notably, the customs value was determined by the customs 
body by proceeding sequentially through the method s of determination of the customs value of the 
goods, as confirmed in Article 2 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  She also noted that 
the current legislation of Kazakhstan did not envisa ge the adoption of any preliminary decision, i.e. 
advanced ruling regarding customs value.  The cu stoms value of the goods was determined by the 
declarant and declared to the customs body at  the instance of the goods declaration.  
446.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that, where the exchange of currency was 
necessary for the determination of customs value, th e official exchange rate effective on the day of 
registration of the customs declaration by the customs body was to be used, unless otherwise 
provided by the Customs Code and/or international treaties of the EAEU member States.  Pursuant 
to Article 78 of the CU Customs Code for the ca lculation of customs duties and taxes and the 
determination of customs value, the customs bo dy of the relevant EAEU member State was 
required to use the exchange rate established in accordance with the national legislation of this 
EAEU member State.  According to Article 56 of the Law "On the National Bank of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995, the National Bank of Kazakhstan established and published the 
official exchange rate of foreign currencies with respect to the tenge.  This information could be 
accessed on the National Bank of Kazakhstan's website (www.nationalbank.kz).   
447.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to Article 64 of the CU Customs 
Code, the legal framework for customs valuation of exported goods had to be conducted in 
accordance with the national legislation of EAEU member States.  In Kazakhstan, this issue was regulated by Article 98 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  
448.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to amend the legislation of Kazakhstan to remove the 
provision allowing the use of reference books that enforced minimum values for certain imports.  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the use of information reference books for the 
purposes of customs valuation of goods had been discontinued under the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan, the CU Customs Code and the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
449.  Asked about the existing procedures for judicial review of customs measures, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that Code No. 155-11 "On Administrative Violations" had been 
adopted on 30 January 2001.  This Code governed procedures for disputes related to customs 
valuation, as well as cases involving deliberate evasion of customs duties and taxes.  
Bodies authorised to address cases of administrative violation and the imposition of sanctions were appointed according to this Code. 
450.  Concerning the right of appeal, she said th at Article 9 of the CU Customs Code and 
Article 17 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan provid ed for the right of appeal and stated that any 
person had the right to appeal against decisions made by the customs bodies, actions (inaction) of 
the customs body or its officials in accordance with procedures and time-frames established by the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Article 12 of Law No. 221 "On Order 
of Review of Requests of Natural and Juridical Persons" of 12 January 2007, the decisions of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 138 - 
 
  authorities (State and local Government bodies), an d the actions (inaction) of officials, could be 
appealed to a senior official.  In cases where there was no senior official, or where the appellant did not agree with the decision of the senior offici al, the appellant could appeal directly to the court 
without exhausting all avenues of administrative appeal.  This principle was also confirmed in 
Article 278 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Kaza khstan of 13 July 1999.  The general time-frame 
for processing appeals to a senior official was described in paragraph [ 452] of this Report.  In this 
case, appeals had to be resolved in the court within one month, as stipulated in Article 174 of the 
Code of Civil Procedure of Kazakhstan of 13 July 1999.  Thus, importers could appeal against 
decisions made by the customs body to a senior customs official or to the court.  No penalty was 
attached to the choice to appeal.  
451.  Confidentiality requirements (Article 10 of  the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation) 
were provided in Article 8 of the CU Customs Code.  According to Article 8, any information 
received by the relevant customs body in accord ance with the customs legislation of the EAEU 
and/or legislation of an EAEU member State was to be used by the customs bodies solely for 
customs purposes, including prevention of administrative offences and violations of laws.  Customs 
bodies, their officials and other persons granted access to such information had no right to 
disclose, use for personal purposes, or pass to third parties, including State bodies, information 
which constituted State, commercial, bank, tax or other secret information protected by law, and 
confidential information, except for the cases prov ided by the Customs Code and/or the legislation 
of the relevant EAEU member State.  Pursuant to Article 16 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, information received by the customs body in acco rdance with EAEU legal acts and the national 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan was used by customs officials exclusively for customs 
purposes, and would not be disclosed or dissemina ted, even to State bodies, except when the 
transfer of such information to other State authorities was necessary for law enforcement and for 
juridical proceedings in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
452.  Concerning the transparency and publicatio n requirements of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Article 10 of the CU Customs Code 
provided for dissemination of information on CU Customs Agreements and other legal acts by 
publishing all EAEU acts on customs legislation in  official and other periodicals and by means of 
television and radio, with the use of information technologies and other means of information 
dissemination.  The Eurasian Economic Commission and each EAEU member State's customs body had to provide free access to information on EAEU legal acts relating to customs matters, including 
publication on their official websites – www .eurasiancommission.org and www.customs.kz.  
Relevant information had to be also disseminated at various border check-points; airports, railway 
and car terminals, as well as seaports; on the board of vehicles, as well as aircraft and marine 
vessels involved in international traffic; and in customs control zones.  The State Revenue 
Committee of the Ministry of Finance of Kazakhstan provided information on relevant 
customs-related legislation and foreign trade stat istics on its website, www.customs.kz and in the 
periodicals "Official Gazette", "Z an", "Keden" and "Customs Bulletin".  All documents that had a 
binding character were published on the official website of the State Revenue Committee.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 139 - 
 
  Pursuant to Article 11 of the CU Customs Code, customs officials were available to provide 
explanations ("consulting") on the provisions of the customs legislation and other issues within the competence of the customs body, both in person and in writing.  Upon written request from an 
interested party, the customs body provided information in writing in the shortest term possible, 
but no later than the term established by the legislation of the relevant EAEU member State.  
Consultations on how to complete the documents to be submitted to the customs bodies had to be 
given by customs officers orally, without reviewing the information provided by the interested 
person.  According to Article 8 of Law No. 221 "O n Procedure of Review of Natural and Juridical 
Persons' Requests" of 12 January 2007, requests of  natural and juridical persons, which did not 
need the customs official to obtain information from  other State bodies or their officials, had to be 
reviewed within 15 calendar days.  Requests that required a customs official to obtain information from other State bodies and their officials had to be reviewed within 30 calendar days.  The term 
could be prolonged for no more than 30 calendar days.  
453.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  pursuant to Article 11 of the CU Agreement 
on Customs Valuation, if there was a need to postpone the decision with regard to customs 
valuation of certain evaluated (imported) goods, the declarant was permitted to take the goods, 
when necessary, by providing sufficient guarante e of payment of the applicable customs duties 
and taxes on such goods in accordance with the le gislation of the EAEU.  Surety bond (warranty) 
provisions were covered by Chapter 12 of the CU Customs Code and Chapter 16 of the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan.  Customs bodies had the right to release the goods conditionally, as long as 
customs duties, taxes and fees were secured in the amount of the customs payment determined 
by the customs body on the basis of available pric e information.  Guarantees could take the form 
of (i) cash; (ii) bank guarantees; (iii) surety; (iv) mortgage; or, (v) insurance contracts.  The 
payer had the right to choose any of the above-mentioned means of ensuring the customs 
payment (taxes and duties).  Pursuant to Arti cle 113 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, these 
payments included import customs duty; export  customs duty; value-added tax levied upon 
importation of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; excise tax levied upon importation 
of goods into the customs territory of Kazakhstan; and customs levies (fees for customs 
declaration, escort, or preliminary decision).  In 2011, 0.2% of customs entries into Kazakhstan 
had made use of this provision.  The term of the guarantee had to be sufficient to allow for the 
timely submission by the customs body of a requ est to the declarant to fulfil the obligation owned 
to the customs body, to which such guarantee had been granted.  Pursuant to Article 156 of the 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan, a deposit would be refunded, within 10 working days of receipt of 
the request, when the commitments of the decl arant before customs bodies were fulfilled.  
The request could be submitted no later than five years after the commitment had been fulfilled.  
She further added that guarantees of payments of customs duties and taxes were required in 
certain cases prescribed by the CU Customs Code and by other customs legislation of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, including the Customs Code of Kazakhstan.  In particular, this included the 
following cases: 
- transportation of goods in accordance with the procedure of customs transit; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 140 - 
 
  - if goods were put under the customs procedur e of processing of goods beyond the customs 
territory; 
- conditional release of goods; and, - change of time-frames for payment of customs du ties and taxes, if international treaties or 
legislation of the EAEU member States provided for that.  
454.  Members expressed concern regarding the treatment of related parties and noted in this 
regard that Article 4.4 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, requiring the imported good in 
such cases to meet certain price benchmarks.  These Members did not appear to be consistent 
with either Interpretative Note 1 to Article 1.2(a) and (b) of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation or with Article 4.3 of th e CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.   
455.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 4.3 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the fact that  the buyer and the seller were related should 
not in itself be grounds for regarding the transaction value as unacceptable.  In such case, the 
circumstances surrounding the sale should be examined.  If on the basis of (this) information, 
presented by the declarant or received by the cu stoms bodies by other means, signs that such 
relationship had influenced the price were discovered, the customs bodies should inform the 
declarant in written form about such signs.  The declarant was then entitled to demonstrate to the 
customs bodies that the relationship did not influence the price.  She also noted that, in a sale 
between related persons, the transaction value al so should be accepted whenever the declarant 
demonstrated that such value closely approximated one of the following occurring at or about the 
same time: 
- the transaction value in sales to unrelated buyers of identical or similar goods for export to 
the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods as determined under the provisions of 
Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation; or, 
- the customs value of identical or similar goods as determined under the provisions of 
Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation. 
456.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Articles 4.3 and 4.4 of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation had been amended by the Prot ocol on Amendments of the CU Agreement on 
Customs Valuation (hereinafter:  "the Protocol"), which had been  provisionally applied from the 
date of its signature, 23 April 2012, and ratified by Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 109 "On 
Ratification of Protocol on Introduction of Amendments and Addenda to the Agreement "On the 
Determination of Customs Value of Goods, Transferred Across the Customs Border of the 
Customs Union" of 25 January 2008" of 21 June 2013.  She further noted that pursuant to 
Decision of the Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) No. 
86 “On Entering into force of the Protoc ol on Amendments and Addenda to the 
Agreement on the Determination of Custom s Value of Goods, Transferred Across 
Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008”, the Protocol had entered 
into full force as of 10 October 2014.  Pursuant to the Protocol, declarants were provided an 
opportunity to demonstrate two different means of establishing the acceptability of a transaction 
value:  examination of the circumstances surrounding the sale and demonstration by the declarant WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 141 - 
 
  that the transaction value closely approximated a "test value" previously accepted by the customs 
body. 
457.   The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Articles 4.3 and 4.4 of the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation would be mo dified prior to the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO to ensure their consistency with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation.  Declarants would be provided an opportunity to demonstrate two different 
means of establishing the acceptability of a transaction value:  examination of the circumstances 
surrounding the sale and demonstration by the declarant that the transaction value closely 
approximated a "test value" previously accepted by the customs body.    The Working Party took 
note of this commitment. 
458.  Members also expressed concern that the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation, the 
CU Protocols, and national implementing legislation all appeared to lack a provision for the 
acceptance of paragraph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation, 
which provided that the "Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software, for Data Processing 
Equipment" should be based on the value of the media, and Decision No. 3.1 "On the Treatment of 
Interest Charges in the Customs Value of Impo rted Goods".  Moreover, a Member noted that 
Kazakhstan had not fully implemented the Interpretative Notes in domestic legislation.  
Members sought information from Kazakhstan on how these issues would be addressed in 
EAEU legal instruments or Kazakhstan's national legislation.   
459.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Article 4.7 of the CU Agreement on Customs 
Valuation corresponded to the provisions of Decision No. 3.1 of the Technical Committee on 
Customs Valuation "On the Treatment of Interest Charges in the Customs Value of Imported 
Goods", which provided that the amount of interest charges would not be included in the customs 
value.  She added that the provisions of para graph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Technical 
Committee on Customs Valuation "On the Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software, for Data 
Processing Equipment" were included in para graph 8 of Article 101 of the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan.   
460.  With respect to Article 14 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation, which stated that 
the Interpretative Notes in Annex I formed an integral part of the WTO Agreement on Customs 
Valuation, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the provisions of most of the 
Interpretative Notes were already reflected in  the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation and 
implemented along with other provisions of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation in the 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan, and the CU Customs Code.  The remaining provisions of the 
Interpretative Notes would be implemented in a decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission, a 
successor of the CU Commission, or in national legislation upon Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.  
461.  Asked to provide further information on the process of implementation of the 
Interpretative Notes in CU and national legal ac ts, the representative of Kazakhstan responded WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 142 - 
 
  that the Protocol was aimed at bringing the CU Agreement on Customs Valuation into compliance 
with the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  Certain provisions of the Interpretative Notes were illustrative and did not represent legal norm s, therefore, had not been included into the 
CU Agreement on Customs Valuation.  For instance, such provisions as illustrative examples of the 
Interpretative Notes to Article 5 provided for dedu ctive value method, illustrative examples of the 
Interpretative Notes to Article 2 applied in the tr ansaction value method of identical goods, etc.  
Therefore, the Commission jointly with EAEU member States had adopted documents that 
incorporated the remaining provisions of the Inte rpretative Notes.  These documents were adopted 
by decisions of the Commission.  In particular, the Collegium of the Commission had approved 
"The Rules on Application of Transaction Value of Identical (Method 2) and Similar Goods (Method 
3)" on 30 October 2012, which incorporated illustrative examples of the Interpretative Notes to Article 2 and 3 of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  Furthermore, the Collegium of the 
Commission had approved "The Rules on Application of Method on Determination of Customs Value 
of Goods According to the Deductive Value Method (Method 4)" on 13 November 2012, "The Rules 
on Application of Method on Determination of Cu stoms Value of Goods According to the Computed 
Value Method (Method 5)" on 12 December 2012 and "The Rules on Application of Method on 
Determination of Customs Value of Goods According to Transaction Value Method (Method 1)" on 
20 December 2012, which incorporated the remaining relevant provisions of the Interpretative 
Notes.  
462.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would apply its customs valuation laws, regulations and practices, including those to prevent 
under-valuation of goods, in conformity with  the WTO Agreement, including Article I of 
the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Implementa tion of Article VII of the GATT 1994.  
Accordingly, Kazakhstan would not use any form of minimum value, such as reference prices, or 
fixed valuation schedule for customs valuation of goods.  In addition, Kazakhstan would ensure 
that in the event that its customs service co uld not determine the proper customs value or 
disputed the transaction value offered, it would release the goods subject to the posting sufficient 
guarantee for the maximum amount of the customs payments that could be owed as defined by 
the customs body of Kazakhstan.  She further conf irmed that, in determining the value of imports, 
Kazakhstan would apply the provisions of paragraph 2 of Decision No. 4.1 of the Committee 
"On Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipment" and Decision 
No. 3.1 "On the Treatment of Interested Charges in Customs Value of Imported Goods".  
The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- Rules of Origin 
463.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as  of 1 July 2010, Kazakhstan applied rules of 
origin to imports in accordance with Chapter 7 of the Customs Code of the Customs Union 
(hereinafter:  the CU Customs Code).  Non-preferen tial rules of origin and their application were 
governed by the provisions of the Agreement "On Common Rules for Determining the Country of 
Origin of Goods" of 25 January 2008 (hereinafter :  "the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin"), WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 143 - 
 
  including the Rules of Determination of the Country of Origin (hereinafter:  "the CU Rules of 
Origin").  These instruments closely followed th e work of the World Customs Organization (WCO) 
and the WTO regarding the application and harmonization of non-preferential rules of origin.  
The principles for determination of the country of origin of goods were based on international 
practices and implemented the recommendations of the revised Kyoto Convention, which had 
come into force in 2009.  Article 58.3 of the CU Customs Code provided that the determination of 
the country of origin had to be carried out in accordance with international treaties of the 
EAEU member States that defined the procedure of  determining the country of origin of goods.  
She further stated that the determination of the origin of goods originating from developing and 
least-developed countries and eligible for the system of preferences maintained by the 
EAEU member States was governed by the Agreem ent "On Rules of Origin of Goods, Originating 
from Developing and Least-developed countries" of 12 December 2008, including the Rules 
Determining the Origin of Goods from Developing and Least-developed Countries (hereinafter:  
"the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin for Developing and Least-developed Countries (LDCs)").  
The customs procedures for determination of the country of origin of goods provided in the 
CU Customs Code replaced the customs procedures contained in the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
No. 401 of 5 April 2003, and these procedures were no longer in force.  Additional provisions on 
rules of origin could be found in Chapter 10 of Kazakhstan's Customs Code No. 296-IV of 30 June 
2010 that had replaced the Customs Code No. 401 of 5 April 2003.  She stressed that the country 
of origin of goods was determined in all cases when application of measures of customs tariff and non-tariff regulation depended on th e country of origin of goods.  
464.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, pursuant to Article 58 of the CU Customs 
Code, goods were recognised as originating from a specific country if they were wholly made in 
that country or substantially transformed in accord ance with criteria set forth in the EAEU customs 
acts.  The basic criterion for substantial transformation for non-preferential goods was the shift in 
the tariff classification of the goods on the level of at least one of the first four digits, as 
established by paragraph 4 of the CU Rules of Or igin annexed to the CU Agreement on Rules of 
Origin.  Paragraph 2 of the Rules of Origin provided a complete list of the kinds of goods which 
could be produced wholly in a country.  Paragraph 5 included an illustrative list of operations which 
did not satisfy the criteria for production of goods within a country.  Other criteria of sufficient 
transformation could be established exclusively by the Commission as set-out in paragraph 6.  
465.  In response to a specific question from a Member, she confirmed that the tariff 
nomenclature referred to in Article 348 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan  corresponded to the 
subheadings and headings of the tariff nomenclature mentioned in Article 2(a)(i) of the WTO  
Agreement on Rules of Origin, adding that Kaza khstan had adopted the 2012 Harmonized System 
Nomenclature.  As of 1 January 2010, classificati on of goods was based on the Common Tariff 
Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs Union, established by Decision of 
the CU Commission No. 130 of 27 November 20 09.  The Common Tariff Nomenclature of the 
Foreign Economic Activity of the Customs Union had been modified in accordance with the 2012 
Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 144 - 
 
  466.  Members requested further information on the CU Agreements, CU Decisions, CU Customs 
Code and EAEU legal acts that governed the application of rules of origin to imports into Kazakhstan, as well as Kazakhstan's domestic legislation containing such regulations.  They sought 
assurances that Kazakhstan's rules of origin co mplied with the provisions of the WTO Agreement 
on Rules of Origin, including information on how these measures established preferential and 
non-preferential rules of origin.  Members also sought elimination of Kazakhstan's requirement 
that imports where MFN origin could not be initially proven were subject to twice the MFN tariff 
rate, as this requirement was unduly burdensome given that after the accession of Kazakhstan to 
the WTO, goods originating in only a small number of countries could possibly originate from 
non-MFN trading partners.  These Members sought a commitment that Kazakhstan would assess 
the MFN rate on all goods originating from countries  enjoying MFN duty rate from the date of the 
accession to the WTO.  They also asked Kazakhstan to clarify whether - for goods whose origin 
could not be clearly established and which could be  cleared through customs only after payment of 
customs duties at double the MFN rate - it was possible to submit a certificate of origin or other 
proof subsequent to customs clearance and, if orig in was subsequently satisfactorily established, 
whether excess duties could then be refunded.  
467.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that, pursuant to Article 58 of the 
CU Customs Code, goods were recognised as originating from a specific country if they were 
wholly made in that country or substantially transformed in accordance with the criteria set forth 
in the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin and Commission Decisions.  Furthermore, Article 59 of the CU Customs Code established that the country of origin of goods could be certified by either a 
declaration of origin or a certificate of origin.  Article 60 of the Code stipulated that the declaration 
of origin of goods constituted a statement on the country of origin of goods made by the 
manufacturer, seller or sender in connection with exportation of the goods, provided that the 
statement specified information allowing to determine the country of origin of goods.  Commercial 
or any other documents related to the goods could also be used as such a declaration.  Pursuant to 
Article 61 of the CU Customs Code, the certificate of origin of goods constituted documentary proof 
of the country of origin of goods, if issued by the competent body or an organization of a given 
country, or of the country of exportation of the said goods in cases where the country of 
exportation issued such certificates, based on the information obtained from the country of origin 
of such goods.  The certificate of origin had to be submitted with the customs declaration and 
other documents presented for customs clearance.  
468.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, pursuant to Article 61.4 of the CU Customs 
Code, if the certificate of origin of goods was not properly completed e.g., there were violations of 
the EAEU certificate form requirements, the cu stoms bodies independently took a decision 
concerning denial to consider the certificate as a basis for granting tariff preferences.  According to 
Article 61.5 of the CU Customs Code, the cust oms bodies could also request additional 
documentary proofs or clarifications when conducting customs control.  Such requests, however, 
did not impede the release of goods based on the information of the country of origin declared 
when placing the goods under the customs procedure.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 145 - 
 
  469.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that a certificate of origin had to contain an 
indication of the country of origin; a written declaration that the goods conformed to the corresponding criteria of origin; and a written certification regarding the accuracy of the supplied 
information, issued by the competent body of the country of exportation.  Certificates of origin 
were not obligatory for non-preferential trade, except if the customs bodies found that the 
information on the country of origin of goods that influenced application of rates of customs duties, 
taxes and (or) non-tariff regulation measures, was inaccurate; or if a certificate of origin was 
required by international agreements to which Kazakhstan was a Party.  Failure to provide a 
correctly drafted certificate or information on the origin of the goods was not a sufficient reason for 
denial of customs clearance, except for cases stipulated in paragraph 2 of Article 62 of the 
CU Customs Code ( e.g., if the goods originated in countries from which imports to the customs 
territory of the EAEU or transit through its territory were prohibited in accordance with the 
customs legislation of the EAEU or the legislatio n of the EAEU member States).  Goods imported 
without a correctly completed certificate of origin would be subject to MFN duty rates.   
470.  The representative of Kazakhstan also explaine d that in the event goods were delivered in 
a dismantled or unassembled state over several shipments - when it was impossible to deliver the 
whole lot at one time due to production or transp ortation problems or when the lot of goods had, 
by mistake, been divided into parts - paragraphs 8 and 9 of the CU Rules of Origin established a 
number of specific rules to assist in determining the country of origin of goods (e.g., the indicated 
goods could, at the discretion of the importer, be considered as one shipment).  
471.  She added that in accordance with Article 62 of the CU Customs Code, when goods were 
brought into the EAEU customs territory, a document  confirming the country of origin of the goods 
had to be shown if Kazakhstan (or other EAEU member States) granted preferential tariffs to the 
country of origin of the goods pursuant to Kazakhstan's customs legislation and (or) international 
agreements of the EAEU member States.  Curre ntly, a certificate of origin (either the "A" 
Document attached to the Annex to the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin for Developing and 
Least-developed Countries or, for CIS preferences, the ST-1 document) was required.  Goods were 
considered as originating from a developing or least-developed country subject to preferential 
tariff treatment when they were fully produced in such country.  She added that Part III of Annex I 
of the CU Agreement on Rules of Origin for Developing and Least-developed Countries provided 
that the EAEU member States could establish a procedure for application of criteria of substantial transformation for countries eligible for tariff preferences based on the determination that the 
value of inputs used in the production process and originating from countries not covered by 
preferential treatment or of unknown origin did not exceed 50% of the total declared value.  
She also noted that Part VI of Annex I provided the terms for application of the rules of direct 
purchase and direct shipping for granting such preferential tariffs.  Pursuant to Section VIII of the 
CU Agreement on Rules of Origin for Developing and Least-developed Countries, in cases where 
there were reasonable doubts regarding the authenti city of the certificate or information contained 
in the certificate, the customs bodies could requ est the competent bodies of the developing or WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 146 - 
 
  least-developed country that had issued the certificate of origin to provide additional documentary 
proof. 
472.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that with respect to goods traded within the 
EAEU and/or goods covered by free trade agreements between Kazakhstan and other 
CIS member States, Kazakhstan applied the Agreement "On the Rules of Origin in the CIS" of 
20 November 2009, and the Agreement of the CIS States "On Rules of Origin of Goods Originating 
from Developing Countries when Granting Tariff Preferences under the General Preferences 
System" of 12 April 1996.  These rules had been de veloped in accordance with the international 
practice for determination of origin of goods.  Additional criteria of direct purchase were used, 
along with the requirement that the exporter be established legally in a Party to the CIS Free 
Trade Agreement (as originally provided for in th e Decision of the Heads of Government of other 
CIS Countries of 18 October 1996).  Currently, there were no other arrangements for the 
determination of the country of origin of goods within the framework of the EAEU, the Eurasian 
Economic Community, or the CIS.  For any free tr ade arrangements with countries not members of 
the CIS, she noted that the rules of origin for th ese preferential arrangements were contained in 
the free trade agreements themselves. 
473.  Members sought clarification of the requirement that, in order for imported goods to be 
eligible for preferential tariff rates under CIS free trade agreements, the exporter had to be legally 
established resident in a Party to a CIS Free Trade Agreement, and asked if corporate registration 
would satisfy that requirement, or whether there were other criteria that had to be satisfied.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as for the requirement that the 
exporter be legally established in a Party to the CIS Agreement there were not any other criteria, 
apart from registration, to qualify.  In addition, to obtain a preferential tariff, goods had to be 
purchased directly from the other CIS States, i.e., pursuant to Article 5.1 of the Agreement 
"On the Rules of Origin in the CIS States" of 20 November 2009, only CIS goods that did not leave 
the CIS territory, except for transit of goods under customs control through third countries, were 
eligible for preferential ta riff rates under CIS FTA.   
474.  Some Members also asked for further explanation about the possibility, under EAEU legal 
instruments, that "the country of origin could also be understood to mean a group of countries, 
region or part of a country, if this was necessary to identify them, with a view to determining the 
origin of goods".  They noted that the WTO Agr eement lacked such provisions, and they requested 
a clarification of how and under what circumstances the origin of a good could be ascribed to a 
region or part of a country.  These Members requ ested confirmation from Kazakhstan that these 
provisions would be applied in full conformity  with the WTO Agreement.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that pa ragraph 1 of Article 58 of the CU Customs Code 
stated that the country of origin of goods could be a group of countries and customs unions as well 
as a region or a part of a country, if it was difficult to determine the exact country of origin within 
the group of countries.  Under those circumstances, the relevant group of countries, customs 
union, or if necessary in order to identify origin, a region or part of a country could be considered WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 147 - 
 
  as the country of origin.  The representative for Kazakhstan noted that a region or part of a 
country was considered as the country of origin in cases where it was necessary to define the origin of the goods as such, and to date had only been used in trade remedy cases.   
475.  A Member noted that the right to seek a determination of origin prior to importation was 
contained in Article 2(h) and Annex II, paragraph 3(d), of the Agreement on Rules of Origin.  
Some Members stated that Kazakhstan should implement this and other aspects of the Agreement 
(e.g. right of appeal) prior to WTO accession.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said 
that the EAEU member States could make prelimin ary decisions with regards to determination of 
the country of origin of goods in the order stipulated by its national legislation, as determined by 
Article 58 of the CU Customs Code.  According to  Article 91 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, 
the customs bodies  could make preliminary decisions on the country of origin of goods.  The 
customs bodies , on request of an applicant, made preliminary decisions with regard to 
determination of the country of origin of goods when the information on the goods was available.  
Preliminary decisions with regard to determination of the country of origin of goods were made by 
the customs bodies  with the application of preferential and non-preferential regimes and in the 
form approved by Government Resolution No. 912 "O n Form Approval for Classification of Goods, 
on Classification of Goods in Unassembled State and Adoption of Preliminary Decision Concerning 
the Determination of the Country of Origin of Good s for Preferential and Non-preferential Regimes" 
of 8 September 2010.  She also noted that, as of  1 July 2010, Order No. 210 of the Chairman of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan Customs Control Ag ency "On Approval of the Rules for Taking 
Preliminary Decisions and their Form" of 15 May 2003 was no longer in force.  
476.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at from the date of accession, measures on 
rules of origin, whether adopted by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be 
applied in Kazakhstan in conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, 
and would reflect the interim rules in Annex II to that Agreement, including the provisions for 
transparency, right of appeal, and notifications to the Committee on Rules of Origin.  She further 
confirmed that, consistent with the requirements of  Article 2(h) and of Annex II, paragraph 3(d) of 
the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, both for no n-preferential and preferential rules of origin, 
customs bodies would provide an assessment of th e origin of goods subject to import upon the 
request of an exporter, importer or any person with a justifiable cause and issue the assessment 
no later than 150 days after a request provided that all necessary elements had been submitted.  According to the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin, any request for such an 
assessment would be accepted before trade in the goods concerned had begun, and any such 
assessment would be valid for three years provided that the facts and conditions, including the 
rules of origin, under which they had been made remained comparable.  She further confirmed 
that the previous practice of using "double MFN" rates as the default tariff rates for imports of 
undeterminable origin had been eliminated.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 148 - 
 
  - Other Customs Formalities 
477.  Some Members stated that the requirement to obtain an import "transaction passport", in 
addition to registration and licensing for currency control was duplicative and an unnecessary 
burden on trade.  These Members of the Working Party were concerned that the transaction 
passport constituted an unacceptable universal licensing system and currency control incompatible 
with Articles XI and XV of the GATT 1994.  These Members asked Kazakhstan to remove the 
transaction passport requirement prior to WTO accession.   
478.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  the CU Customs Code or other EAEU legal 
acts did not regulate the transaction passport requ irement.  This issue was left to the national 
competence of the EAEU member States.  She fu rther explained that, within the framework of 
reduction of administrative barriers to trade, the transaction passport had been cancelled in 
accordance with Law No. 530-IV "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on the Issues of Currency Control and Regulation" of 6 January 2012, which had 
amended Law No. 57 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005.  
The transaction passport had been replaced by a procedure for registration of foreign trade 
contracts exceeding the equivalent of US$50,000.  Th e exporter or importer had to register their 
foreign trade contract prior to any money payments under the contract and/or movement of goods 
across the border of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  To this end, the exporter or importer had to 
submit to the bank an application form and an orig inal or a copy of the contract.  The bank had to 
register the contract and assign the registration number within one working day.  The registration 
procedure for foreign trade contracts was required only for the purposes of statistical data 
gathering and for monitoring foreign trade payments.   
479.  Some Members expressed concerns regarding the requirement to provide an electronic 
copy of the import and export declaration as part of the required customs documentation, as well 
as the granting of an exclusive licence for the provis ion of electronic copies of these declarations to 
"Accept Corporation".  The cost to the importer of obtaining such an electronic copy, and the 
requirement that importers still had to present a paper copy of the import declaration also 
represented a concern.   
480.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, to facilitate control at the border, her 
Government was in the process of implementing a Unified Automated Information System (UAIS).  
As a first step, the Government of Kazakhstan had introduced an electronic customs declaration 
system.  Paper customs declarations continued to be used in parallel.  At the moment, test 
application of an electronic customs declaration system was being conducted in several regions of 
Kazakhstan.  The system would be applied across the country when all necessary test applications 
were completed.  The date of introduction of  the system across the country depended on the 
outcomes of implementation of the system in th e pilot regions.  Concerning the protection of 
confidential information under the UAIS, she said that the State Revenue Committee of the 
Ministry of Finance used standard software to ensure the security of information in the system.  She pointed to Article 16 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, pursuant to which WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 149 - 
 
  customs bodies, customs officials as well as other persons who had access to information in 
accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan had no right to disclose, use for personal purposes, or transfer to third parties (including Government bodies) information regarded 
as State, commercial, bank, or tax secret, or other secrets protected by laws as well as other 
confidential information (exceptions were contained in paragraph 3 of this Article).   
481.  Asked about the results of the review of the temporary customs warehouse storage 
regime, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the temporary storage regime was regulated 
by Chapter 30 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Articles 259-270).  According 
to Article 260, temporary storage of goods was not limited or restricted to the use of temporary 
warehouses, but could also involve the importer's own warehouses, customs and free warehouses; 
as well as premises, open-air and other locations belonging to the authorised economic operator.  In addition, pursuant to Article 265, upon written request and provision of guarantee for the 
payment of customs duties and taxes, imported goods could be temporarily stored in an 
unauthorised warehouse belonging to the recipient of goods, in automobile vehicles located on the 
territory owned or leased by the recipient of good s, or railway vehicles located on the territory 
owned or leased by the owner of the goods.  According to paragraph 2 of Article 259 of the 
Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, te mporary storage of goods was not required for 
goods transported by pipeline and by electricity transmission line.   
482.  Asked about any regulations mandating specific customs entry points for specific goods, 
the representative of Kazakhstan stated that, according to Article 248 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, customs clearance took place at the point of placement of goods under a customs 
procedure.  These provisions were the same within the framework of the EAEU.  According to 
Article 156 of the CU Customs Code, customs oper ations regarding the placement of goods under 
customs procedure took place at the customs points during their office hours.  Article 248 of the 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan authorised the Government of Kazakhstan to designate customs 
entry checkpoints for certain categories of goods.  Pursuant to the Regulation s to items 2.9 and 
2.10 of the "Common List of Goods that are  Subject to Bans and Restrictions for Importation and 
Exportation by Parties of the Customs Union of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with 
Third Countries" approved by Collegium Decision No. 134, State control had to be established over 
the exportation of natural diamonds, in accordance with the requirements of the Kimberley Process 
Certification Scheme.  In addition, the importation of the following categories of goods had to take place at designated customs checkpoints - natural diamonds (HS tariff line  7102 21 000 0), raw 
precious stones (HS Code s 7106, 7108, 7110); ores, and concentrates of precious metals 
(HS Code 2616); scrap and wastes from precious metals (HS Code 7112). 
- Preshipment Inspection 
483.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that preshipment inspection currently did not 
exist in Kazakhstan.  Preshipment inspection had been applied in accordance with Government 
Resolution No. 1301 "On the Implementation of Inde pendent System for Preshipment Inspection of 
Goods Imported into the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 4 October 1995 (hereinafter:  Government WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 150 - 
 
  Resolution No. 1301) for three years from 1996 to 1999.  Pursuant to Government Resolution 
No. 1301, preshipment inspection had been carried out by "Société Générale de Surveillance S.A.".  The preshipment inspection procedure had applied to all imported goods, except for:  (i) goods 
imported from CIS countries; (ii) goods of customs value lower than US$3,000; (iii) goods of 
strategic importance; (iv) dual-purpose goods; (v) and printing materials.  Government Resolution 
No. 1301 had been repealed by Government Resolution No. 1778 of 24 November 1999.   
484.  She also noted that in 2001-2005, an indepe ndent expert examination of the customs 
value of imported goods had been conducted by the private company "ICS Inspection and Control 
Services Kazakhstan".  This procedure had not represented a preshipment inspection as the 
decision had been taken within 30 days of the sampling of imported goods.  The independent 
expert examination had applied to all imported goods, except for goods included in the List of Goods not Subject to Independent Examination, such as goods of strategic importance and 
medicines.  This system was also no longer in place. 
485.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that there were currently no plans to 
re-establish preshipment inspection requirements for imports, but that Kazakhstan reserved the 
right to have recourse to such measures in th e future, should it be deemed necessary by the 
Government.  The authority to establish preshipment inspection existed in EAEU legal instruments.  
Section VII of Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the 
EAEU Treaty replaced the corresponding provis ions of the CU Agreement "On Common Measures 
for Non-Tariff Regulation with Respect to Third Counties" of 25 January 2008.   From 1 January 
2015, these EAEU provisions authorised the imposi tion of non-tariff regulatory measures on the 
basis of national interests, inter alia , to implement national laws not in conflict with international 
agreements.  Section II of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty replaced corresponding provisions of 
the CU Agreement "On the Procedure of Introducti on and Implementation of Measures, Concerning 
Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common Custom s Territory in Respect of Third Countries" of 9 
June 2009.   These EAEU provisions authorised the Commission to introduce non-economic 
measures affecting goods in foreign trade from third countries on the basis of proposals from the 
EAEU member States.  Pursuant to Section X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, Kazakhstan could 
propose to introduce preshipment inspection.  Even  if the Commission rejected the proposal, such 
measures could be imposed unilaterally for up to si x months, as provided for in Section X of Annex 
No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty. 
486.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, if a 
preshipment inspection scheme were to be introduc ed in the future, whether by Kazakhstan or by 
the competent bodies of the EAEU, its operation would be in conformity with the relevant 
provisions of the WTO Agreement, including th e Agreement on Preshipment Inspection, and the 
Agreement on the Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994, inter alia , in respect of the due 
process and transparency requirements of the WTO Agreements, in particular Article X of the 
GATT 1994 and the Agreement on the Implemen tation of Article VII of the GATT 1994 and 
confidentiality of data received would be ensured.  In addition, it would be ensured by Kazakhstan WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 151 - 
 
  or by the competent bodies of the EAEU that ch arges and fees for preshipment inspection would 
comply with Article VIII of the GATT 1994, that pr eshipment entities would establish and maintain 
appeals procedures as foreseen by Article 2.21 of the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection, and 
that that scheme would not constitute an undue and additional burden on exporters to or 
importers of goods into Kazakhstan.  Further, sh e confirmed that the duration of any such scheme 
would be limited to three years and that importers and exporters would not be precluded from 
challenging facts found and findings made by preshipment inspection entities as part of 
administrative appeals against decisions of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the EAEU where 
such decisions were based on those facts or findings.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
- Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duty and Safeguard Regimes 
487.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the application of anti-dumping, 
countervailing and safeguard measures was regulated by the following legal acts:  (i) Section IX 
"Foreign Trade Policy"(Articles 48-50) and Annex No . 8 to the Eurasian Economic Union Treaty of 
29 May 2014 (hereafter – EAEU Treaty); and, (ii)  the Decision of the Board of the Eurasian 
Economic Commission No. 1 of 7 March 2012; as well as the following national legislation:  Law 
No. 421-1 "On Anti-Dumping Measures" of 13 July 1999; Law No. 441-1 "On Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures" of 16 July 1999, as amended by Law No. 114-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Ka zakhstan on Subsidies, Countervailing and Anti-
dumping Measures" of 9 January 2006; Law No. 337-1 of "On Safeguard Measures for Domestic 
Market upon Importation of Goods" of 28 December 1998, as amended by Law No. 53-III of "On 
Amendments and Addenda to the Law 'On Safeguard Measures for Domestic Market upon 
Importation of Goods'" of 16 June 2005; and Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan 
No. 1374 "On Approval of the Rules for Conducting Investigations prior to Introduction of 
Safeguard, Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Meas ures" of 9 September 2000 (hereinafter – the 
"Rules for Conducting Investigations").  She stated that Kazakhstan was in the process of 
amending Law No. 337-1 of "On Safeguard Measures  for Domestic Market upon Importation of 
Goods" of 28 December 1998, Law No. 421-1 "O n Anti-Dumping Measures" of 13 July 1999 and 
Law No. 441-1 "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" of 16 July 1999 with the purpose to 
bring them into conformity with the EAEU Treaty and the relevant WTO Agreements.  
The provisions of the EAEU Treaty replaced the Agreement of 25 January 2008 on Application of 
Safeguard, Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries between the Republic 
of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Ru ssian Federation (hereinafter – the Agreement of 
25 January 2008) and the Protocol on the Order on Submission to Authority Conducting the 
Investigation the Information including Confidential Information for the Purposes of Safeguards, 
Anti-dumping and Countervailing Investigations of 19 November 2010 which were terminated 
when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015. 
488.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that during the time when the Customs Union was 
in force (2010-2014), the transitional arrangements  that were set-out in the additional Agreement 
"On Application of Safeguard, Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 152 - 
 
  the Transitional Period" of 19 November 2010 (her einafter – the Transitional Period Agreement) 
had been applicable during unification of safeguard anti-dumping and countervailing measures of the Customs Union.  Upon the expiration of the tr ansitional period, the provisions of the national 
laws and regulations applied to the extent they did not contradict the Agreement of 
25 January 2008.  The investigations ongoing on th e date of the entry into force of the Agreement 
of 25 January 2008 had continued in accordance with  the new rules and the national regulations to 
the extent those regulations did not contradict that Agreement.  Therefore, if the national industry 
met the criteria of the domestic industry of the Customs Union as stipulated by the Agreement of 
25 January 2008 , the investigation had continued, otherwise it had been terminated.  
The representative of Kazakhstan provided addi tional information on trade remedy measures 
currently applied in Kazakhstan and the EAEU in Annex 16 of this Report. 
489.  The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members that starting from 17 April 2012 the 
Department for Domestic Market Protection of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – 
Department or investigating body) was authorised  to carry out new safeguard, anti-dumping and 
countervailing investigations on the common customs territory of the Customs Union by the 
Decision of the EEC Collegium of the Eurasian Economic Commission (hereinafter – EEC or 
Commission) No. 1 of 7 March 2012.  This authority was continued under the EAEU Treaty.    
- (a) Transitional regime 
490.  The Transitional Period Agreement stipulat ed that all safeguard, anti-dumping and 
countervailing measures that had been in force prior to 19 November 2010 had to be reviewed by 
the national authorised body in accordance with the criteria used to define the domestic industry of 
the Customs Union.  If the domestic producers, which had filed applications for the national 
measures, met the criteria of the domestic industry of the Customs Union promulgated in the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008, the measures had b een extended to the customs territory of the 
Customs Union by a Decision of the CU Commission for the period it had been determined initially.  
In case the domestic industry definitional criteria were not met, the measure had continued to be 
applied at the national level.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that in case national investigations on application of safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing measures had been 
finished by the time of signing of  the Transitional Period Agreement, but the measure had not 
been taken, safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing measures had been  applied at the 
national level by a decision of the national author ized body and had to be reviewed in accordance 
with the provisions of the Transitional Period  Agreement.  If safeguard, anti-dumping and 
countervailing investigations had not been finished by the time of signing of  the Transitional 
Period Agreement and investigations had still been  conducted, safeguard, anti-dumping and 
countervailing measures had been  applied in accordance with the Agreement of 25 January 2008.  
During the transitional period provided for in the Transitional Period Agreement, the national 
authority of the Republic of Kazakhstan had continued ongoing investigations and had conducted 
new trade remedies investigations in the Republic of Kazakhstan upon the request of the domestic industry of the CU.  However, all decisions to impose, extend, review or terminate trade remedy WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 153 - 
 
  measures had to be taken by the Commission on the basis of a proposal from the Government of 
the CU Party that carried out the investigation. 
491.  In response to the question of a Member on the status of the "transitional period", the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that the term "transitional period" referred to the period that 
had been  necessary for the review of existing national  measures in force in the territory of CU 
Parties.  The transitional period, which had ended on 1 August 2012, also had allowed national 
governments of the CU Parties to proceed with delegation of the authority to conduct 
investigations and introduce trade remedy measur es from national bodies to the supranational 
body – the Eurasian Economic Commission. 
492.  According to the Commission Decision No. 44 of 16 May 2012, all the ongoing 
investigations had been transferred to the Department by 31 July 2012.  Accordingly, from 1 August 2012, the Department would be the single authorised body to conduct safeguard, 
anti-dumping and countervailing investigations on a common customs territory of the CU.  
This authority was continued under the EAEU Treaty. 
- (b) Regime established under the EAEU Treaty 
493.  T h e  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  s t a t e d  t h a t  t h e  p r o v i s i o n s  o f  S e c t i o n  I X  o f  t h e  
EAEU Treaty provided the principles for applicatio n of trade remedies by the EAEU member States 
– the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Belarus – with regard to 
third countries.  The provisions of the EAEU Treaty , in her view, complied with the principles of the 
WTO Agreements. 
494.  According to Article 48 of Section IX of the EAEU Treaty, all decisions with respect to 
common trade remedies in the EAEU member States had to be taken by the Commission.  
The decisions of the Commission would be collect ively applied by all the EAEU member States 
within the customs territory of the EAEU against the imports of relevant third countries.   
495.  According to Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty , (i) anti-dumping investigations could be 
initiated provided there was evidence of dumped imports and material injury, threat of such injury 
or material retardation of the establishment ("material injury") of the sector of economy of the member States as a result of such imports; (ii) investigations regarding safeguard measure 
application could be initiated provided that there was evidence of imports of products into the 
EAEU territory in such increased quantities, absolute or relative to production, and under such 
conditions as to cause or threaten to cause serious injury to the sector of economy of the 
member States that produces like or directly competitive products; and, (iii) countervailing 
investigations could be initiated provided there was evidence of a specific subsidy and subsidized 
imports into the EAEU customs territory that caused material injury to the sector of economy of 
the member States. 
496.  According to the Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, the sector of economy of the 
member States was defined as:  (i) all producers of a like product - for the purposes of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 154 - 
 
  anti-dumping and countervailing investigations; (ii) all producers of a like product or a directly 
competitive product - for the purposes of safeguard investigations; or, (iii) producers of a like product – for the purposes of anti-dumping and countervailing investigations, and producers of a 
like or a directly competitive product – for the purposes of safeguard investigations, whose share 
in the total production volume in the EAEU member States constituted at least 25% of total 
production.  Similarly, the relevant import was measured as the import inflow into the entire 
EAEU customs territory. 
497.  A Member asked a question regarding the initiation of investigations under the national 
legislation.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that all investigations on the customs 
territory of the EAEU were initiated and conducted in accordance with the EAEU legal framework.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further noted th at pursuant to Annex No. 8 of the EAEU Treaty, 
application for initiation of investigations with respect to anti-dumping and countervailing 
measures was considered to have been made "by or on behalf of the sector of economy of the 
member States" if it was supported by those producers whose collective output in the EAEU 
member States constituted more than 50% of the to tal production of the like product produced by 
that portion of the sector of economy of the me mber States expressing either support for or 
opposition to the application; and investigation could only be initiated provided that producers in 
the EAEU member States expressly supporting the application accounted for no less than 25% of 
the total production of the like product produced by the sector of economy of the member States.  
Application for initiation of investigations with respect to safeguard measures was considered to have been made "by or on behalf of the sector of economy of the member States" if producers in 
the EAEU member States supporting the application accounted for no less than 25% of the total 
production of the like or directly competitive pr oduct produced by the sector of economy of the 
member States.  
498.  A Member questioned Kazakhstan regarding a deadline to accept or reject a request for 
safeguard investigation made by the domestic industry mentioned in the Rules.  In particular, this 
Member asked if the authorised body had 45 days  from the date of submission to decide on 
acceptance or rejection and to publish a notice of initiation of investigation in the official 
mass-media, and also if it was required, within these 45 days, to notify the applicant within 
10 days from submission of the application in case some information was missing and if a decision 
not to initiate an investigation was made.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that according to the provisions established by Annex No. 8 to  the EAEU Treaty, the investigating body had 
30 calendar days from the date of a safeguard, as well as anti-dumping and countervailing 
application, to verify the accuracy and completeness of the information stated in the application.  
Such period could be extended but could not exceed  60 calendar days in total.  An application was 
refused if an applicant failed to submit all the necessary documents.  The 30-day period did not 
include the notification procedure in the mass-media and official publications about initiation of 
investigation.  In cases when initiation of an investigation was refused, the investigating body 
informed the applicant of the refusal and its reason within 10 working days from the date of taking 
such decision.  If the decision on initiation of the investigation was taken, the investigating body WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 155 - 
 
  notified the authorised body of the exporting foreign country and other interested parties and 
published the notification on the official website of the Commission within 10 working days from 
the date of taking such decision.   
499.  A Member asked if the period of 30 calendar da ys to notify stakeholders started from the 
date when the authorised body took the decision to initiate an investigation and without any 
relation to 45 days for publishing the notice of  initiation in the media.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, in accordance with the provisions established by 
Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, stakeholders would be notified within 10 working days from the 
date when a decision to initiate the investigation was taken.  The investigating body of had to 
notify the EAEU member States and announce via the official website of the Commission the 
initiation of the investigation in order to involve all interested parties.  This period did not relate to the 30-day period during which the investigating body reviewed the application and took a decision 
about initiating an investigation or rejecting an application.  The CU investigating body notified 
interested parties and published the notification on the official website of the Commission about 
initiating an investigation within 10 working days from the date when a decision to initiate the 
investigation was taken. 
500.  Further, a Member pointed out that neither Kazakhstan's Anti-dumping Law nor its 
Countervailing Duty Law appeared to address how the investigating authority would treat an 
interested party who refused access to, or otherwise did not provide, necessary information within 
a reasonable period or significantly impeded an in vestigation, as provided under Article 6.8 of the 
WTO Anti-dumping Agreement (ADA).  This Me mber also asked Kazakhstan to explain how 
Annex II of the ADA was reflected in Kazakhstan's legislation.  
501.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to the 
Law "On Anti-dumping Measures" and the Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures", if an 
interested party did not provide necessary information within the time periods established by the 
authorised body, or otherwise significantly impeded an investigation, the authorised body could 
conduct an investigation on the basis of the facts available.  Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty also 
stipulated that in cases when an interested party refused access to, or failed to submit necessary 
information to the investigating body within the time periods established by the investigating body, 
or otherwise significantly impeded an investigation, such party was considered as uncooperative 
and the investigating body would make preliminar y and final determinations on the basis of the 
facts available.  As regards to the provisions of Annex II of the ADA, they were reflected in 
paragraphs 239-243 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, which provided for data collection within 
the course of investigation.  Paragraph 239 of Anne x No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty provided that after 
a decision on the initiation of the investigation was made, the investigating body would issue 
questionnaires to certain interested parties.  Within the course of the investigation, the 
investigating body would verify the accuracy and reliability of the information provided by the 
interested parties.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 156 - 
 
  502.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that during the 
investigation, the investigating body had the ri ght to request additional information from the 
interested parties.  A request was considered to be received after seven calendar days from the 
date of posting or handing it over to a representative of an interested party.  She added that 
pursuant to Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty responses had to be submitted to the CU investigating 
body within 30 calendar days from the date of rece ipt.  In case the responses were submitted after 
the deadline, the investigating body had the right not to consider such information. 
503.  In response to the request by a Member to  clarify the legal authority that provided 
protection of confidential information in trade remedy investigations, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that confidential information provided by the interested parties to the 
investigating authority was protected by internal regulations of the Eurasian Economic Commission and paragraphs 254-258 of Annex No. 8 to the EA EU Treaty.  In particular, paragraph 258 of 
Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty stipulated that confidential information could not be disclosed 
without permission of the interested party which submitted the information.  Interested parties 
providing confidential information also had to provide a non-confidential summary of the 
information.  She further added that in accordance with paragraph 258 of Annex No. 8 to the 
EAEU Treaty, officials and employees of the inve stigating body accountable for the disclosure of 
the confidential information provided to the investigating body could be deprived from the 
privileges and immunities provided by the intern ational Treaty of the EAEU and prosecuted in 
accordance to the procedure established by the Commission.  
504.  Another Member asked Kazakhstan to describe the very limited situations provided for by 
the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan where confidential information could be disclosed.  
The representative of Kazakhstan responded that such cases were set-out in the Criminal 
Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Persons requested by a relevant competent body 
carrying out a criminal investigation to provide confidential information could not refuse to provide 
information because it needed to be kept secret.  However, the results of the preliminary criminal 
investigation, including commercial secrets, were confidential.  The evidence containing 
commercial secrets, upon request of the persons concerned, could be reviewed at a closed 
proceeding.  After the proceeding, the legal do cuments of the case containing commercial and 
other secrets were confidentially retained with the case records.   
505.  A Member asked if provisions on retroactivity, duration, review of anti-dumping duties, 
consultation and dispute settlement were foreseen in the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures".  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that paragraphs 104 and 105 of Annex No. 8 to the 
EAEU Treaty provided for use of anti-dumping measures retroactively in the cases envisaged by 
Articles 10.2 and 10.6 of the ADA.  According to paragraph 104 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU 
Treaty, a definitive anti-dumping duty might be le vied on products not more than 90 days prior to 
the date of application of provisional measures, if according to the results of the investigation in 
respect of that product it was found that: 1) there was a history of dumped imports which caused 
injury or that the importer had been, or should have been, aware that the exporter delivers the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 157 - 
 
  product at a price below its normal value, and th at such import would cause injury, and 2) the 
injury was caused by substantially increased dumped imports in a relatively short period of time which in light of the duration and the volume as well as other circumstances (including rapid 
growth of inventories of the imported products) could significantly undermine the remedial effect 
of the anti-dumping duty to be applied, under the condition that the importers of the product 
concerned should be given an opportunity to comment.  As for the duration and review of 
anti-dumping duties, paragraph 107 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty provided that the effective 
period of anti-dumping duty would not exceed the period necessary to counteract the dumping 
which was causing injury.  This period would not exceed five years from the date of its introduction 
or the last sunset review.  The period of an application of anti-dumping measures could be 
extended if a sunset review of the measures showed that the expiry of the measure was likely to lead to a recurrence of dumping and injury. Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty stipulated that the 
sunset review procedures of anti-dumping measures  were carried out by the investigating body on 
its own initiative or on the basis of the interested parties' application submitted not later than six 
months prior to anti-dumping duty termination.  
506.  In reply to a question on procedural fairness, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
Article 29 of the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" and paragraph 215 of Annex No. 8 to the 
EAEU Treaty established that all interested parties had a right to defend their interests during an 
anti-dumping investigation.  For this purpose and upon request of an interested party, the 
investigating body had to provide an opportunity for the parties with opposing interests to discuss 
the investigation documentation and provide for additional information within the time-frame that 
did not disrupt the course of investigation.  The investigating body had to duly provide all 
interested parties with the possibility of acquaint ing themselves with public information used by 
the authorised body in anti-dumping investigation in order to allow them prepare arguments for 
their cases. 
507.  As for dispute resolution, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that provisions 
regulating appeals to decisions and actions of the Commission were stipulated in the Statute of the 
Court of the Eurasian Economic Union.  In particular, the Statute provided for the right of 
economic entities in the EAEU member States and all other interested parties, including foreign 
economic entities, to bring a case against the decisions of the CU Commission to the EAEU Court 
(paragraph 39).  In accordance with the Statute, appeals to the Court by the domestic and foreign economic entities and peculiarities of the legal pr oceedings were determined by the Statute of the 
Court of the Eurasian Economic Union. 
508.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to indicate whether and how Article 13 of the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (hereinafter – ASCM) concerning 
consultations before initiation was reflected in the Section 4 on countervailing measures  of the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that from 
1 January 2015, paragraph 225 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty provided for consultation 
procedures.  In particular, before initiating an investigation, the authorised body had to send WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 158 - 
 
  invitations for consultations to the foreign countries concerned in order to clarify the situation and 
seek to reach a mutually agreeable solution.  In the course of investigation, the foreign countries 
were allowed to continue the consultations with the authorised body.  Conducting consultations did 
not prevent the initiation of an investigation and application of provisional or final countervailing 
measures. 
509.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that pursuant to paragraph 90 of Annex No. 8 to 
the EAEU Treaty, investigation proceedings could be suspended or terminated by the investigating 
body without the imposition of anti-dumping duti es upon receipt, in writing, of satisfactory 
voluntary undertakings from any exporter of the product under investigation to revise its prices or 
to cease exports to the customs territory of the EAEU  at prices lower than its normal value, if such 
exporter's undertakings were supported by its af filiated persons in the EAEU member States and 
the investigating body came to a conclusion that accepting such undertakings eliminated the 
injurious effects of dumped imports and decide d to approve these undertakings.  Thus, the 
exporters could choose between two options:  (i) pay anti-dumping duties and continue supplying 
the goods to the customs territory of the EAEU; or, (ii) agree to a price undertaking for the 
purposes of eliminating the injurious effects of dumping.  A price undertaking was not mandatory.  
The investigating body could not require a price undertaking which increased prices higher than 
the dumping margin.  Price increases could be less than dumping margin if the investigating body 
established that the price increase resulting from the undertaking was enough to remove the 
injury to the sector of economy of the member  States.  Investigation proceedings regarding 
subsidized goods could be suspended or terminated  by the investigating body without imposition 
of countervailing duties upon receipt in writing of satisfactory voluntary undertakings from (i) an 
exporting foreign country to terminate or reduce the subsidies being provided or take measures to 
eliminate the injury caused to the sector of econom y of the member States; or (ii) an exporter of 
the goods concerned increased the price for these goods in such a way that it would eliminate the 
injury caused to the sector of economy of the member States.  
510.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that in anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases 
the amount of the duty had to be sufficient to eliminate injury to the domestic industry; an 
anti-dumping duty could not exceed the calcul ated dumping margin, and a countervailing duty 
could not exceed the amount of the subsidy of the exporting foreign country calculated for a 
product unit.  If a safeguard measure was applied by establishing an import quota, the import 
quota could not be lower than the annual average level (in relation to quantity or value) of the 
import volume of the product under investigation for three years preceding the date of submitting 
an application for investigation, for which the statistical data was available, except for cases when 
clear justification was given that a lower import quota to prevent or remedy serious injury or a 
threat of such injury to the domestic industry was necessary.  
511.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan's Anti-dumping law did not appear to address whether an 
individual anti-dumping rate could or would be calculated for a company who was not chosen as a 
mandatory respondent because the authority limited the examination of interested parties to a WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 159 - 
 
  "reasonable number" of respondents, such as that  contemplated in Article 6.10.2 of the ADA.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" did not cover this specific situation.  However, this situation was provided for in Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty.  
Pursuant to paragraph 50 of Annex No. 8 to the EAEU Treaty, if a company was not chosen as a 
mandatory respondent, the amount of the margin of dumping calculated in respect of every 
foreign exporter or foreign producer that was not selected but submitted the necessary information 
within a period established for such submission during the investigation, could not exceed the 
weighted average dumping margin established in respect of the selected foreign exporters or 
foreign producers of the allegedly dumped imports.  As noted above, should there be any 
discrepancies between the national law and the EA EU Treaty, the EAEU Treaty would prevail.   
512.  A Member noted that paragraph 11 of Article 10 and paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 stated that the "all others" rate or duty would be based on the 
highest margin of dumping determined during th e investigation and asked the representative of 
the Kazakhstan to explain why an adverse inference was made (i.e. the highest margin of 
dumping) in setting the "all others" rate, as oppo sed to choosing a more neutral method (e.g., the 
weighted-average margin of all participating respondents).  Furthermore, this Member asked the 
representative of Kazakhstan to explain how this methodology was consistent with Article 9.4 of 
the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994.  
513.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that , if the competent authority found that an 
interested party had failed to cooperate for th e purpose of the investigation, the competent 
authority could use an inference that was adverse to the interests of that interested party.  
The competent authority could also determine the dumping margin on the basis of any other 
information at its disposal, including the weighted-average margin of all participants. 
These provisions could be found in paragraphs 51 and 212 of Annex No. 8 to the Treaty. 
514.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, if an interested party cooperated, but 
was not selected for the calculation of an individual dumping margin, the anti-dumping duty 
applied would be applied in accordance with Arti cle 9.4 of the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VI of the GATT 1994.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
515.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that an anti-dumping investigation would 
be terminated in cases when the investigating body determined that the dumping margin was 
considered to be less or equal to de minimis (i.e., 2%), or that the volume of dumped imports was 
negligible.  The volume of dumped imports would be normally regarded as negligible if the volume 
of dumped imports from a particular country was found to account for less than 3% of imports of 
the like product to the EAEU customs territory, unless countries which individually accounted for 
less than 3% of the imports of the like produc t to the EAEU customs territory collectively 
accounted for more than 7% of imports of the like product to the EAEU customs territory.  
This provision was, in her view, in line with Article 5.8 of the ADA. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 160 - 
 
  516.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Law "On Anti-Dumping Measures" had 
been amended in line with the provisions of the ADA.  The term "normal price" had been replaced 
by "normal value" and the concept of ordinary cour se of trade had been modified in line with the 
ADA.  The de minimis dumping margin had been reduced from 5 to 2%, in accordance with the 
ADA.  To ensure transparency and confidentiality,  the authorised body would be required to make 
written evidence, presented by one interested party,  promptly available to other interested parties 
participating in the investigation, with the exception of confidential information.  
517.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures" had been amended to introduce new definitions of the terms "domestic producers", "like 
products" and "specific subsidy".  In her view, the provisions of the Law had been brought in 
conformity with the provisions of Article 8 of the ASCM with regard to non-actionable subsidies.  
The new amendments had introduced provisions for holding consultations aimed at reaching a 
mutually acceptable solution, prior to conducting an investigation, as provided under Article 13 of 
the ASCM.  Throughout the investigation, foreign states would be given a reasonable opportunity 
to continue such consultations.  In reply to a specific question, she said that the concept of 
"benefit" was contained in Article 1 (paragraph 16) of the Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures".  The definition of a subsidy in this La w conformed to the definition provided in Article 1 
of the ASCM.  
518.  Several important changes had been introduced to the Law No. 337-1 "On Safeguard 
Measures for Domestic Market upon Importation of  Goods".  Namely, the definitions of key terms 
used in the law – such as domestic industry, serious injury and threat of serious injury – had been 
modified in accordance with the definitions of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards.  The procedure 
for the imposition of provisional safeguard measures  and, in particular, refund procedures had also 
been adjusted.  Opportunities would be provided to all interested parties to present evidence and 
express their views.  A provision that envisaged progressive liberalisation of safeguard measures 
after their first year of application had been ad ded.  The representative of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan noted that provisions of the national  laws and regulations on trade remedy measures 
applied in Kazakhstan to the extent that they did not contradict to the EAEU Treaty. 
519.  A Member expressed concern about the application of safeguard measures to certain 
products by the Republic of Kazakhstan and considered that maintaining such measures 
contradicted the existing Law of the Republic of  Kazakhstan No. 337-1 "On Measures to Protect the 
Domestic Market from Imports" of 28 December 1998, Article 13a of the Free Trade Agreement of 
15 April 1994 as amended on 2 April 1999 and prov isions of the Agreement on Safeguards.  
The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan 
No. 1055 "On Introduction of Safeguard Measures to Import of Certain Kinds of Confectionary 
Products" of 14 September 2011 would be revoked by the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.   
520.  [This Member also expressed concern about th e principle applied to the expedited reviews 
that led to the extension of the measures applie d by the EAEU.  As the review established that WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 161 - 
 
  producers in the EAEU accounting for no less than 25% of total production in the EAEU supported 
the measure, this measure was extended in the EAEU .  In this Member's view, such an application 
of measures did not meet the requirements of th e Agreement on Safeguards.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan confirmed the measures applied on th e territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan after 
such expedited reviews would be brought in full conformity with the Agreement on Safeguards.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.]18 
521.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, compliance 
with the provisions of the Agreement on Impl ementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994, 
the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, and the Agreement on Safeguards, 
whether by the competent authorities of Kazakhst an or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would 
be ensured.  She further confirmed that Kazakhst an would notify and implement, upon accession, 
all appropriate laws and regulations applicable in Kazakhstan in conformity with the provisions of 
these Agreements.  She confirmed that, from the date of accession, WTO requirements would be 
met in applying anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures in Kazakhstan, whether by 
the competent authority of Kazakhstan or by the competent body of the EAEU.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan further confirmed that any tr ade remedy measure applied on the date of 
WTO accession of Kazakhstan and any trade remedy measure procedure launched before the date 
of accession as well as any trade remedy measur e resulting therefrom, whether by the competent 
authority of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies  of the EAEU, would be consistent with the 
relevant WTO Agreement, as of the date of acce ssion.  She also confirmed that all interested 
parties, as defined in the relevant WTO Agreement, would have access to any non-confidential 
information that was relevant to any trade remedy measure applied on the date of WTO accession 
of Kazakhstan, or adopted subsequently, on the basis of an investigation or review launched 
before its accession.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that, from the date of 
WTO accession of the Kazakhstan, any interested party could request the initiation of a review of 
any trade remedy measure, applied on the date of accession or adopted subsequently, on the 
basis of an investigation or review launched before the WTO accession of Kazakhstan, identifying 
the elements of that measure, which were, in their view, not consistent with the above-mentioned 
WTO Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
B. EXPORT REGULATIONS 
- Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Services Rendered, Application of Internal 
Taxes to Exports 
522.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that export duties were levied pursuant to the 
Government of Kazakhstan Resolution No. 520 "On Customs Duty Rates" of 7 June 2010.  
According to these Resolutions, export duties were applied to the following list of goods:  livestock 
raw skin and wool, ferrous and non-ferrous metal scrap and waste, and oil products.  The export 
duties for these goods varied from 10% (uncombed wool) to 30% (copper waste and scrap).  
Export duties were subject to publication after a pproval by the Government and had to enter into 
                                               
18 Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 162 - 
 
  force within thirty calendar days after the first official publication.  Export duties currently applied 
in Kazakhstan are listed in Annex 23(A) of this Report. 
523.  She added that within the framework of the CU, the member States elaborated the 
Agreement of 25 January 2008 "On Export Duties with regard to Third Countries" (hereinafter – 
the CU Agreement on Export Duties) and agreed that it would form the legal basis for levying 
export duties on goods exported from the member States to third countries after it entered into 
force and necessary implementing arrangements were concluded , which was not yet the 
case.  The CU Agreement on Export Duties was a framework agreement which established general 
terms on which export duties within the CU had to be applied.  However, it did not provide unified 
regulations and unified rates of export duties.  Thus, from the date of the CU establishment 
on 1 January 2010, export duties remained subject to regulation at the national level.  Article 1 of 
the CU Agreement on Export Duties called for the eventual development of a Common List of 
Goods Subject to Export Duties (CU Common List), to be established by the member States within 
60 days of its entry into force.  Accordingly, each member State was in the process of developing a 
list of goods subject to export duties with the rates of the duties established according to the 
national legislation.  Once developed, the list would be submitted to the EEC.  The EEC on the 
basis of information provided by the member States would create the Common List.  She also 
added that pursuant to Article 3 of the Agreem ent, if a product made on the territory of a 
member State levying export duties on this product was exported to a third country from the 
territory of another Party that was not levying expo rt duties on this product or was applying lower 
rates, such Party had to ensure that export duti es were:  (i) levied at the rates applied by the 
producing Party; and (ii) included into the Common List of Goods Subject to Export Duties.   
524.  As regards the common policy to be furt her developed in this field, Members 
observed that the WTO commitments undertake n by each of the EAEU member States 
define the ceilings for setting common export duties of the EAEU.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that, under the EAEU regime described in paragraphs [251 and 
252] of this Report and in paragraphs 185 and 186 of the Working Party Report on the 
Accession of the Russian Federation to th e WTO, the WTO commitments undertaken by 
an EAEU member are part of the EAEU legal framework.  The representative of the 
Russian Federation supported this statemen t of the representative of Kazakhstan.   
525.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan applied export duties on an MFN 
basis.  However, exports under the free trade re gime between members of the Eurasian Economic 
Community (EurAsEC) and under the bilateral free trade agreements in force with all other 
CIS countries were exempt from the payment of ex port duties, except for Moldova.  At the same 
time, in accordance with a multilateral FTA si gned by the CIS countries (Armenia, Belarus, 
Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, the Ru ssian Federation, Tajikistan and Ukraine) on 
18 October 2011, Kazakhstan had reserved the right to apply export duties for exports of certain 
goods to other parties of the Agreement, except for the member States.  Upon its entry into force, 
the new Agreement would replace bilateral FTAs of the CIS countries with Kazakhstan (for more WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 163 - 
 
  details please see the section "Trade Agreements").  She further noted that the Agreement 
between Kazakhstan and the European Union on Tr ade in Certain Steel Products approved by the 
Government Resolution No. 738 of 19 July 2005, had abolished customs duties, charges or any 
similar measures on exports of ferrous scrap an d waste to the EU falling under heading 7204 of 
the EU Combined Nomenclature (paragraph 3, Article 2).   
526.  Some Members noted that export duties appeared to be introduced to displace foreign 
products, which would otherwise be imported, with domestic products or otherwise distort trade.  
These Members considered that this application of export duties was unacceptable and inconsistent 
with Articles II and XXIII of the GATT 1994.  These Members also stated that, in their view, the 
discriminatory export duty exemptions granted to member States were inconsistent with Article I 
of the GATT 1994.  In addition, a Member expressed particular concerns regarding the export duty 
imposed on iron and steel scrap, considering the pressure that it placed on countries not applying 
such restrictions in the current market.  This Member also noted the non-MFN treatment of ferrous 
scrap in Kazakhstan's exports to the European Union, and stated that this practice had to be 
eliminated prior to WTO accession.  Finally, this Member enquired as to whether, as was the case 
with one other EAEU member State, only exports to the EAEU were exempt from the payment of 
export duties.  Given that Kazakhstan had free trade area relations with other CIS countries, 
discrimination in the elimination of duties and charges among preferential trading partners would 
have implications for the consistency of such a measure with Article XXIV of the GATT 1994.   
527.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  export duties were applied on a limited 
number of goods mainly for fiscal and regulatory purposes as well as environmental reasons and, 
as such, did not violate the provisions of the GATT 1994.  She added that her Government was 
undertaking steps to narrow down the list of goods subject to export duties.  To this end, the 
export duty on aluminium and beryllium ligatu re (out of HS Code 7601 20 100 0) had been 
eliminated.   
528.  Kazakhstan was also planning to reduce the export duty on ferrous scrap (HS Code 7204).  
The representative of Kazakhstan noted that these reductions in export duties on ferrous waste 
and scrap contained in HS heading 7204 and others  had come about through bilateral negotiations 
and the results of these negotiations had been  duly reflected.  A Member indicated that it had 
accepted Kazakhstan's invitation to engage in bila teral negotiations to reduce its export duties on 
the above-mentioned products in the context of Ka zakhstan's accession to the WTO.  The results 
of these negotiations are provided in Annex [23(B) of this Report].  In the view of this Member, 
these results formed part of the balance of commitments and concessions in the terms of 
accession of Kazakhstan.  This Member emphasized that, if Kazakhstan subsequently increased 
these export duties above the commitment level,  it would disturb the balance of concessions 
established in the bilateral and multilateral negotiations for WTO accession, and this Member 
would have the right to take appropriate action to rebalance the concessions.  Some other 
Members stated that this was without prejudice to their views in respect of the status and legality 
of export duties in the framework of the WTO Agreement. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 164 - 
 
  529.  With respect to application of export duties to CIS countries, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that export duty exemptions applied to CIS countries were applied in accordance with Article XXIV of the GATT 1994.  In  particular, the volume of Kazakhstan's exports 
to CIS countries subject to export duties was less than 1% of the total volume of goods exported 
to CIS countries.  She held the view that Kazakhstan's participation in FTAs was in compliance with 
Article XXIV:8(b) since the duties were eliminated on substantially all the trade between the FTA's 
participants.  With regard to exports of ferrous scrap to the European Union, she noted that the 
bilateral Agreement between the Republic of Ka zakhstan and the European Union on Trade in 
Certain Steel Products had expired, without replacement, on 31 December 2006; and the 
preferential treatment granted thereunder had ceased at that time. 
530.  Asked to explain how Kazakhstan would schedule its export levies so as to avoid distortion 
of domestic or international trade, the representative of Kazakhstan said that export duties for 
goods continued to play an important fiscal role in  Kazakhstan.  She noted that export duties did 
not affect the price at which an exported commodity  (i.e. oil, oil products, and non-ferrous metals) 
was purchased abroad.  Therefore, they were not used by Kazakhstan in a way that distorted 
domestic or international trade. 
531.  Some Members asked Kazakhstan to describe the new tax regime for oil operations.  
In addition, a Member asked Kazakhstan specifically to provide further information on how the 
world price of crude oil was determined for the pu rposes of revising the export duty on this 
product. 
532.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan had introduced a new tax 
regime for oil operations designed to increase o il revenue from the export of crude oil.  The new 
tax regime for oil operations applied for all contractual obligations, except for Production Sharing 
Agreements (PSAs) concluded between the Government and subsurface user prior to 
1 January 2009 and which had passed the obligatory tax expertise.  Subsurface users operating 
under PSAs were bound by the tax conditions st ipulated in the PSA in accordance with the 
provisions of the tax legislation which applied on the date the contract had been signed.  
The conditions of the PSA were fixed and coul d not be changed with subsequent changes in 
legislation without the prior agreement of both parties (see also the section on "Monetary and 
Fiscal Policy"). 
533.  Natural persons and juridical persons (subsurface users), operating under the new tax 
regime were subject to taxes affecting ordinary tax payers, as well as specific taxes, including a 
rent tax on the export of crude oil and gas conden sate, excess profits tax, minerals extraction tax, 
corporate income tax and bonuses.  The rent tax had been established by Article 303 of the 
Tax Code.  It was calculated based on the value of exported crude oil and gas condensate, which 
was set on the basis of the actual volume export ed and its market (world) price.  The market 
(world) price of crude oil was determined by multiplying the average of daily price quotations by 
the average exchange rates of KZT (tenge) to a related foreign currency.  Most particularly, price 
quotations of crude oil in foreign currency of each standard type of crude oil of Brent DTD or Urals WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 165 - 
 
  MED for the tax period published by "Platts Crude Oil Marketwire" or "Argus Crude" were used for 
calculation of the rent tax.  Rent tax rates ranged from 0% when the world price was US$20 per barrel to 32% when the world price exceeded US$200 per barrel.  The rent tax applied to all 
juridical and natural persons engaged in the export  of crude oil and gas condensate.  The export 
rent tax was aimed at recovering excess profits from subsurface users.  
534.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would implement, from the 
date of accession, its tariff concessions and commitments contained in Part V of the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan.   Accordingly, products described in Part V 
of that Schedule would, subject to the terms, conditions or qualifications set-forth in that Part of 
the Schedule, be exempt from export duties in excess of those set-forth and provided therein.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further conf irmed that Kazakhstan would not apply other 
measures having an equivalent effect to export duties on those products.  She confirmed that, 
from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would apply export duties in conformity with the 
WTO Agreement, in particular with Article I of th e GATT 1994.  Accordingly, with respect to export 
duties and charges of any kind imposed on, or in connection with exportation, any advantage, 
favour, privilege or immunity granted by Kazakhstan to any product destined for any other country 
shall be accorded immediately and unconditionally to the like product destined for the territories of 
all other WTO Members.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, in the event of 
a future EAEU common policy on export du ties referred to in paragraph [524], 
Kazakhstan will fully implement its WTO commitments on export duties as set out in Part V of the Schedule of Concessions an d Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan and 
subject to the terms, conditions or qualificatio ns set forth in that Part of the Schedule.  
In particular, section b) of Part V of the Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on 
Goods of Kazakhstan provided for the alignm ent of Kazakhstan's rates with lower rates 
of the Russian Federation for a number of prod ucts in case the competent bodies of the 
E A E U  d e c i d e  t o  u n i f y  e x p o r t  d u t i e s  o n  t h ese tariff lines.  Until such unification, 
Kazakhstan would only be bound by the commit ments indicated in section a) of Part V of 
the Schedule of Concessions and Commit ments on Goods of Kazakhstan.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at any changes of its export duties and 
measures having an equivalent effect wo uld be notified to the WTO providing all 
relevant information on the day of their pu blication and in any case at least 30 days 
before any such changes enter into force.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
Kazakhstan would, from the date of accession to the WTO, administer export tariff rate quotas 
(TRQs) in a manner that is consistent with the WTO Agreement and in particular the GATT 1994 
and the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Proced ures.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.  
- Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas  
535.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that as of 1 January 2015, the legal basis for the 
application of export restrictions on goods exported to third countries from the EAEU could be 
found in Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" to the EAEU WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 166 - 
 
  Treaty, which replaced the following Agreements:  (i) "On Common Measures of Non-tariff 
Regulation in Respect of Third Countries" of 25 January 2008; (ii) "On the Procedure of 
Introduction and Implementation of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the 
Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries" of 9 June 2009; and (iii) "On Licensing 
Procedures in the Sphere of Foreign Trade in Goods" of 9 June 2009.  According to Annex No. 7 to 
the EAEU Treaty, decisions to apply non-tariff measures on exports from the EAEU member States 
to third countries were taken by the Commission.  By Collegium Decision No. 134, which had 
replaced Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009, the Commission had approved the Common List 
of Goods that are  Subject to Bans and Restrictions on Importation and Exportation by Parties of 
the Customs Union of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Third Countries 
(hereinafter:  "the Common List").  The Common list originally had entered into force on 1 January 2010.  Among the goods subject to export prohibitio n were:  (i) printed information or information 
on audio-visual and other devices containing information, which might cause damage to the 
political or economic interests of the Republic, to its State security, to the health and morality of 
its citizens; (ii) timber, recovered paper, paperboard and wastepaper; and (iii) service or civil 
weapons, their main parts and cartridges.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained 
that, according to Sections III  and VII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, and in accordance with 
the national legislation, non-tariff measures could be introduced on exports from the EAEU if those 
measures:  (i) were necessary to prevent or reduce a critical shortage of foodstuffs or other goods 
considered essential for the domestic market; (ii) were necessary to maintain public morals or law and order; (iii) were necessary to protect the life or health of citizens, environment, animal and 
plant life or health; (iv) were related to the export  of gold or silver; (v) were applied to protect 
cultural valuables and heritage; (vi) were required to prevent the exhaustion of exhaustible natural 
resources and implemented simultaneously with reduction/restriction of the domestic production or 
consumption associated with the conservation of exhaustible natural resources; (vii) were linked to 
an export limitation of domestic raw materials to provide sufficient quantity of such materials for 
the domestic processing industry in periods when domestic prices for such materials were lower 
than the world prices as a result of a stabilisation plan implemented by the Government; 
(viii) were essential to acquire or distribute goods in case of their general or local shortage; 
(ix) were essential to comply with international obligations; (x) were essential to ensure the 
defence and security of the State; (xi) were nece ssary to ensure observance of regulatory legal 
acts consistent with international commitments and related to the application of the customs law, 
preservation of the environment, protection of intellectual property, and other legal acts; and, 
(xii) necessary to the application of standards or  regulations for the classification, grading or 
marketing of commodities in  international trade. 
536.  Furthermore, pursuant to Section VIII of A nnex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the Commission 
was authorised to apply quantitative export restri ctions and prohibitions to protect the external 
financial situation and safeguard the balance of payments.  For this reason, the Commission was 
authorised to apply quantitative export restrictions or grant exclusive licenses to import or export 
based on proposals from an EAEU member State.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 167 - 
 
  537.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  as of 1 January 2015, pursuant to Section 
II of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, the authority to impose non-tariff measures on exports from EAEU member State to third countries had been transferred to the Commission.  A proposal to 
apply a non-tariff measure could be filed by an  EAEU member State or by the Commission.  
The Commission had to take its decision within 30 days from the date the proposal had been 
submitted.  The decision, if positive, would co me into force 45 days after the date of its 
publication.  Such non-tariff measures would be applied to goods destined for third countries, and 
applied equally to exports to all countries.   
538.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
under Section X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, an EAEU member State could unilaterally 
impose a temporary non-tariff measure, if such a measure was due to the reasons stipulated in 
paragraphs [535] and [536].   Furthermore, an EAEU member State could, pursuant to Section 
X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, request the Commission to impose non-tariff measures on 
exports.  If the Commission rejected the proposal, the EAEU member State could, under Sections 
VII and VIII of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, im pose such measures unilaterally, in conformity 
with Section X of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty.  Under these provisions, unilateral measures 
could be imposed for only six months.  The EAEU member States, not imposing the non-tariff 
measure, were to take the necessary steps to pr event the exportation of the subject good(s) from 
the EAEU member State applying the non-tariff measures to third countries.  
EAEU member States, not applying the measure, were to require licenses and/or permits for 
exportation of the subject goods from their respective territories.   
539.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that Kazakhstan currently imposed 
prohibitions on the export of lumber, saw timber, certain wood products, reusable paper, 
cardboard, raw paper materials and paper waste that were included into the Common list.  Asked 
to confirm whether the prohibition on the export of lumber and saw timber was only applied by 
Kazakhstan or by all EAEU member States, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that this 
export prohibition was only applied by Kazakhstan.  The measure was applied in conjunction with 
the ban on cutting forest trees in "specially protected natural territories" (SPNT).  The SPNT 
included geographical territories of special interest which had environmental, scientific, cultural 
and recreational value placed under special protection regime (Law No. 175 "On Specially 
Protected Natural Territories" of 7 July 2006).  The restrictions were related to conservation of exhaustible natural resources and had been introduced to maintain the ecological balance and 
prevent deforestation, given Kazakhstan's highly lim ited reserves of wood.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan considered that this export prohibition was applied in compliance with paragraphs (b) 
and (g) of Article XX of the GATT 1994, on a non-discriminatory basis, and in a manner which did 
not constitute a means of disguised restriction on international trade.  Goods subject to export 
restrictions were listed in Annex 14 of this Report. 
540.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that Kazakhstan currently did not apply any 
quantitative or other restrictions on the export of grain or any other agricultural products.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 168 - 
 
  541.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan had implemented export restrictions on sunflower seeds 
and wheat until September 2008.  This Member enquired as to whether export restrictions on sunflower seeds and wheat were still in place.  In this respect, this Member asked the 
representative of Kazakhstan to explain the justification behind these actions.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, due to the critical shortage of food made from wheat on 
the domestic market, her Government had applied export restrictions on certain types of wheat 
in 2008.  In particular, the Government had adopted Resolutions "On Export Restrictions of Wheat" 
No. 343 of 15 April 2008 and No. 777 of 28 August 2008.  These Resolutions had remained in 
effect until 1 September 2008.  Government Resolution No. 930 “On Introduction of 
Amendment and Addenda in Resolution of th e Government of Kazakhstan No. 681 of 10 
July 2003”  of 8 October 2008 had applied export restrictions on sunflower seeds, which had 
been  intended to be in effect until 1 April 2009.  However, in February 2009 export prohibitions on 
sunflower seeds had been repealed.  The Governme nt of the Republic of Kazakhstan had adopted 
Resolution No. 1042 “On Introduction of Ban on Ex portation of Certain Goods” of 5  
October 2010  for export ban on oilseeds, vegetable oils and buckwheat  in order to avoid 
supply shortages and mitigate price volatility in the domestic market.  The Resolution had 
remained in effect until 18 April 2011.  At the moment, export restrictions on agricultural products 
were not applied in Kazakhstan.  Furthermore, she added that Kazakhstan did not require any kind 
of sanctions/permits/licenses applicable to grain exports.  
542.  In response to the question by a Member concerning temporary bans on exports of 
petroleum products from the territory of Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 713 of 27 June 2014 had established the 
temporary ban on exports of  light distillates and products (HS heading  2710 12), middle 
distillates, kerosene gas oil, diesel oil (HS tariff lines  2710 19 110 0 –2710 19 480 0, 2710 
20 110 0 – 2710 20 190 0) and motor oil (HS tariff line  2710 19 820 0), fluid for hydraulic 
purposes (HS tariff line  2710 19 840 0), light oil (HS tariff line  2710 19860 0), oil for gears (HS 
tariff line  2710 19 880 0), electrical lubricating oil (HS tariff line  2710 19 940 0) and other 
petroleum products (HS tariff line  2710 20 900 0), except for house heating fuel.  She further 
added that the temporary bans were introduced in  order to prevent a critical shortage of goods 
essential for the domestic market, since domestic oil refineries did not have sufficient 
technological capacity to fully meet the domestic needs in petroleum products.  At the moment, 
Kazakhstan imported more than 50 % of petroleum products consumed within the 
country.  With the objective to eliminate a crit ical shortage of petroleum products on its 
market by 2018, in accordance with the Government Resolution No. 567 “On Approval of 
Complex Plan on Development of Oil and Gas Sector for 2014-2018”, Kazakhstan started 
technological modernization of oil refineries.   In her view, the temporary measures applied 
by Kazakhstan were in full conformity with paragraph 2(a) of Article XI of the GATT 1994. 
543.  A Member noted that export bans and quantitative restrictions on commercial products 
were prohibited under the GATT 1994, unless justif ied under WTO provisions.  This Member sought WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 169 - 
 
  a commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan's export restrictions 
would be in conformity with WTO provisions, including Article XI of the GATT 1994.   
544.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied th at, upon accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan 
would apply such quantitative export restrictions only in accordance with Article XI of the 
GATT 1994 and Article 12 of the WTO Agreement on  Agriculture, and would amend its existing 
legislation to bring its legislation on export restrictions into compliance with the provisions of 
Article XI of the GATT 1994.  She further mentioned that paragraph 15 of Annex No. 7 to the EAEU 
Treaty incorporated provisions of Article 12 of the Agreement on Agriculture.  In addition, her 
Government had adopted Resolution No. 1404 of 27 December 2004, which had eliminated the 
export ban on aluminium and nickel waste and scrap. 
545.  In response to concerns raised by some Members who noted that, although minimum 
export prices had previously been eliminated, it a ppeared that the authorities were still operating a 
system with a similar effect, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Government Resolution 
No. 994 of 19 July 1997 had eliminated contract re gistration at the commodity exchange, and that 
Kazakhstan had no provisions stipulating minimum ex port prices on grain and, in general, did not 
apply minimum export prices. 
- Export Licensing Procedures 
546.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, as with import licensing, as of 
1 January 2015, the legal basis for the export licensing system in Kazakhstan was established in 
Annex No. 7 to the EAEU Treaty, which replaced the following Agreements: (i)  "On Common 
Measures of Non-tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries" of 25 January 2008; (ii) "On the 
Procedure of Introduction and Implementation of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, 
on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries" of 9 June 2009; and, (iii) "On 
the Rules of Licensing in the Area of Foreign Trade in Goods" of 9 June 2009.  By Collegium 
Decision No. 134, which had replaced Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009, the Commission 
had approved the Common List, which had originally entered into force on 1 January 2010 
(Annex 14 of this Report).  Kazakhstan confirmed that Annex 14 of this Report was exhaustive and 
that currently there were no other exports subject to licensing requirements. 
547.  Among the goods subject to export licensing were:  (i) hazardous waste; (ii) collectible 
materials in mineralogy and paleontology; (iii) wild-growing crude drugs (plants, parts of plants, 
seeds, fruits); (iv) wild live animals and certain wild growing plants; (v) rare and endangered 
species of wild animals and wild growing plants an d plants thereof and/or derivatives inscribed in 
the "Red Books" of EAEU member States; (vi) precious metals and gems; (vii) unprocessed 
precious metals, waste and scrap of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals and 
commodities containing precious metals; (viii) mineral raw materials (only untreated stones); 
(ix) drugs substances with psychotropic effects and their precursors; (x) toxic substances, except 
for precursors of the drugs and substances with  psychotropic effect; (xi) special devices for 
unauthorised obtaining of information; (xii) encryption devices; (xiii) cultural valuables, documents WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 170 - 
 
  of the national archive funds, originals of the archive documents; (xiv) human organs and tissues, 
blood and its components; and, (xv) service and ci vil weapons, their main parts and cartridges.  
Currently, no goods were subject to automatic export licensing in Kazakhstan.  All goods listed in 
Annex 14 of this Report with a note "export licensi ng" were subject to non-automatic licensing.   
548.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, according to Section IX of Annex No. 7 to 
the EAEU Treaty, the Ministry of Investments and Development (Ministry responsible for 
administration of licenses in Kazakhstan) issued three types of licenses:  one-time, general, and 
exclusive.  One-time licenses were issued on the basis of a foreign trade contract related to goods 
subject to export licensing.  General licenses had to be issued upon decision of the Commission.  
Both types of licenses granted the right to export certain types of goods subject to licensing, in the 
quantity determined by the licence, and were valid for one year or, for goods with respect to which 
provisional quantitative restrictions had been introduced, until 1 January of the following calendar 
year.  Exclusive licenses gave the applicant the exclusive right to export certain types of goods.  
The goods subject to exclusive licensing and the ho lders of exclusive licenses were to be decided 
by the Commission.  At the moment, Kazakhstan had not issued any exclusive licenses. 
549.  One-time licenses were issued by the Minist ry of Investments and Development, with the 
exception of licenses for the exportation of milita ry products and goods that could be used to 
create weapons of mass destruction, means of transportation of such weapons, and other 
armament and defence technology.  Licenses were issued upon receipt of:  (i) an application for 
the licence; (ii) an electronic version of the application; (iii) a copy of the contract; (iv) a copy of a certificate confirming that the applicant was registered by a regional tax authority as a tax-payer; 
(v) a copy of the activity licence, if applicable; and, (vi) other documents, if so decided by the 
Commission, pursuant to which a licensing of this product had been introduced.  
550.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in addition to Annex No. 7 to the 
EAEU Treaty and Commission Decisions, the national legislation of Kazakhstan, including Law 
No. 214 "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, continued to regulate the application of the licensing 
regime in Kazakhstan.   
551.  A Member also requested more information re garding the procedures of issuance export 
licensing and the applied fees related to these procedures.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that procedure used to export licensing was identical to the procedure used for 
import licensing (for further details, see section "Import Licensing" of this Report).  With regards to export licensing fees, Kazakhstan applied uniform import/export licensing fees in relation to all 
goods.  According to the Tax Code of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan, the import/export licensing fee 
was equal to 10 MCI.  In 2014, the import/e xport licensing fee was equal to KZT 18,520 
(approximately US$100), the fee for re-issuance of  licence was equal to KZT 1,852 (approximately 
US$10). 
552.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that the export of certain flora and fauna species 
under threat of extinction, listed in Appendices  I, II and III of the Convention on International WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 171 - 
 
  Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, (CITES) was subject to export permits 
issued in Kazakhstan.   
553.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed, th at, from the date of accession, quantitative 
restrictions on exports or restrictions on the sale for export of goods, such as quotas, bans, 
permits, prior authorisation requirements, licensing requirements (including the requirements 
listed in Annex [14] of this Report), domestic market supply requirements or measures having 
equivalent effect that could not be justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement, would be 
eliminated and not introduced, re-introduced or applied, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent 
bodies of the EAEU.  She further confirmed that discretionary authority to temporarily ban exports 
or otherwise restrict exports, whether exercised by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the 
EAEU, would be applied from the date of accession  in conformity with the provisions of the WTO 
Agreement.  She also confirmed that, if Kazakhstan took recourse to Article XX(i) of the GATT 
1994, with respect to any measures, whether applied by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of 
the EAEU, restricting exports of domestic materials necessary to ensure essential quantities of 
such materials to a domestic or EAEU processing industry, such measures would not operate to 
increase the exports of or the protection of such  industry.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments. 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECT ING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS 
- Industrial Policy, including Subsidies 
554.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Article 93 "Industrial Subsidies" and Annex 
No. 28 "Protocol on Common Rules for Granting Industrial Subsidies" of the Eurasian Economic 
Union Treaty (hereinafter – the Protocol) from 1 January 2015, established basic rules for granting 
industrial subsidies within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).  
These provisions replaced the Agreement on Common Rules for Granting Industrial Subsidies 
between the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Repu blic of Belarus and the Russian Federation of 9 
December 2010 which had entered into force  as of 1 January 2012 within the framework of the 
Single Economic Space, which was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 
January 2015.  Article 93 and the Protocol were aimed at ensuring a level playing field for 
companies operating within the EAEU in the absenc e of trade barriers.  Article 93 and the Protocol 
incorporated the main principles of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, 
and stipulated procedures for notification of specific subsidies, monitoring, dispute-settlement, and 
conducting investigations by national authorities.  From 1 January 2017, EAEU member States 
could request the Commission for approval of their specific subsidies.  The approved subsidies 
could not be challenged by other member States.  She further added that provision of subsidies in Kazakhstan was regulated by budget, tax, customs,  and investment legislation.  State support to 
the industrial sector of Kazakhstan's economy was mainly provided from the republican (central) 
budget.  In response to the questions of some Members of the Working Party about the objective, 
criteria and guidelines that governed the availability of regional subsidies and their use by regional 
bodies, the representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that, in accordance with the Budget Code of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 172 - 
 
  the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 548 of 24 April 2004,  regional subventions were official transfers 
from higher-level to lower-level budgets, receiv ed within the limits of approved amounts in the 
republican or regional budgets, for the purpos e of carrying out public services, such as 
development and maintenance of local infrastructure, running schools, and making social income 
support payments unrelated to the production of goods. 
555.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that State support to the industrial sector was 
aimed mainly at attracting investment into priority sectors of the economy, development of 
innovative industries, support of small and medi um enterprises, and development of regions.  
The main instruments of State support included:  (i) investment preferences in the form of tax and 
customs duty exemptions on imports; (ii) in-kind State grants; (iii) preferences on land tax and 
property tax for juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects; (iv) subsidization of interest rates on commercial loans and providing partial guarantees of loans; (v) leasing on 
preferential terms; (vi) development of industrial  infrastructure; (vii) industrial preferences for 
juridical persons implementing strategic investment projects in socially and economically 
disadvantaged regions; (viii) service support of bu sinesses; (ix) tax deferral; and (x) innovation 
grants.   
556.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more details on corporate income tax preferences 
provided to industries investing in the petrochemical sector, and on special tax treatment for 
companies primarily engaged in information technology research and development, which 
operated in special economic zones (SEZs).  This Member also requested more information on the benefits provided for investment and industrial activity in Kazakhstan's Tax Code.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that applic ation of a preferential tax regime for industries 
engaged in the petrochemical sector was aimed at diversification of the national economy through 
development of processing industries.  She acknow ledged that previously a preferential corporate 
income tax regime had been provided to companies in the petrochemical sector, in cases where 
90% of the company's income had been generated from refining oil and gas resources produced in 
Kazakhstan.  However, this provision had been eliminated by the Law "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Legislative Acts of Kazakhstan on Taxation Issues" of 22 November 2005.  She further 
stated that tax and customs duty exemptions granted to companies registered in SEZs were 
discussed in the "Special Economic Zones" section of this Report. 
557.  With respect to "soft loans", i.e., loans with subsidized interest rates, from Kazakhstan's 
ExImBank, some Members of the Working Party expr essed specific concerns that, to the extent 
that these loans were contingent upon export or import substitution, they could constitute a 
prohibited subsidy under Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures (SCM Agreement).  Kazakhstan was asked to confirm that the financing provided by the 
ExImBank conformed to the rules set out in items (j) and (k) of Annex I of the SCM Agreement.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that, pursuant to the Decree of the 
President of Kazakhstan No. 1815 "On Establishmen t of the State Export - Import Bank of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1994,  the main functions of the ExImBank had consisted of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 173 - 
 
  borrowing on international capital markets under  State guarantee and providing loans on the 
domestic market.  Uniform terms and conditions had been  applied by the ExImbank in financing 
enterprises engaged in priority sectors of  the economy.  For example, companies had received 
loans from the ExImBank for the following purposes:  (i) importation of agricultural equipment and 
machinery for the production of sugar beet; (ii) importation of equipment for construction projects 
and production of construction materials; (iii) importation of fertilizers; (iv) construction of electric 
power plants and pump producing plants; and (v) food processing.  The ExImBank had financed 
three- to five-year investment projects, at a 6% interest rate, and with a grace period of two to 
three years.  She stated that the provision of loans had not been contingent upon export 
performance or import substitution requirements .  Since 2004, the ExImBank had been privatized 
and no longer operated on behalf of the Govern ment, nor received any Government guarantees for 
loans extended to the ExImBank.  It now provided  general banking services in the market as any 
other commercial bank of Kazakhstan. 
558.  Referring to a statement made by the representative of Kazakhstan regarding "soft loans" 
granted to support extraction and exportatio n of non-ferrous products and gold by the 
Development Bank of Kazakhstan, some Members of the Working Party requested further 
information on the nature of the financing (e.g., benefits to exports) provided by this Bank.  
Kazakhstan was asked to confirm that the financing provided by the Development Bank conformed 
to the rules set-out in item (k) of Annex I of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures (WTO SCM Agreement).  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the terms for financing export operations by the Development Bank were regulated by Law No. 178-II "On the 
Development Bank of Kazakhstan" of 25 April 2001 (t he Development Bank Law).  She stated that 
for the provision of financial services, the Deve lopment Bank used funds borrowed on domestic 
and international capital markets on commercial terms.  Moreover, pursuant to Article 12 of the 
Development Bank Law, the interest rates charge d for loans were based on the average cost of 
borrowing and operating costs of the Bank.  Thus, on legal grounds, the Bank was prevented from 
subsidizing the interest rates charged on its loans.  She stated that the Bank's financing of 
companies, including its loans for export operations, could not, in her view, be considered as 
export subsidies within the scope of Article 3.1 and Annex I of the WTO SCM Agreement.   
559.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan applied a system of decreasing (discount) coefficients on 
tariffs for railway transportation, which appeared to provide tariff reductions to producers of sulphuric acid and iron ore products, and was only available for export transportation.  This 
Member stated that, to the extent that these incent ives were contingent upon export (even if this 
was not necessarily the specific goal of the legislation), they could constitute prohibited export 
subsidies under Article 3.1 of the WTO  SCM Agreement.  This Member asked Kazakhstan to 
explain how it planned to bring this programme into compliance with WTO provisions.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that the use of decreasing coefficients on tariffs for railway 
transportation of sulphuric acid, which was a by-product of the refining process and not demanded 
domestically, and iron ore had not been implemen ted to support exports of domestic goods.  A 
temporary decreasing coefficient had been applied for transportation of sulphuric acid on export WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 174 - 
 
  routes, to address a potential negative environmental impact in Kazakhstan.  However, since 2003 
no decreasing coefficients had been applied for transportation of sulphuric acid.  A decreasing coefficient on the transportation of iron ore had been  applied due to the high volume of iron ore 
transported by railway.  The representative of  Kazakhstan further explained that a temporary 
0.25 decreasing coefficient had been applied from 22 February to 31 December 2004 for 
transportation of iron ore on export routes.  Si nce then decreasing (discount) coefficients had not 
been applied on the transportation of iron ore in Kazakhstan. 
560.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that in 2004, in accordance with Order of the 
Acting  Chairman of the Agency "On Regulation of Natural Monopolies" No. 375-OD  of 
8 September 2004, "Rules Governing Application and Discontinuation of Temporary Decreasing 
Coefficients on Tariffs for Mainline Railway Transportation" had been adopted.  These new rules 
affected only the services provided using the main-line railway network, which qualified as a 
natural monopoly.  Temporary decreasing coefficients only applied under any of the following 
conditions:  (i) the volume of transportation of the good by railway exceeded, or was equal to the 
actual volume of transportation of this good during a similar period in the preceding year; 
(ii) idle/under-utilised segments of the main-line railway network would be used; (iii) the good was 
a by-product of industrial production and presente d an environmental hazard; (iv) to provide equal 
tariff conditions for access to regulated services of the main-line railway network and railway 
transportation facilities under concession agr eements; and (v) transportation of passengers was 
socially important.  Once established, decreasing coefficients for railway transportation of a particular type of goods applied on a temporary basis to all entities (consignors) transporting these 
goods and were valid for all destinations, including domestic, export and import routes.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the criteria used for the application of decreasing 
coefficients on tariffs charged for the main-line railway transportation services were not 
contingent, in law or in fact, upon exportation or the use of domestic over imported goods.  In her 
view, as such, these measures could not be viewed as providing a prohibited subsidy within the 
meaning of Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement and Article XVI of the GATT 1994.  She added 
that other aspects of railway tariffs were addressed in the section "Pricing Policies" of this Report.  
561.  Some Members of the Working Party noted that Kazakhstan provided tax exemptions for 
exporters of yellow phosphorus, ground phosphat e rock and phosphate fertilizer, and expressed 
concern that these tax exemptions were contingent upon export and thus prohibited under Article 3 of the WTO SCM Agreement.  In response , the representative of Kazakhstan said that 
"Kazphosphat" Ltd. was engaged in a priority sector of the economy and had received investment 
preferences in the form of 50% reduction of corporate income tax until 31 August 2008, and 50% 
reduction of property and land taxes until 2007, in accordance with investment contracts 
concluded in 1999-2000.  No such preferences had been provided since 2008.  She confirmed that 
the criteria used for granting these tax preferences were not contingent, in law or in fact, upon 
export performance or the use of domestic over imported goods, rather on the strategic 
importance of the industry for diversification of the national economy.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 175 - 
 
  562.  In response to concerns raised by some Memb ers of the Working Party, who noted that tax 
exemptions had been granted under the Law No. 75-I "On State Support to Direct Investments" of 28 February 1997, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Law No. 75-I and Law No. 266-XIII 
"On Foreign Investments" of 27 December 1994 had been abolished and replaced by Law No. 373 
"On Investments" of 8 January 2003.  She acknowle dged that tax preferences granted prior to the 
adoption of the new Law "On Investments" remained  in effect until the expiration of the terms of 
the contracts signed between the authorised body  and investors (i.e. by early 2009 for the last 
remaining contracts).  The new Law did not contain requirements concerning the minimum volume 
of investments to be made in order to be eligible for investment preferences.  She added that the 
detailed information on the investment preferences granted under the Law "On Investment" was 
contained in the section "Investment Regime" of this Report.   
563.  Some Members of the Working Party requested Kazakhstan to provide comprehensive 
information on subsidies that would have to be notified under Article 25 of the 
WTO SCM Agreement.  In particular, Kazakhstan was asked whether there had been any 
administered programmes, other than the ones described in the preceding paragraphs, which 
provided industrial incentives or met the definition  of a specific subsidy.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan responded that there were a number of  other investment and industrial incentives 
provided for in Kazakhstan's National Programme of Accelerated Industrial and Innovative 
Development (2010-2014), including tax incentives, grants, research and development funding 
and concessional lending through the Bank of Development and second-tier banks in priority 
sectors aimed at diversification of the national economy.  More specifically, Law No. 534-IV 
"On State Support of Industrial Innovative Ac tivity" of 9 January 2012 defined state measures 
aimed at supporting industrial-innovative projects, i.e. projects aimed at transfer of technologies, 
and creation of new and improved productions, technologies, goods and services.  
564.  A Member expressed the view that some of  the sectoral plans under the National 
Programme of Accelerated Industrial and Innovative Development (2010-2014) - and more 
specifically, the plan of "granting of financial stimulation for improvement of export of Kazakhstan 
mechanic engineering products" - might contain ex port contingent elements.  This Member added 
that to the extent that incentives under the programme were export contingent, they would 
appear to be prohibited, as provided under Arti cle 3 of the SCM Agreement.  This Member asked 
how Kazakhstan planned to bring this programme into compliance with the SCM Agreement prior to accession. 
565.  The Representative of Kazakhstan replied that the National Programme on Accelerated 
Industrial and Innovative Development for 2010-2014 was a framework document that established 
the main directions and objectives of industrial and innovative development of Kazakhstan for 
2010-2014.  The Programme outlined priority sectors for development, established objectives and 
targets in each of these sectors and outlined instruments that could be used to achieve these 
objectives and targets.  Concrete mechanisms aimed at implementing the objectives set in the 
National Programme were provided in separate legal acts and programmes such as the Programme WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 176 - 
 
  "Business Road Map - 2020", "Productivity - 2020", and the Programme on Investment Attraction, 
Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014.  In this regard, "financial stimulatio n for improving exports of Kazakhstan's mechanic 
engineering products" described a general target that  had to be followed, but it did not prescribe a 
precise subsidy mechanism.  Financial stimulation, in this case, meant that producers of machinery 
products in Kazakhstan would receive subsidies that would allow producers to enlarge their 
production and improve the quality of their products  so they could sell their products not only on 
the domestic market, but could also export these products.  Specific subsidy schemes for 
mechanical engineering products were envisaged under "Productivity - 2020", "Business Road Map 
- 2020", as well as preferences within Special Economic Zones and the Free Warehouse customs 
regime.  She stressed that these programmes did not provide for prohibited export subsidies.  
566.  The Programme "Business Road Map - 2020" provided a set of measures aimed at the 
development of new processing industries and the modernisation of existing ones.  
The Programme envisaged Government support in the form of partial guarantees for and 
subsidization of interest rates on commercial loans, development of industrial infrastructure, 
service support of businesses.  The Programme "Productivity - 2020" was aimed at increasing the 
competitiveness of industrial enterprises in priority sectors of the economy through increasing 
labour productivity.  The main mechanisms envisaged in this programme included innovation 
grants, financial leasing, grants for introduction of modern administrative and industrial 
technologies, grants for financing the development and expertise of comprehensive investment project plans.  Business entities and entreprene urs that had been implementing or planned to 
implement investment projects in non-extracting and priority sectors of the economy were eligible 
to receive preferences under these programmes.  
567.  To implement these programmes, Kazakhstan had established special development 
institutions and funds, including the Kazakhstan Investment Fund; the National Innovation Fund; 
and the "Damu" Entrepreneurship Development F und.  The representative of Kazakhstan added 
that Kazakhstan had made available to the Working Party the information on  all of its 
subsidies under Article 25 of the SCM Agreement in the form of notifications . 
568.  A Member stated that, according to the programme "Productivity-2020", it appeared that 
participants of the Programme could be enterprises operating in a priority sector of the economy 
and performing activities aimed inter alia  at being "export oriented".  To the extent that incentives 
under this programme were export contingent, they would appear to be prohibited, as provided 
under Article 3 of the SCM Agreement.   
569.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that entrepreneurs that met the 
following criteria could be eligible to receive subsidies under the Programme "Productivity - 2020": 
- implementing and (or) planning to implement in vestment projects in priority sectors of the 
economy listed in Annex 1 to the Programme; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 177 - 
 
  - implementing and (or) planning to implement production of goods listed in Annex 2 to the 
Programme, excluding entrepreneurs implementing investment projects in the sphere of rendering services on maintenance and installation of machines and equipment; 
- financially stable (no overdue debt on all kinds of obligations to the bank(s) or bank 
affiliates(s) and absence of tax debts, etc.)    
- presenting a comprehensive project implementation plan containing the following 
information: 
1. financial return on investment project; 
2. increase in productivity; and, 3. competitiveness of the product. 
570.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that eligibility criteria under the Programme 
"Productivity-2020" did not include local content or export performance requirements.  Thus, the 
subsidies provided under this Programme did not fa ll under the category of prohibited subsidies. 
571.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the programmes aimed at 
export promotion, including trade financing and insurance, and service support of exports.  
This Member also enquired whether the terms of trade financing and insurance for export were 
coordinated with international norms for this kind of support.   
572.  The Representative of Kazakhstan responded that Government Resolution No. 1017 of 
2 August 2012 provided for partial reimbursem ent (50%) of expenses borne by companies 
engaged in industrial and innovative activity for promoting their goods and services abroad.  
The following expenses could be partially compensated:  marketing research, advertising costs, participation in foreign exhibitions, maintenance of overseas representatives, training of 
specialists, and registration of products and trademarks abroad.  The aim of the subsidy was to 
promote Kazakhstan's products in global markets.  At the same time, there was no requirement 
for these companies to export a certain amount of their products.  Thus, the conditions for 
receiving the subsidy were not contingent upon export performance and, correspondingly, the 
subsidy did not fall under the category of prohibited  export subsidies in accordance with Article 3 
of the SCM Agreement. 
573.  Regarding the service support for exporters, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that it included a number of services aimed at supporting medium and small businesses in their ongoing and potential foreign trade activities.  The services included inter alia  marketing and 
analytical assistance, provision of information on demand in foreign markets, organization of 
launch events for promoting trademarks of Kazakhstan's producers.  In her view, the service 
support could not be considered as a prohibited subsidy because the scheme did not involve a 
financial contribution by the Government to specific enterprises or industries that was contingent 
upon export performance.   
574.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that state support for financing export operations 
was provided through the Export Credit Insurance Corporation "KazExpoGarant" JSC and included 
the following instruments:  (i) export credit insurance against commercial and political risks arising 
during implementation of export contracts with foreign importers; and, (ii) provision of post-export 
financing (export credits).  These financing instruments were provided based on international WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 178 - 
 
  practices, including the OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits.  Thus, in her 
view, they were compliant with the ru les and norms of the SCM Agreement. 
575.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the "Programme on 
Investment Attraction, Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic 
of Kazakhstan for 2010-2014", including information on the eligibility criteria for companies to 
receive incentives under this programme, focusing on export promotion programmes.  
The Member also expressed concern that the Prog ramme listed as one of its tasks the "financial 
backing of exporters" and two of its target indica tors set to be reached by 2015 as:  (i) ensuring 
the export of at least 50% of the increased outp ut of the SEZs and (ii) increasing non-primary 
exports by at least 40%.  The Member sought specific assurances that none of the financial 
backing of exporters in this or Kazakhstan's other development programmes was intended to ensure or support the attainment of specific ex port performance targets of the recipient firms. 
576.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  most of the measures aimed at promoting 
investments and exports envisaged in the Programme on Investment Attraction, Special 
Economic Zone Development and Export Prom otion in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 
2010-2014, approved by Government Resol ution No. 1145 of 30 October 2010, did not 
represent a subsidy in accordance with the definition provided in the SCM Agreement.  These 
measures included:  (i) activities to assess the effectiveness of measures undertaken by the 
Government to improve the business climate; (i i) improvement of customs and border service 
activities; (iii) improvement of conditions of stay of foreign labour on the territory of Kazakhstan; 
monitoring the relevant government authorities' work with investors; (iv) development of legal 
acts; (v) service support for exporters; (vi) orga nization of trade missions and fairs abroad; and, 
(vii) publishing brochures and books on Kazakhstan's producers and their products.  She further 
explained that "financial backing of exporters" in the Programme referred to the state support of 
financing export operations through the Export Credit Insurance Corporation "KazExpoGarant" 
described in paragraph [ 574].  The target indicators:  "to ensure the export of at least 50% of the 
increased output of the SEZs" and "to increase no n-primary exports by at least 40%", set to be 
reached by 2015, did not involve export subsidies.   These were general targets for implementation 
of the programme, and as such, they were not used as a condition for a particular subsidy 
measure.  She added that the main purpose for establishing SEZs was the diversification of the 
economy through facilitating production of high  value-added goods.  Therefore, state support 
measures provided within SEZs included tax an d customs duty preferences aimed at attracting 
investments and stimulating production that were not contingent upon export performance. 
Detailed description of preferences applied in SEZs was provided in the section "Free Zones, 
Special Economic Zones".  The representative of  Kazakhstan further confirmed that preferences 
stipulated in Kazakhstan's development programmes, including the "Programme on Investment 
Attraction, Special Economic Zone Development and Export Promotion in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan for 2010-2014", were not contingent upon export performance, therefore, in her view, 
they did not represent prohibited export subsidies.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 179 - 
 
  577.  A Member expressed concern with regard to Kazakhstan's two subsidy programmes - 
Business Road Map 2020 and Government Resolution No. 1017.  In his view, certain aspects of these programmes appeared to constitute prohibited export subsidies in accordance with WTO 
SCM Agreement.  This Member sought Kazakhstan's review of this legislation and amendment 
prior to conclusion of the negotiations to eliminate the possibility of prohibited subsidization.  In 
response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that in order to bring its subsidy 
programmes into compliance with the WTO SCM Agreement, the Government of Kazakhstan was 
working on introduction of amendments into these two legislative acts.  In particular, the target 
indicators in relation to export promotion and other references to export performance would be 
excluded from the Programme Business Road Map 2020.  The Government Resolution No. 1017 
would be abolished.  These amendments would be enacted by the date of Kazakhstan's accession 
to the WTO. 
578.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to confirm that it would eliminate all prohibited subsidies 
within the meaning of Article 3 of the WTO SC M Agreement and Article XVI of the GATT 1994, at 
all levels of Government, which were contingent upon export performance or the use of domestic 
over imported goods as of the date of accession.  Kazakhstan was also asked to confirm that it 
would administer any subsidy programmes in place or established after accession at all levels of 
Government in conformity with the WTO SCM Agreement.  This Member requested Kazakhstan to 
provide a draft of its subsidies notification f under Article 25 of the WTO SCM Agreement to the 
Working Party for review, noting that it would be difficult to conclude discussions on this section without it. 
579.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, except as otherwise provided in the 
Working Party Report, upon accession, Kazakhstan would eliminate all subsidies programmes, 
[including provisions contained in its  development programmes providing benefits for 
exporting firms contingent upon their export performance,]  administered within its territory 
falling within the scope of Article 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures or modify these programmes so that any subsidy provided would not be contingent, de 
jure or de facto , upon export performance, or on the use of domestic over imported goods.  She 
also confirmed that any subsidy programme in place or established after accession within the 
territory of Kazakhstan would be administered in conformity with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies 
and Countervailing Measures.  In addition, the Republic of Kazakhstan would provide a subsidies notification prepared in accordance with Ar ticle 25 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures to the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures as provided 
for in Table 4 of this Report.  She also confirmed that Kazakhstan would not invoke any of the 
provisions of Articles 27 and 28 of the WTO Agreem ent on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 180 - 
 
  - Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification 
(a) Legal Framework 580.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that her country's legal framework for technical 
regulations, standards and conformity assessmen t systems had been governed by the national 
legislation of Kazakhstan until 1 January 2010.  At that time, international agreements of the CU 
and other CU legal instruments also had become  relevant.  As of 1 January 2015, the CU legal 
instruments were incorporated into the EAEU legal framework, including technical regulations of 
the CU which became technical regulations of the EAEU.  This legal framework required certain 
products circulating in the territories of the EA EU member States to meet established technical 
regulations, as well as sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) requirements established as technical 
regulations.  In particular, trade (including both importation and circulation in the domestic market) in products on the territory of Kazakhstan could be restricted or banned if the products in 
question did not meet these requirements.  The EAEU member States had agreed to harmonize 
their policies and regulatory systems in the area  of technical regulation and to intensify their 
cooperation in this area within the framework of the EAEU.  The goal of this harmonization was to 
ensure uniform requirements for the circulation of goods within the territories of the 
EAEU member States in the area of technical regulation, through common technical regulations of 
the EAEU.  These technical regulations were applied directly in the territory of Kazakhstan, and no 
separate national legislation was necessary.  The provisions of the EAEU Treaty and other EAEU 
legal instruments were based on the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), and technical regulations were applied with the purpose of protecting human  life and 
(or) health, property, environment, animal and pl ant life and (or) health, and preventing actions 
that might mislead consumers, as well as for the pu rpose of ensuring energy efficiency and saving 
resources.  The representative of Kazakhstan emphasized that technical regulations adopted and 
applied within the EAEU were not adopted for any other purposes. 
581.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal basis for the common policy was 
Section X (Articles 51-55) "Technical Regulation" and Annexes Nos. 9-11 of the EAEU Treaty. 
These provisions replaced the Agreement on Unifor m Principles and Rules of Technical Regulation 
in the Republic of Belarus, Republic of Kazakh stan and the Russian Federation of 18 November 
2010; and the CU Agreement on the Circulation of Goods Subject to Mandatory Conformity 
Assessment on the Customs Territory of Cust oms Union of 11 December 2009, which were 
terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015. The Regulation on 
Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellati on of Technical Regulations of the Customs 
Union adopted by the Decision of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 48 of 20 
June 2012 (hereafter:  EEC Council Decision No. 48) remained in force.  From 1 January 2015 
these provisions of the EAEU Treaty and EEC Council Decision  No. 48  established the main 
instruments of the common policy applied in Kazakhstan in the following areas: 
- harmonization of national legislation in the area of technical regulation; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 181 - 
 
  - development and adoption of technical regulations of the EAEU stipulating mandatory and 
binding requirements for the goods subject to technical regulation; 
- implementation of common procedure on development of technical regulations in the 
territory of each EAEU member State; 
- harmonization of standards and the implementation of relevant international standards as 
a basis for the elaboration of technical regulations; 
- implementation of common forms and rules for conformity assessment; 
- conducting conformity assessment (confirmation of compliance ) of products or product-
related production processes, installation, setup, operation (use), storage, carrying 
(transportation), sale and disposal, including testing and certification;   
- accreditation of certification (confirmation of compliance ) bodies and test laboratories 
(centres) participating in the process of mandatory confirmation of conformity; and, 
- coherent policies in the area of traceability.  
582.  She added that paragraph 7 of Annex No. 9 "Protocol on Technical Regulation within the 
Eurasian Economic Union" to the EAEU Treaty provided for the development of a unified list of 
goods subject to mandatory conformity assessment within the EAEU for which it was possible to 
issue a certificate and to register a declaratio n of conformity assessment using a common form 
during the transition period, until the adoption of  technical regulations of the EAEU.  The unified 
list had been established by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010 "On Technical 
Regulation in the Customs Union" (hereafter:  CU Commission Decision No. 319) and later 
replaced by the CU Commission Decision No. 620 of 7 April 2011 "On the New Version of the 
Unified List with Regard to Products Subject  to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation 
of Compliance ) within the Framework of the C ustoms Union with Issuance of Single Documents, 
approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" (hereinafter – the Unified List 
approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620).  The Unified List included products for which the 
EAEU member States:  (i) establis hed similar mandatory requirements; (ii) used similar conformity 
assessment schemes; and, (iii) used similar or comparable testing and measurement methods.  
Initially, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Expl anatory Note 1 to the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620, a declaration of conformity based on the EAEU common form 
could not be used for goods produced by foreign manufacturers located outside the territory of the 
EAEU.  However, CU Commission Decision No. 620 still provided for the possibility of using a 
certificate of conformity for such goods base d on the EAEU common form.  In Kazakhstan, a 
declaration of conformity for goods manufactured outside of Kazakhstan could be done under Law 
No. 603 "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004 (hereafter - Law "On Technical 
Regulation"). 
583.  Some Members expressed their concern that under CU Commission Decision No. 620 
foreign manufacturers not located on the territory of the EAEU, in contrast to manufacturers 
located within the territory of the EAEU, did not ha ve the option to use declarations of conformity 
based on the EAEU common form.  For these Member s, this constituted discrimination in breach of 
the TBT Agreement.  These Members sought a co mmitment that Kazakhstan, by the date of its 
accession, would eliminate this discriminatory treatment. 
584.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in order to comply with the WTO TBT 
Agreement, and in particular Article 2.1 thereo f, discriminatory treatment had been eliminated 
through the amendment of CU Commission Decision  No. 620 of 7 April 2011 "On the Unified List's WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 182 - 
 
  Update with Regard to Products Subjected to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) 
within the Framework of the CU with Issuance of Single Documents, approved by the CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" , to ensure that foreign manufacturers not 
located within the territory of the EAEU would be able to demonstrate the conformity of the 
products imported into the territory of the EAEU through use of declarations of conformity using 
the EAEU common form.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.  
585.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the amendments to Decision No. 620, 
which provided for a possibility for foreign manufacturers located outside the EAEU territory to 
demonstrate the conformity of products imported into the EAEU territory through the use of 
declaration of conformity of a common EAEU form, did not affect the possibility for foreign 
manufactures to issue declaration of conformity in accordance with national legislation of the EAEU member States (i.e. in Kazakhstan - in accordan ce with Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation").  
Currently, in accordance with Decision No. 620, depending on where the product was going to be 
circulated – in Kazakhstan or the EAEU, at the a pplicants choice, conformity of goods produced by 
foreign manufacturers located outside the EAEU terr itory could be demonstrated either through the 
use of declaration of conformity of the EAEU common form, or declaration of conformity in 
accordance with the national legislation of the EAEU member State. 
586.  The representative of Kazakhstan further ex plained that CU Commission Decision No. 319 
also determined the criteria for inclusion of conf ormity assessment bodies and testing laboratories 
into the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and Testing Laboratories of the CU (hereinafter – 
the Unified Register) and established the rules for development and maintenance of the Unified 
List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 and Unified Register by national authorised 
bodies.  CU Commission Decision No. 319 also established the regulations for importation of 
products listed on the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620.  Currently, the 
new Regulation on the Procedures for Importatio n to the CU Territory of Goods (Products) in 
Respect of which Mandatory Requirements are Established within the Customs Union had been 
adopted by the EEC Collegium Decision No. 294 of  25 December 2012 (hereinafter - Regulation on 
Procedures for Importation of Goods).  Annex No . 11 "Protocol on Acceptance of The Results of 
Works on Accreditation of The Conformity Assessment Bodies" to the EAEU Treaty, which replaced 
the Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Accreditation of Certification (Assessment (Confirmation 
of Compliance)) Bodies and Test Laboratories (Centres) that Perform Work on the Assessment (Confirmation) of Compliance of 11 December 2009, stipulated the principles for a common EAEU 
system of mutual recognition of accreditation, the responsibilities of the accreditation bodies of the 
EAEU member States, and general principles of accreditation, pending gradual replacement of this 
mutual recognition system by adoption and application of common technical regulations of the 
EAEU by the EAEU member States. 
587.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on the provisions of the new 
regulation governing importation of products to the EAEU territory.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 183 - 
 
  established unified procedures for importation of products, included into (i) the Unified List of 
Products, in Respect of Which Mandatory Requirements are  Established in the Frame of the Customs Union, approved by CU Commission De cision No. 526 of 28 January 2011 (hereafter:  the 
Unified List of Products approved by CU Comm ission Decision No. 526); (ii) the Unified List 
approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620; and, (iii) the lists of products for which a customs 
declaration had to be submitted to customs authority along with a document confirming 
compliance with mandatory requirements.  The Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods 
elaborated in detail the provisions of the currently applied regulation adopted by CU Commission 
Decision No. 319.  The Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods stipulated the list of 
customs procedures, under which customs authorities required submission of documents 
confirming compliance of products (goods) with mandatory requirements or information about such documents (production for domestic consumption, temporary importation, free customs zone, 
free warehouse, re-import).  Moreover, the Regulation on Procedures for Importation of Goods 
specified categories of products (goods), for which submission of documents confirming the 
compliance of products (goods) with mandatory requirements or information concerning such 
documents was not required.  These categories, for example, included used goods, and goods 
imported in limited quantities for personal  use or for scientific research purposes. 
588.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify the difference between the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620 and the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 526.  The Representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Unified List approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 620 was provisionally applied in order to ensure free movement of 
goods on the CU territory until adoption of relevant  technical regulations of the EAEU.  It included 
products for which EAEU member States:  
- established similar mandatory requirements;  
- used similar conformity assessment schemes; and, - used similar or comparable testing and measurement methods.  
589.  In accordance with the Explanatory Notes to the Unified List approved by CU Commission 
Decision No. 620, for products included in the list, at the applicant's choice, certificates of 
conformity or declarations of conformity of a common EAEU form, or certificates of conformity or 
declaration of conformity issued according to the national legislation of the EAEU member States, 
could be used.  Products included into the Un ified List approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 620 could move freely within the entire EAEU territory if they had undergone conformity assessment procedures in one of the EAEU member States and the following conditions were met: 
- certificates of conformity or declarations of conformity of a common EAEU form were 
issued;  
- the certifying body was included into the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and 
 Testing Laboratories of the EAEU; and, 
- the testing laboratory was included into the Unified Register of Certification Bodies and  Testing Laboratories of the EAEU.  
She further clarified that in accordance with  CU Commission Decision No. 620, as amended 
by EEC Collegium Decision No. 69 of 13 May 2014 , applicants had an opportunity to choose WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 184 - 
 
  between the conformity confirmations documents of a common EAEU form or conformity 
confirmation documents issued in accordance with the legislation of the EAEU member States.  However, the form of conformity assessment that could be used for a particular product, i.e. 
whether it had to be declaration of conformity or certification, was established in the Unified List 
approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 (her einafter:  the Unified List) and it was not per 
applicant's choice. In particular, in the Unified List for each product there was reference indicating 
what form of the conformity assessment procedures had to be used:  1 – certification; 2 - 
declaration of conformity based on evidence ac quired with the third party participation; 3 – 
declaration of conformity based on applicant's own evidences.  Conformity assessment form for 
each product was established based on the level of  risk that a particular product posed to human 
life and health. 
590.  Products not included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 
were subject to mandatory conformity assessment (confirmation of conformity) according to the 
national legislation of the EAEU member States.  Products for which technical regulations of the 
EAEU were adopted had to be excluded from the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 620.  She further explained that the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526 
included product groups for which technical regu lations of the EAEU had to be developed.  
For products included into the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 526, for which 
no relevant technical regulations of the EAEU had been yet enforced, EAEU member States applied 
national technical regulations.  However, the EAEU member States could not apply national technical regulations to products not included in the Unified List approved by CU Commission 
Decision No. 526. 
591.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that in accordance with paragraph 1 Article 
52 of the EAEU Treaty, technical regulations of  the EAEU could only be developed for goods 
included into the Unified List of Products adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  The list 
included 61 product groups, including:  (i) machinery and equipment; (ii) low voltage equipment, 
(iii) high-voltage equipment; (iv) devices operating on gaseous fuels; (v) equipment operating 
under excess pressure; (vi) agricultural machinery; (vii) products of light industry; (viii) toys; (ix) 
tobacco products; (x) furniture; (xi) packaging; (xii) animal feedstuff; (xiii) personal protection 
equipment; (xiv) detergents; (xv) food products; and, (xvi) coal and its products, etc.  The list 
could be expanded by decisions of the Eurasian Ec onomic Commission if new risks were identified.  
Thus, the Unified List adopted by the CU Commi ssion Decision No. 526, had been amended by the 
EEС Council Decision No. 102 of 23 November 2012.  In particular, six product groups had been 
added into the Unified List adopted by CU Comm ission Decision No. 526: (i) liquefied petroleum 
gas used as fuel; (ii) materials contacting human skin; (iii) products intended for civil defence and 
protection of natural and man-made disasters; (iv) oil, prepared for transportation and use; 
(v) combustible natural gas, prepared for transporta tion and use; and, (vi) mainline pipelines for 
transportation of liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons .  One product group – alternative fuels – had 
been excluded from the Unified List adopted by  CU Commission Decision No. 526.  Thus, at 
present, the Unified List included 66 product groups. She further explained that for products WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 185 - 
 
  included into the Unified List approved by Decision No. 526, for which no relevant technical 
regulations of the EAEU had been enforced, national  technical regulations were applied.  The EAEU 
member States could not at the national level maintain mandatory requirement to products not 
included in the Unified List approved by De cision No. 526. The Unified List adopted by 
CU Commission Decision No. 526 was provided in Annex 17 of this Report.  Of these initial 
61 products included into the list, 47 had been iden tified as priority products for development and 
adoption of technical regulations of the EAEU.  The schedule for development of priority technical 
regulations of the EAEU was provided in CU Commission Decision No. 492 of 8 December 2010 "On 
Schedule of Development of Priority Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" (hereafter:  CU 
Commission Decision No. 492).  By the end of 2 012, of 47 technical regulations of the EAEU 
stipulated in CU Commission Decision No. 492, 31 technical regulations had been adopted.    Sixteen technical regulations of the EAEU (out of 47 technical regulations) that had not been 
developed by that time were included into the new Schedule for Development of Technical 
Regulations of the Customs Union for 2012-2013 adopted by the EEC Council Decision No. 103 of 
23 November 2012 (hereinafter - EEC Council Decision No. 103).  The new schedule envisaged the 
development of 29 technical regulations.  Kazakhstan was responsible for the development of 
7 draft technical regulations.  As of May 2014, 34 technical regulations of the EAEU had been 
adopted and 26 technical regulations had entered into force.  The remaining 8 technical 
regulations would enter into force not later than 15 February 2015. 
592.  A Member enquired about the criteria that were used to place 61 products on the Unified 
List approved  by CU Commission Decision No. 526.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that the Unified List of Products for which Mandatory Requirements were Established within the 
Framework of  the EAEU was formed on the basis of proposals from EAEU member States, 
including stakeholders and the business community, as well as proposals of the Commission.  
Initially, national lists of products subject to mandatory conformity assessment of the EAEU 
member States were used as a basis for development of the Unified List of Products for which 
Mandatory Requirements were E stablished within the Framework of the EAEU .  For determining 
products to be included into the List, the EAEU member States assessed the risk (potential hazard) 
that these products posed to human life and/or health, environment, animal and plant live and/or 
health.  New products could be added into the List if new risks were identified.  In forming the 
Unified list, the EAEU member States mainly focused on mutually traded products.  A draft 
consolidated List of Goods for which Mandatory Requirements were E stablished within the 
Framework of the  EAEU, prepared by the Department of Technical Regulation and Accreditation 
of the EEC on the basis of proposals from the EAEU member States, was circulated to the 
member States for review.  When approved by the EAEU member States, the draft list was 
considered by the Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary, 
Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures.  Upon endo rsement of the Committee, the draft list had to 
be submitted to the EEC Collegium and then to the EEC Council for approval.  Similar procedures 
were used to introduce amendments into the Unified List approved by CU Commission Decision 
No. 620  (inclusion and exclusion of products into/from the Unified List).   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 186 - 
 
  593.  Once technical regulations of the EAEU came in to effect, they applied with direct effect, 
and relevant national requirements, established by laws of the EAEU member States, could no longer be applied on the territories of those member States.  In order to implement this provision, 
national technical regulations for products towards which relevant technical regulations were 
a d o p t e d ,  w e r e  r e p e a l e d  b y  a  r e s o l u t i o n  o f  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n .   
The EAEU member States ensured release of products that conformed to CU technical regulations 
into circulation without laying out additional requirements other than those contained in the 
technical regulations of the EAEU and without carrying out additional conformity assessment 
procedures.  In order to ensure the comparability of conformity assessment results with technical 
regulations of the EAEU, the EAEU member States carried out coordinated policy aimed at ensuring 
measurements uniformity.  As of May 2014, the Commission had adopted 34 priority  technical regulations which would enter into force no later than 15 February 2015, after a transitional period 
which allowed producers, importers, and exporter s to become acquainted with the new technical 
regulations prior to their application.  By that date, all other national mandatory technical 
requirements applied on the territory of EAEU member States would be replaced by technical 
regulations of the EAEU or wo uld no longer be applied. 
594.  The domestic legislative framework for technical regulation, standardization, certification 
and accreditation in Kazakhstan was based on the Law "On Technical Regulation", which had 
replaced Laws No. 433-1 "On Standardization" of 16 July 1999 and No. 434-1 "On Certification" of 
16 July 1999.  In her view, the new Law took into account the main principles of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement), including inter alia  national 
treatment, transparency, and priority consideration given to international standards in drawing up 
domestic technical regulations and standards.  This Law was the basis for the development of 
technical regulations, standards, procedures for recognition of conformity assessment and 
accreditation; it was aimed at setting a balance between the degree of government intervention 
and the goal of protecting the public.  The two main objectives of the Law were:  (i) to ensure the 
safety of products through application of mandat ory technical regulations; and (ii) to enhance 
product competitiveness through application of voluntary standards.  The Law also ensured that 
ratified international agreements had priority over the national legislation.  Existing legislation in 
the area was being brought into conformity with the Law "On Technical Regulation" and provisions 
of the TBT Agreement.  To this end, Law No . 209 "On Amendments and Addenda into Certain 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Issues of Technical Regulation" of 
29 December 2006 had introduced amendments to 33 Laws.  In addition, four new laws had been 
adopted –"On Toys Safety", "On Safety of Chem ical Products", "On Safety of Machinery and 
Equipment" and "On Food Safety".  In the area of  accreditation, two Laws had been adopted – Law 
No. 61-IV "On Accreditation in the Field of Conformity Assessment" of 5 July 2008 and Law 
No. 62-IV "On Amendments and Addenda in Certain Legislative Acts on the Issues of 
Accreditation" of 5 July 2008.  These Laws were aimed at building the legal framework for 
accreditation and harmonizing accreditation requirements with international standards, including 
those of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) and the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC).  In addition, new regulatory acts on technical regulation were being developed WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 187 - 
 
  and existing ones were being revised.  She held  the view that the provisions of the national 
legislation in this area could not constitute a barrier to trade. 
595.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that with the establishment of the CU regime on 
1 January 2010, and the entry into force of th e EAEU Treaty on 1 January 2015, EAEU legal 
instruments implementing the EAEU policy on technical regulation substantially had replaced Law 
No. 603 "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004 as the overall legal framework for 
technical regulations, standards, and conformity  assessment systems in Kazakhstan.  However, 
certain provisions of the Law "On Technical Regulation" remained in effect to the extent they did 
not conflict with the relevant CU and EAEU legal instruments, including Commission Decisions.  
Development and application of standards, confor mity assessment, State control and supervision, 
metrological control, and liability issues in Kazakhstan would continue to be administered at the national level under the EAEU regime, with regard to the following issues: 
- national standards within the meaning of the TBT Agreement (development, adoption) and 
standards of organizations;  
- State control and supervision (inspection) to ensure compliance with the requirements of 
technical regulations; 
- assurance of uniformity of measurements; 
- violations of technical regulations and withdr awal of products from the domestic market;  
- operation of the national aspects of developing and maintaining the system of certificates 
of conformity assessment and declarations of conformity, including national part of the 
Unified Register of certificates and declarations; 
- operation of the national aspects of developing and maintaining the system of certification 
bodies and testing laboratories (centres) of the EAEU, including accreditation and national 
part of the Unified Register of certification bodies and testing laboratories; 
- voluntary conformity assessment;  
- rights and obligations of applicants in the field of mandatory conformity assessment;  
- coordination of activities, positions and procedures of the Government in the field of 
technical regulation; 
- procedures for determination of liability in the case of violation of technical regulations and 
sanctions until the decision to transfer these issues to the EAEU was made; 
- providing required transparency; and, 
- financing in the field of technical regulation. 
596.  Asked to elaborate on the status of Kazakhstan's other legislation after 1 January 2010, 
the Representative of Kazakhstan noted that the national legislation in the field of the technical 
regulation was being brought into complia nce with the CU, and after 1 January 2015, 
EAEU legislation.  In particular, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Amendments and 
Additions to Some Legislative Acts of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology" had been adopted on 10 July 2012.  This Law had introduced amendments and 
addenda to eight Codes and 22 Laws of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan.  The Law had excluded the 
Government's competence to adopt technical regulations due to the development of common technical regulations of the EAEU and transfer of the authority to adopt technical regulations of the 
EAEU to the Eurasian Economic Commission.  The Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan only 
reviewed and approved draft technical regulation s of the EAEU prior to their adoption by the 
Eurasian Economic Commission.  The Law also provided for the harmonization of terms in the field 
of technical regulation with the EAEU legislation.  In particular, the terms 'state system of technical 
regulation', 'register of state system of technical regulation', 'compulsory certification', 'uniform WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 188 - 
 
  state fund', 'normative technical documents', 'documents in the field of conformity confirmation', 
'standard', 'testing laboratory', 'standard of the organization' were introduced or modified.  Moreover, the Law had introduced new provisions to the Law on Technical Regulation that reflected 
Kazakhstan's commitments undertaken in the course of WTO accession process and were aimed at 
bringing the national legislation in line with international practice.  In particular, a new article on 
the Information Centre reflected Kazakhstan's commitment under the TBT Agreement to establish 
an enquiry and notification point.  Article 24 of  the amended Law provided for an application of 
international and regional standards, recommendations and guidelines, and normative documents 
of foreign countries.  Moreover, the new article on Uniform State Fund of Normative Technical 
Documents that contained information on all adopted standards, classifiers of technical and 
economic information and normative technical documents had been introduced by the Law in to the Law on Technical Regulation.  On 1 January 2015, CU authorities in the sphere of technical 
regulation were transferred to the EAEU. 
(b) Institutions 
597.  Section X and Annexes Nos. 9-11 of the EAEU Treaty provided for the transfer of a 
substantial share of competences in the field of technical regulation from the national level to the 
EAEU level.  In particular, each EAEU member State delegated the authority to establish 
mandatory State requirements for products to the Commission, i.e. sovereign rule-making in this area was excluded.  None of the member States was eligible to establish additional mandatory 
requirements at the national level other than those established in the technical regulations of the 
EAEU. 
598.  As of 2 February 2012, when the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Commission 
(hereinafter – Commission or EEC) signed on 18 November 2011 was enacted, the competences of 
the CU Commission were transferred to the EEC.  According to the Treaty on EEC of 18 November 
2011, the competences in the field of technical re gulation were divided between the EEC Council, 
responsible for the overall regulation of inte gration processes, and the EEC Collegium, the 
executive body of the EEC that made proposals fo r further integration.  The EEC Council exercised 
the following functions: 
- approval of the unified list of products in respect of which mandatory requirements were 
established within the framework of the EEC, and of the procedure of its maintenance; 
- approval of the plans for  developmen t of technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- adoption, amendment and cancellation of technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- approval of the common forms of confor mity assessment (confirmation) documents  
(declaration of conformity with the techni cal regulations of the EAEU, certificate of 
conformity with the technical regulations of the EAEU); 
- establishment of the procedure for developmen t, adoption, amendment and cancellation of 
technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- approval of the Common Mark of Circulation of Products on the Markets of the member 
States of the EAEU; and, 
- approval of the regulation on the Common Ma rk of Circulation of Products on the Markets 
of the member States of the EAEU and the procedure for its use. 
The EEC Council adopted its decisions by consensu s.  The EEC Collegium approved, by qualified 
majority: WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 189 - 
 
  - the List of international and regional standa rds, and in case of their absence – national 
(State) standards, application of which, on a voluntary basis, ensured compliance with the 
technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- procedures for development of the List of inte rnational and regional standards, and in case 
of their absence – national (State) standards, the application of which, on a voluntary 
basis, ensured compliance with the technical regulations of the EAEU; 
- standard schemes of conformity assessment (confirmation); and, 
- approval of the regulation on procedure of importation into the customs territory of the 
EAEU of products in respect of which mandat ory requirements were established within the 
framework of the EAEU. 
599.  The EEC Collegium was responsible for implementation of the EEC Council Decisions.  
In the field of technical regulation its work was conducted by the Department on Technical 
Regulation and Accreditation.  In addition, th e EEC Collegium Decision No. 11 of 7 March 2012 
established the Consultative Committee on Technical Regulation, Application of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Measures (hereafter:  the Consultative Committee).  The Consultative Committee 
was an advisory body that developed proposals fo r the EEC Collegium on technical regulations and 
the application of sanitary, veterinary and phytosan itary measures on the basis of agreed positions 
of the authorised bodies of the EAEU member St ates.  Sub-committees were established under the 
Consultative Committee, including the Sub-committee on Standardization and Uniformity of 
Measurements.   
600.  In response to a specific question from a Member, the Representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that the change of the CU Commissi on to the EEC on 1 July 2012 did not lead to 
changes in Kazakhstan's legal basis in the field of technical regulations.  The creation of the EEC 
involved only changes in the structure of the Commission and its decision-making process.  
601.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that draft technical regulations were developed in 
member States using internal procedures before being proposed by the authorised national bodies 
in the field of technical regulation to the designated EAEU Bodies for harmonization, further 
review, and adoption as provided for in the relevant  international agreements or decisions.  In the 
EAEU framework, the coordination and transparency  functions were fulfilled by the Consultative 
Committee, which received draft technical regulations from the authorised bodies of the EAEU member States, coordinated the developmen t of the draft text and resolved disputes 
concerning it among the EAEU member States' authorities.  The Consultative Committee, with the 
assistance of the Eurasian Economic Commission, then circulated the draft technical regulation for 
public review and comments, and prepared analysis and recommendations on the draft technical 
regulations before forwarding the proposals for adoption by the Eurasian Economic Commission. 
602.  At the national level, the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry 
of Investments and Development  of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter – the Committee) was 
the competent authority in the field of technical regulation.  Its competences were stipulated in 
Article 7 of the Law "On Technical Regulation", and among others included:  (i) participation in 
development of the State system of technical regula tion; (ii) implementation of the state policy in 
the field of technical regulation; (iii) cross-sectoral coordination of activities of public authorities, 
individuals and legal entities in the field of techni cal regulation; (iv) representation of the Republic WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 190 - 
 
  of Kazakhstan in international and regional organizations for standardization, conformity 
assessment and accreditation; (v) organization and coordination of work on state control over compliance with requirements established by technical regulations; (vi) establishment of 
procedures for the development, approval, regi stration, approval, verification, amendment, 
termination and enactment of national standards; and, (vii) establishment of national forms of 
certificates of conformity and declarations of conformity.  The Committee had three subordinate 
organizations:  the Institute of Metrology, the Institute for Standardization and Certification, and 
the National Center for Accreditation.  The Institute of Metrology was a national institution with the 
primary task of improving the technical (etalon) base and harmonization of normative documents 
in the field of metrology to ensure uniformity of  measurements with international requirements.  
The Institute for Standardization and Certification was created for development and enhancement the legal and normative basis in the field of technical regulation in order to ensure safety and 
quality of products, works and services, and its harmonization with international requirements.  
The National Center for Accreditation was a national accreditation body that carried out its 
activities under the Law "On Accreditation in the Field of Conformity Assessment".  
(c) Technical Regulations, International and National Standards, and Conformity 
Assessment Procedures 
- (i) Technical Regulations 603.  The technical regulations of the EAEU were ad opted only with the purpose of:  protecting 
human, animal and plant life or health, property, and the environment; ensuring energy efficiency 
and resource saving; preventing practices that might mislead consumers (paragraph 1 of Article 52 to the EAEU Treaty).  The EAEU member States were not allowed to adopt technical 
regulations of the EAEU for any other purposes.  Technical regulations of the EAEU established 
requirements for products and product-related processes: of design, production, installation, 
maintenance, operation, storage, transportation, real isation and utilisation, as well as identification 
rules and conformity assessment forms and schemes, and could also contain requirements for 
terminology, packaging, labelling and sanitary re quirements and procedures, as well as veterinary-
sanitary and quarantine phytosanitary requirements of a general nature.  Technical regulations of 
the EAEU had to be developed in accordance with recommendations on a model structure laid 
down in Resolution of the Interstate Council of the EurAsEC No. 321 of 21 October 2006, which 
was still used even though technical regulations were not developed through the EurAsEC 
institutions, because no recommendation on the model structure of the technical regulations had been adopted within the EAEU.  The representative of Kazakhstan affirmed that paragraph 3 of 
Annex No. 9 to the  EAEU Treaty established that  the relevant international standards and other 
documents (i.e., rules, directives and recommendations or any other documents accepted by 
international standardizing organizations) would be used as the basis for elaboration of technical 
regulations of the EAEU, except in cases where such documents were absent, or did not conform 
to the purposes of the technical regulations of the EAEU, in particular, due to climatic and 
geographical factors or technological and other particularities.  CU Commission Decision No. 527 
“On Normative Acts of the Commission of th e Customs Union in the Field of Technical WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 191 - 
 
  Regulation” of 28 January 2011 , which stipulated regulations for development, adoption, 
amendment and cancellation of technical regulations on the territories of the EAEU member States, had been replaced by a new regula tion adopted by EEC Council Decision No. 48.  
The new Regulation stipulated in more detailed way provisions on development of draft technical 
regulations, including public consultation proced ures, preparation of draft technical regulations 
with due account of comments and proposals provid ed during public consultations.  She further 
noted that currently the EurAsEC did not play any role in technical regulation for the EAEU.  
Development of EurAsEC technical regulations had been suspended by the De cision of the EurAsEC 
Interstate Council No. 575 “On Elimination of Technical Ba rriers in Mutual Trade between 
EurAsEC Member States on the Basis of th e System of Technical Regulation of the 
Customs Union” of 19 October 2011.  Currently, only technical regulations of the EAEU were 
being developed. 
604.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 48, technical regulations of the EAEU were  developed in accordance with the plan on 
development of technical regulations.  The plan was prepared on the basis of proposals from the 
EAEU member States or the EEC, agreed by the member States and approved by the EEC Council.  
The member State (or the Commission) responsible for the development of a draft technical 
regulation was determined in the plan.  The memb er State responsible for the development of the 
draft technical regulation designated a state bo dy responsible for the development of the draft 
technical regulation (hereinafter – the Develope r of draft technical regulation).  All EAEU 
member States determined the state bodies participating in the development of the draft technical 
regulation.  The state body was selected taking in to account the relevant competence of the state 
body in the sphere where the technical regulation was planned to be developed.  In Kazakhstan, 
the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology under the Ministry of Investments and 
Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan deve loped a draft document On Designation of State 
Bodies Responsible for Development of Technical Regulations of the EAEU.  The draft document 
was sent to State bodies for approval and was adopted by the Protocol of the Commission on the 
Issues of Technical Regulation and Metrology established by the Government Resolution No. 558 of 
12 June 2010.  To date, Kazakhstan had developed nine technical regulations of the EAEU with the 
following state bodies designated as the Developer of the draft technical regulation: 
- On Safety of Grain; On Safety of Meat and Meat Products – the Ministry of Agriculture; 
- On Safety of Elevators; On Safety of Explosives and Product on their Basis;  
- On Safety of Equipment Working under Excess Pr essure – the Ministry of Internal Affairs;  
- On Requirements to Automotive and Aviation Petrol, Diesel Fuel, Fuel for Jet Engines and 
Fuel Oil – the Ministry of Energy; 
- On Safety of Products of Light Industry – the Ministry of Investments and Development; 
- On Safety of Products of Dietary, Special and Medicinal and Prophylactic Nutrition; and, 
- On Safety of Food Additives, Flavourings and Processing Aids; On Safety of Explosives and 
Products on their Basis – the Ministry of Public Health and Social Development. 
605.  The Developer of the draft technical regulati on prepared the first draft and, based on 
proposals from the competent authorities of the EAEU member States, formed a working group for 
the development of the draft technical regulation.  The working group included representatives of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 192 - 
 
  standardization bodies, industry and business re presentatives.  The Developer of the draft 
technical regulation informed the EEC and othe r EAEU member States about the creation and 
composition of the working group. 
606.  In reply to a specific question, the Representative of Kazakhstan explained that under 
official EAEU procedures, natural and legal pers ons of EAEU member States could propose draft 
technical regulations and supporting materials for their development, but they could not act as an 
official Developer of draft technical regulation of the EAEU.  In accordance with Article 25 of the 
Law "On Technical Regulation" natural and legal pe rsons could participate in the working groups 
and could submit proposals on draft technical regu lations, as well as their own draft technical 
regulations, to the national body responsible fo r development of the draft technical regulation.  
Moreover, natural and legal persons could also submit proposals on development, amendment, 
cancellation of technical regulations and standards, and draft normative acts in the field of 
technical regulation to the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  Upon their review the Committee would submit the consolidated proposal from 
Kazakhstan to the EEC.  
607.  Upon completion of the first draft technical regulation, the Developer of draft technical 
regulation sent the draft, an explanatory note, and the notification on development of the technical 
regulation to the EEC (electronic and hard copy).   The explanatory note to the draft technical 
regulation had to include: 
- the purpose of the technical regulation; 
- structure and general characteristics of the objects of the technical regulation; 
- main groups of business or other activities, other interested persons whose interests would 
be affected by technical regulations; 
- a list of international, regional and nation al (State) standards, requirements of other 
documents (regulations, directives and recommendations and other documents adopted by 
international organizations), and in case of their absence - regional documents 
(regulations, directives, decisions, regulations, and other documents), national technical 
regulations, on the basis of which the draft technical regulation was developed; 
- requirements that differed from provisions of international, regional standards or 
mandatory requirements in force on the territory of the member States with a brief 
rationale for their introduction; 
- information on the compliance of the draft technical regulation with the requirements 
ensuring the uniformity of measurements; and, 
- the expected date of implementation of th e requirements established by the technical 
regulation. 
Notification on the development of the draft tech nical regulation had to be made in accordance 
with the prescribed form and include the following information: 
- the member State responsible for the development of the draft; 
- the authorised body of the member State th at was responsible for the development of the 
draft (developer of the technical regulation); 
- draft title of the technical regulation; 
- object of the technical regulation; 
- purpose of the development of the technical regulation; 
- reason for the development of the technical regulation; 
- mailing address, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address for comments and 
proposals (review) on the draft; and, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 193 - 
 
  - expected date of completion of public consultations (final date for providing comments and 
proposals (reviews) on the draft). 
The EEC sent these documents to the member States within five working days from the date of 
receipt of the mentioned materials. 
608.  The EEC ensured the consideration of the first version of the draft technical regulation and 
related set of documents at the meeting of the Consultative Committee.  Following the 
consideration by the Consultative Committee, the decision on possibility, starting date and period 
of public consultations on the draft technical regulation was made, which was formalised by a 
Protocol.  If necessary, the Developer of the draft technical regulation within the period established 
by the Consultative Committee revised the draft technical regulation and the set of related 
document.  
609.  The notification on the draft technical regulation was published on the official website of 
the Eurasian Economic Commission (h ttp://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act 
/texnreg/deptexreg/tr/Pages/projectsPublic.aspx), the Committee for Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry of Investments and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
(www.memst.kz), the TBT/SPS Enquiry Point (www. wto.memst.kz), as well as in the official 
publication "Bulletin of the Enquiry Point on TBT/SPS".  The Enquiry Point would notify the WTO of 
a draft technical regulation that would affect international trade approximately at the same time 
when it was published for public consultations.
  This would allow to synchronize the process of 
receiving comments through both mechanisms.   The representative of Kazakhstan also clarified 
that in cases when the deadline established in th e notification to the WTO exceeded the public 
consultation period, EAEU member States would st ill continue to consider comments received from 
WTO Members. 
610.  The period of public consultations of the draft technical regulation (from the moment of 
publication of notification on the development up to the moment of publication of notification on 
the completion of public consultation) had to be no less than 60 calendar days.  The public 
consultations period was closed by publishing a notification about the closure of public 
consultations on the draft technical regulation on the official website of the EEC.  The EEC 
processed comments and proposals received from interested parties during public consultations 
and sent them to the Developer of draft technical regulation. 
611.  The Developer of the draft technical regulation within 30 working days from the date it 
received consolidated comments from the EEC, revised the draft technical regulation and the 
related documents taking into account comments and proposals received during the public 
consultations.  The revised draft technical regulati on, the protocol of the meetings of the working 
group, and the consolidated comments were sent to the EEC.  The EEC sent the draft technical 
regulation and related documents to the member St ates for their internal approval and published 
them on the official website.  Upon completion of the internal approval of the draft technical 
regulations by the member States, the draft tech nical regulation was sent to the Consultative 
Committee that submitted it to the EEC Collegium for approval.  The draft technical regulation and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 194 - 
 
  related documents, and disagreements that could not be solved during the negotiations were 
considered by the EEC Collegium.  After the co nsideration the EEC Collegium submitted the draft 
technical regulation and related documents either to the EEC Council for approval, or to the 
developer for revision.  The EEC Council adopted the final draft technical regulation at its meeting.  
612.  The Decision of the EEC Council on adoption of the technical regulation, the Decision of the 
EEC Collegium on approval of the draft technical regulation and Decision of the EEC Collegium on 
the order of entering into force of the technical regulation were published at the official website of 
the EEC.  The EEC maintained the Register of technical regulations.  Kazakhstan's Enquiry Point 
would send a copy of the final technical regulation to the WTO Members upon request, as it was 
provided in Article 10 of the TBT Agreement. 
613.  In response to the request of a Member to explain the full role that Law No. 603 
"On Technical Regulation" played in laying out the responsibilities of the developer of technical 
regulation, the representative of Kazakhstan ex plained that Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation" 
contained general provisions on the development of technical regulations.  In accordance with the 
Law, state bodies authorized to establish mandatory rules and norms had to prepare proposals on 
development, amendment or cancellation of technical regulations taking into account proposals of 
interested parties, and had to submit them to the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The Law stipulated the following obligations of the 
developer of technical regulation: 
- to publish notifications about the developmen t of draft technical regulations, amendments 
 and (or) addenda, or cancellation of technical regulations, in the official publications and 
 public information system no later than a month after the beginning of development of 
 draft technical regulations, amendments and ( o r )  a d d e n d a ,  o r  c a n c e l l a t i o n  o f  t e c h n i c a l  
 regulations; 
- to organize public discussions of draft technical regulations; 
- to revise draft technical regulations taking into account received comments;  - to publish technical regulations in the official publication of the authorized body and public  information system; and, 
- to provide answers to comments received during the public consultation to the interested 
 parties at their request. 
614.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that EAEU member States could not 
establish additional mandatory requirements at the national level other than those established in 
the technical regulations of the EAEU.  Thus, no national technical regulations were developed in 
Kazakhstan at the moment.  Provisions of the Law "On Technical Regulation" were applied to the 
extent they did not contradict the provisions of the EAEU Treaty and Commission Decisions.  
The Law "On Technical Regulation" envisaged mandatory requirements for (i) products – aimed at 
ensuring the protection of human life and health, the environment, national security, as well as the prevention of deceptive practices; and, (ii) related processes – aimed at ensuring product safety.  
Technical regulations set forth mandatory requiremen ts for products (and processes), contained an 
exhaustive list of such requirements, and had the st atus of direct application.  These requirements 
were applied in an equal and uniform manner regardless of the product's country or place of 
origin.  Development of technical regulations was based on international and regional standards.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 195 - 
 
  Technical regulations were also aimed at eliminating technical barriers to trade and increasing 
product competitiveness. 
615.  In response to the enquiry of a Member whether any of Kazakhstan's laws referred to "sets 
of rules" as a form of mandatory requirement, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that there 
was no reference to "sets of rules" in the national legislation of Kazakhstan.   
616.  In response to a specific question, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan explained that in 
Kazakhstan, technical requirements in the fields of telecommunication and nuclear energy were 
subject to the Law on Technical Regulation of 9 November 2004.  The mandatory requirements to 
products and/or the processes of their life cycle were established in the following national technical 
regulations:  
- in the field of nuclear energy:  "Nuclear and Radiation Safety of Nuclear Power Plants", 
approved by Government Resolution No. 683 of 1 July 2010; "Nuclear and Radiation Safety 
of Nuclear Research Facilities", approved by Government Resolution of No. 684 of 
1 July 2010; and "Nuclear and Radiation Safety", approved by Government Resolution No. 768 of 30 July 2010; and, 
- in the field of telecommunications:  "Gener al Requirements for Safety, Functional and 
 Technical Requirements for Telecommunication Equipment During Search Operations", 
 approved by Government Resolution No. 805 of 6 August 2010. 
- (ii) Technical Requirements Not Su bject to Law No. 603 "On Technical  
  Regulation" 
617.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide more information on mandatory technical 
requirements that were not regulated under Law No. 603 "On Technical Regulation", and how the 
requirements of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade were applied in these areas.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan expl ained that safety requirements in the field of 
civil aviation were not regulated by the Law "On Technical Regulation" and were regulated by 
national legislation in the field of civil aviation.  Kazakhstan was a party to the Convention on 
International Civil Aviation (hereinafter - CICA) (since 1992) and the CIS Intergovernmental 
Agreement on Civil Aviation and use of Airspace (IAC).  In this regard, Kazakhstan based its civil 
aircraft certification requirements, including airworthiness requirements and certification 
procedures, on international requirements of the CICA and IAC.  In accordance with international standards of CICA, Kazakhstan developed its Law No. 339-IV "On Use of Air Apace of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 15 July 2012.  Article 16 and Chapter 5 of the Law stipulated the main 
objectives and requirements for certification in the field of civil aircraft.  Certification in the field of 
civil aircraft included confirmation of conformity of aircrafts (certification of airworthiness, 
certification of type of civil aircraft, certification of specimen of civil aircraft), aerodromes and 
aviation services to the requirements established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
in the field of use of airspace and aviation activity.  The certification was carried out by the 
competent authority in the field of civil aviation – the Civil Aviation Committee under the Ministry 
of Investments and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
618.  Civil aircrafts had to be airworthy and were allowed for exploitation with a valid certificate 
of airworthiness, which ensured compliance with the requirements approved  by the Resolution of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 196 - 
 
  the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 859 of 26 July 2011.  Certificates of 
airworthiness of civil aircrafts issued by foreign countries were recognised in accordance with Rules approved by the Order of the Acting Minister of Transport and Communication of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 112 of 3 March 2011.  
619.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all technical requirements applied to 
goods on the territory of Kazakhstan, including th ose applied as technical regulations as provided 
for in Law No. 603 of 9 November 2004 "On Technical Regulation" (as last amended on 
3 December 2013) and other national legislation, the relevant CU Agreements and other CU Acts, 
the EAEU Treaty, the relevant Commission Decisions and other EAEU legal instruments, to the 
extent that they corresponded to the definition of a "technical regulation" under the 
WTO TBT Agreement, would comply with the princi ples of the WTO TBT Agreement, relating in 
particular to transparency, predictability, and avoiding the creation of unnecessary obstacles to 
trade.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
- (iii) Voluntary National and International Standards 
620.  With regard to standards, she said that pursuant to the Law "On Technical Regulation", 
standards were applied on a voluntary basis and equally regardless of the origin of the product or 
service.  Whereas the application of a variety of standards had been foreseen (including 
international, regional and national), the application of international standards would prevail.  International or foreign countries' standards and regulations were used in drawing up national 
standards, except when such standards were inefficient or inadequate for achieving the desired 
objectives.  National standards were developed, reviewed and terminated in accordance with the 
National Standard of the Republic of Kazakhstan ST RK 1.2-2008 "Procedure for the Development 
of National (State) Standard and Standards of Organizations" and the Rules for Harmonization, 
Recording, Approval, Amendment, Cancellation and Entering into Force of National (State) 
Standards, Classifiers of Technical and Economic Information approved by Order of the Deputy 
Minister of Industry and New Technologies of th e Republic of Kazakhstan No. 40 of 23 April 2010.  
She added that the Committee on Technical Regu lation and Metrology of the Ministry of 
Investments and Development was the only authorised  State body in charge of administering work 
and issuing standards in the field of technical regulation, metrology and certification. 
621.  According to the national standard RK 1.2- 2008, requirements established in national 
standards had to be based on:  (i) the results of research and development works; (ii) patent 
research; (iii) provisions of international, regional or national standards and regulations of foreign 
countries; and/or, (iv) other official information on the latest achievements of domestic and 
foreign science, engineering and technology.  Nati onal standards were developed on objects that 
addressed tasks of national importance to prov ide safety of products and related processes 
(works), quality of services, protection of co nsumers from deceptive practice, production of 
competitive products.  National standards could be developed by natural and juridical persons of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, including technical committees on standardization, in accordance with the plans of state standardization approved by th e competent authority in the field of technical WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 197 - 
 
  regulation and plans of authorities whose competence covers objects of standardization.  
National standards could also be developed off-plan.  In this case in order to avoid duplication,  
information on development of national standard had to be forwarded to the competent authority 
in the field of technical regulation.   
622.  National standards could be developed at the request of state authorities, producers and 
consumers of products, non-governmental organizations and other interested parties.  
The competent authority concluded a contract on  development of the national standard with 
developer of a national standard.  Information on national standards that were under development 
had to be published on the official website of the competent authority in the field of technical 
regulation.  Developer of a national standard established a working group which prepared the first 
draft of the national standard.  The draft national standard and explanatory note were published at the official website of the competent authority in  the field of technical regulation and sent to 
interested parties for review and comments.  The time-frame for review by interested parties was 
60 calendar days.  The developer prepared the fina l draft of the national standard taking into 
account comments and proposals received from interested parties.  The developer approved the 
draft standard and sent it for approval to the competent authority in the field of technical 
regulation.  
- (iv) Disposition of Mandatory Na tional Standards of Kazakhstan 
623.  Some Members requested information on the elimination of WTO-inconsistent mandatory 
national standards.  In particular, these Member s enquired whether there were any explicit plans 
to address such standards.   
624.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with the Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan "On Technical Regulation" in cases where a technical regulation for a particular 
product had not been enacted, for the purpose of  confirmation of conformity the manufacturers 
could apply international, regional (interstate) or  national (State) standards that met the technical 
regulation objectives.  In such cases, compliance with the standard chosen by the manufacturer 
was mandatory for that manufacturer.  As soon as  the relevant technical regulation was adopted, 
the chosen standard could be applied on a voluntary basis.  Standards that contained conflicting 
provisions could not be used for confirming the conformity with the technical regulation and 
became void.  
625.  In response to a request from some Members for Kazakhstan to bring its standards and 
technical regulations system into compliance with WTO requirements prior to WTO accession, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that upon accession to the WTO, relevant international 
standards or relevant parts thereof would be used for development of technical regulations, unless 
they were ineffective or inappropriate means for the fulfillment of legitimate objectives pursued, as 
stipulated in the TBT Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
626.  A Member welcomed the proposed commitment and expressed the view that it should 
explicitly include a commitment to amend or rescind any existing standard, technical regulation or WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 198 - 
 
  conformity assessment procedure that was not compliant with the WTO TBT Agreement.  
This Member requested further information on how Kazakhstan intended to implement this commitment if all WTO-inconsistent mandatory standards had not been phased-out and whether 
these mandatory standards would become voluntary. 
627.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan, jointly with other 
EAEU member States, was actively working on development of technical regulations which would 
replace WTO-inconsistent mandatory standards.  Thus, standards containing mandatory 
requirements, which were currently in force, wo uld be replaced by technical regulations of 
the EAEU as part of the EAEU technical regulation  harmonization process, based on the work plan 
and timetable for adoption of priority technical regulations contained in CU Commission Decision 
No. 492 and EEC Council Decision No. 103.  Pendin g their replacement by technical regulations 
of the EAEU, standards containing mandatory requirements were in force only to the extent that 
they ensured:  protection of human life or health ; protection of the environment and of animal and 
plant life or health; provision of national securi ty; prevention of deceptive practices and energy 
efficiency (all of which were set out in the Law "On Technical Regulation").  Further, such national 
standards, were considered by her Government to be "technical regulations" as that term was 
defined in Annex 1 of the WTO TBT Agreement.  She also added that national standards 
contradicting the WTO requirements were being reviewed with a purpose to harmonize them with 
international standards.  To date, the total numbe r of national (State) standards of Kazakhstan 
amounted to 4,627 units, of which 3,323 units were harmonized with international standards.  Thus, 72% of national standards were harmonized with international standards.  In addition, the 
Law "On Technical Regulation" (sub-paragraph 5 of Article 4) prioritised the use of international 
standards. 
628.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all standards currently in force in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan containing mandatory requirements would be applied in compliance with 
the WTO TBT Agreement from the date of accession.  In case of their inconsistency with the 
provisions of the WTO TBT Agreement, such standa rds would be modified in accordance with the 
procedures set-out in CU Commission Decision No. 48 of 20 June 2012, Regulation on 
Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the 
Customs Union, and the national legislation.  Any concerns of interested parties and Members 
regarding compatibility of such mandatory requ irements with the WTO TBT Agreement would be 
duly and effectively addressed in the framework of mechanisms and procedures provided for in the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and in technical regulations of the EAEU.  She added that 
information about the opportunities offered by these procedures would be made available to 
interested parties and Members, inter alia , through the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS.  
She confirmed that the Republic of Kazakhstan would fulfil all requirements of the 
WTO TBT Agreement, including those on notification s, as of the date of accession.  The Working 
Party took note of these  commitment s. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 199 - 
 
  - (v) Conformity Assessment Procedur es including the Accreditation of 
 Conformity Assessment Bodies 
629.  Accreditation of conformity assessment bodi es enabled a conformity assessment body 
included in the Unified Register of Accredited Certification Bodies and Testing Laboratories of the 
EAEU (hereinafter - Unified Register) to issue documents on conformity assessment within the 
area of its accreditation that would be accepted within the territory of Kazakhstan, as well as the 
rest of the EAEU.  Paragraph 4 of Annex No. 11 of the EAEU Treaty  established the responsibility 
of the EAEU member States' accreditation bodies: (i) carry out the formation and maintenance of 
the register of accredited conformity assessment bodies, register of experts on accreditation, 
register of  technical experts, and the national part of the United Register ; (ii) provide 
information from the register of accredited conformity assessment bodies, register of  
accreditation experts and register of  technical experts, as well as other information and 
documents related to accreditation, as provided for by the EAEU  Treaty , to the integrated 
information system of the EAEU;  (iii) provide an  opportunity for representatives of accreditation 
bodies to carry out mutual comparative assessments  in order to achieve equivalence of procedures 
applied in the member States; (iv) consider an d decide on the appeals filed by conformity 
assessment bodies to revise the decisions taken by the accreditation body in respect of these 
conformity assessment bodies; and, (v) consider and adopt decisions on complaints from physical 
or juridical persons of member States on the activities of accreditation bodies, as well as on the 
activities of accredited conformity assessment bo dies.   Apart from the Unified Register, the EEC 
also adopted common forms for the certification and declaration of conformity; and the Unified 
Registry of Certificates of Conformity and Declarations of Conformity.  Paragraph 3 of Annex 
No. 11 to the EAEU Treaty provides for application of international standards for the development 
of accreditation rules. 
630.  Products subject to technical regulations of the EAEU could be released for circulation 
within the EAEU customs territory provided they had undergone all necessary conformity 
assessment procedures established by the relevant  technical regulations of the EAEU.  The EAEU 
member States conducted conformity assessment in accordance with EAEU technical regulations.  
Conformity assessment had to be carried out in the form of registration, testing, expertise and 
conformity verification.  As set-out in paragraph 5 of Annex No. 9 of the EAEU Treaty, mandatory 
assessment (confirmation) of conformity (compliance) of products with requirements of technical 
regulations of the EAEU was confirmed by a declarat ion of compliance or certificate that was issued 
by a certification body listed in the Unified Re gister based on tests performed by accredited 
laboratories and testing centres.  For registration of declaration of conformity, the following persons could act as applicants:  a juridical person or a natural person registered as an individual 
entrepreneur in accordance with national legislation of EAEU member States  or a person acting as 
a producer/seller or performing the duties of a foreign producer on the basis of a contract, 
concluded with the producer, which stipulated that supplied products met the requirements of 
technical regulations of the EAEU and established liability for non-compliance of supplied products 
with the requirements of technical regulations of  the EAEU.  CU Commission Decision No. 621 of 
7 April 2011 "On the Regulation on the Applicatio n of Model Schemes of Conformity Assessment WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 200 - 
 
  (Confirmation) in the Technical Regulations of the Customs Union" (hereafter:  CU Commission 
Decision No. 621), established common forms an d regulations on the application of model 
conformity assessment schemes to ensure comp liance with the requirements of technical 
regulations of the EAEU. 
631.  Pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Annex No. 9 to the EAEU Treaty, activity related to 
conformity assessment had to be carried out by the accredited certification bodies and testing 
laboratories included into the Unified Register.  The Unified Register was formed and maintained in 
an order adopted by the Commission.  Recognition of results issued by accredited certification 
bodies and testing laboratories had to be carried out in accordance with Annex No. 11 of the EAEU 
Treaty.  Results of conformity assessment of products for which no technical regulations of the 
EAEU came into force were recognised in accordance with paragraph 7 of Annex No. 9 to the EAEU Treaty. 
632.  For the purpose of conformity assessment, the EAEU member States, in accordance with 
paragraph 4 of Annex No. 9 to the EAEU Treaty, could apply international and regional standards 
and in the absence thereof - national standards.  Application of these standards on a voluntary 
basis ensured the compliance with requirements of technical regulation of the EAEU.  The EEC 
adopted a list of such standards (hereinafter – List of Standards).  The national standards 
contained rules for testing and measurement techniques, including rules for sampling required for 
application and implementation of technical regu lation requirements and conducting conformity 
assessment.  Application of international, regional and (or) national standards included into the List of Standards on a voluntary basis was a sufficient condition to prove compliance with 
requirements of technical regulation of EAEU .  However, non-compliance with the standards 
included into the List of Standards did not mean non-compliance with the technical regulations of 
the EAEU.  
633.  Pursuant to paragraph 5 of Article 53 of the EAEU Treaty, the liability for non-compliance 
with requirements of technical regulations, as  well as for violation of conformity assessment 
procedures, was established by legislation of each  member State.  Each EAEU member State had a 
right to take all appropriate measures whenever it ascertained that products did not conform to 
the requirements of technical regulations of the EAEU.  Such measures included actions aimed at 
prohibiting their placement on the market, withdrawing the products from the market in 
accordance with the national legislation of EAEU member States and informing other member States thereof.  Furthermore, the EAEU member States had a right to take emergency measures 
to prevent entry of hazardous products into the EAEU market.  Any EAEU member State seeking to 
apply such measures had to notify the other EAEU member States. 
634.  With respect to conformity assessment, the Representative of Kazakhstan stated that at 
the national level the Law "On Technical Regulation" provided for (i) "conformity recognition" – a 
procedure that resulted in a documental certification (in the form of declaration of conformity or 
conformity certificate) of conformity of an object (product or process) to the requirements 
established in technical regulations or standards; and (ii) "accreditation" – an official recognition WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 201 - 
 
  by an accreditation body of the competence of ju ridical persons to perform conformity recognition 
works.  Conformity recognitions could be mandatory – in the form of certification by an accredited conformity assessment body or a producer's declar ation of conformity (for products subject to 
technical regulation requirements); and voluntary – in the form of certification or a conformity 
declaration of a producer/seller indicating that the requirements of standards, other documents or 
special requirements were met (for products no t subject to mandatory conformity recognition). 
635.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan would, from the date of 
accession, ensure that State bodies use existing (or soon-to-be-completed) relevant guides or 
recommendations, or the relevant parts of them, issued by international standardization bodies as 
a basis for their conformity assessment procedures, ex cept where, as provided for in Article 5.4 of 
the WTO TBT Agreement, such guides or recommendations or relevant parts of them were inappropriate for Kazakhstan.  In addition, she confirmed that in accordance with Article 5.1.2 of 
the WTO TBT Agreement, in respect of products su bject to mandatory certification, the conformity 
assessment procedure provided for in the EAEU Treaty and other EAEU legal instruments would not 
be more strict or be applied more strictly than was necessary to give Kazakhstan adequate 
confidence that products conformed to the applicable technical regulations or standards.  
She confirmed that the products subject to mandatory certification set out in CU Commission 
Decision No. 620 "On the New Version of the  Un ified List with Regard to Products Subject 
to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirm ation of Compliance) within the Framework 
of the Customs Union with Issuance of Single Documents, approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" of 7 April 2011  would be defined in accordance with the 
provisions of the TBT Agreement, including the provisions of Article 5.1.2 thereof.  The Working 
Party took note of these commitments. 
636.  In response to a Member enquiring how a manufacturer could obtain a certificate, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that according to the procedure for issuing conformity 
certificates established in the technical regulation "Procedures of Conformity Certification" adopted 
by Government Resolution No. 90 of 4 February 2008: 
- the applicant submitted an application for carrying out certification to a conformity 
certification body;  
- the conformity certification body reviewed the application and informed the applicant of its 
decision within three days upon receipt of the application;  
- the decision for carrying out the certification procedure had to contain all basic certification 
conditions based on the established certification procedures for the type of product being 
certified, as well as proposed certification scheme, list of the necessary technical 
documents, list of the parameters, inspection conditions and title of an accredited 
laboratory/centre (further – laboratory) which carried out the testing; 
- if the applicant agreed with the conditions of the certification procedures, they concluded a 
contract for carrying out the works; 
- tests were carried out on the samples, the design, structure and production technology of 
which had to be the same as that of the product supplied to consumers; 
- the conformity assessment body or an accredited laboratory, upon request of the 
conformity assessment body or a commission consisting of auditors appointed by the 
applicant, carried out sampling.  Quantity of samples, procedure for their selection, as well 
as storage rules, were established in accordance with the regulatory and methodical 
documents on certification and testing methods of a specific product; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 202 - 
 
  - the applicant had to submit technical documentation for the samples, the structure and 
content of which were established in the normative documents of a specific product as well 
as the technical documents to be submitted in accordance with the basic certification 
conditions, mentioned above; 
- accredited laboratories carried out testing on the samples provided to the conformity 
assessment body; 
- certification tests had to be carried out in accordance with the methods and within the 
terms stipulated in the regulatory documents designed for a specific product but no longer 
than 30 calendar days; and, 
- after analysis of the test results, and other documents on product conformity, the 
conformity assessment body conducted conformity assessment. 
637.  The conformity certificate was issued by the conformity assessment body on the basis of 
the expert conclusion.  In case of negative test ing results, the conformity assessment body had to 
issue the decision indicating the reasons for refusal. 
638.  The representative of Kazakhstan further described that Government Resolution No. 367 
"On Mandatory Conformity Assessment of Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 April 2005 
established two lists of products subject to mandatory conformity assessment in Kazakhstan:  (i) List of Products and Services Subject to Mandatory Certification; and (ii) List of Goods 
Conformity of which Could Be Verified by Declaration of Conformity.  To circulate as well as enter 
into Kazakhstan's market, the listed products had to undergo conformity assessment for the 
purposes of mandatory requirements and had to be accompanied with a conformity certificate or a 
declaration of conformity.  With respect to the re lationship of the two lists with the Unified List 
adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 620 of 7 April 2011, the representative of Kazakhstan 
noted that products, that passed mandatory conformity assessment in Kazakhstan, would still 
need to receive conformity certificate or declaratio n of conformity in an EAEU member State, when 
being exported to such an EAEU member State, if the products were not included in the Unified 
List approved by CU Commission Decision No. 620 .  She recalled that the EAEU and national 
lists were subject to revision upon adoption of a relevant technical regulation of the EAEU for a 
product included into the above-mentioned lists. 
639.  Referring to a previous statement of Kazakhstan on revisiting and subsequent elimination 
of the list of products subject to mandatory certification upon adoption of related technical 
r e g u l a t i o n s ,  a  M e m b e r  c o m m e n t e d  t h a t  s o m e  c a t e g o r i e s  o f  p r o d u c t s  w o u l d  a l w a y s  r e q u i r e  
mandatory certification.  Asked to confirm whether Kazakhstan was considering that products like 
pharmaceuticals and medical devices be subject to mandatory conformity certification, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan currently did not foresee to cancel 
mandatory conformity assessment requirements for all products.  In general, a conformity 
assessment scheme for a specific product would be established in a relevant technical regulation of the EAEU. 
640.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in order to receive access to 
Kazakhstan's market, pharmaceuticals and medical devices were subject to State registration 
conducted by the Ministry of Public Health and So cial Development.  Within the EAEU framework, 
pharmaceuticals were not included into the Unified List of Products Subject to Mandatory WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 203 - 
 
  Requirements within the Framework of Customs Union adopted by the CU Commission Decision 
No. 526 of 28 January 2011.  Therefore, the develo pment of a technical regulation of the EAEU for 
pharmaceuticals was not planned.  Medical devices were included into the Unified List.  
In accordance with EEC Council Decision No. 103,  the decision on the development of the EAEU 
technical regulation "On Safety of Medical Devi ces" would be made after the adoption of the 
Agreement on Conducting Uniform Policy in the Field of Registration and Monitoring of Circulation 
of Medical Devices (Medical Devices and Medical Eq uipment) in the Territory of the Customs Union 
and Common Economic Space (hereinafter – the Agreement on Circulation of Medical Devices).  
The draft Agreement on Circulation of Medical De vices and the draft Agreement on Cooperation of 
CU member States in the Field of Circulation of Pharmaceuticals were developed in order to 
regulate the placement of medical devices and ph armaceuticals on the territory of the EAEU.  
The draft Agreements provide for a phased implemen tation of the uniform policy in the sphere of 
registration and monitoring of circulation of medical devices and pharmaceuticals through 
harmonization in the first phase and the subsequent unification in the second phase of 
requirements for medical devices and pharmaceuticals.  This would provide a basis for mutual 
recognition of the results of work on state registration of medical devices and pharmaceuticals with 
the application of uniform permit documents. 
641.  A declaration of conformity could be prepared  on the basis of evidence collected by the 
applicant alone or on the basis of evidence ob tained with the participation of a conformity 
assessment organization.  The declaration of conformity had to be registered by the relevant accredited conformity assessment organization and was valid, similarly to a conformity certificate, 
on the entire territory of Kazakhstan.   
642.  Recognising the need for keeping track of manufacturer's declarations of conformity, a 
Member expressed concern that instituting an offici al register/requiring official registration could 
be disproportionate and unnecessarily trade-restrict ive, especially concerning imports, since it 
would be certainly more burdensome in practice for non-domestic suppliers to apply for this 
registration.  This Member's country required the ma nufacturer to keep a full technical file with the 
specifications of the product including the supplier declaration of conformity.  This file had to be 
made available to public authorities (mainly in the framework of market surveillance) under their 
simple request.  In this regard, this Member requested information on (i) the formalities to 
accomplish in order to have a supplier declaration of conformity registered; (ii) if any, costs to be 
borne by the manufacturer/importer/legal representati ve; (iii) the length of registration procedure; 
and, (iv) grounds of refusal.  In addition, this  Member enquired whether Kazakhstan considered 
less trade-restrictive modalities to process supplie r's declaration of conformity, such as allowing 
the manufacturer/importer/legal representative to keep a full technical file (including the 
declaration) at the disposal of the authorities under their simple request.  This Member also 
enquired how Kazakhstan intended to avoid that this provision put foreign manufacturers in a less 
favourable position compared to domestic ones. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 204 - 
 
  643.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  currently the EAEU legal framework did not 
stipulate uniform procedures in the sphere of decl aration of conformity.  Therefore, requirements 
and procedures related to declaration of conformity  were applied in accordance with the national 
legislation applied.  Chapter 4 of the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 90 "On Approval of the Technical Regulation "Conformity Confirmation Procedures" of 
4 February 2008 established procedure for declaration by market participants.  The manufacturer 
(performer) undertook a declaration based on the documents confirming the conformity of 
products to the specified requirements.  The following documents could be used as a basis for 
declaration by manufacturer (performer):  (i) protocols of approval and other control testing 
conducted by the manufacturer (performer) and/or accredited testing laboratories; (ii) previously 
obtained certificates in force, or testing protocols for primary products, materials, components; (iii) statement of State control confirming the product compliance with the requirements of the 
legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and,  (iv) documents confirming the conformity of 
products to the specified requirements (deliveries of primary products, production process, 
assembling, finished products, package, marking), quality management system certificates.  
In this regard, consideration and registration of  the declaration of conformity by a conformity 
assessment body had to be paid by the manufacturer (performer) on a contractual basis.  
Declaration could be undertaken for specific products or a group of homogeneous products in 
relation to which the common requirements were established.  Declaration could be taken for the 
period determined by the manufacturer (performer ) of products based on the planned period of 
production of such products or the sales period of a products lot, but not longer than for one year.  
Declaration accepted by the manufacturer (performer) had to be registered in an accredited 
conformity assessment body.  Within a period not exceeding three days, the conformity 
assessment body had to consider and check the followin g:  (i) presence of this kind of products in 
the list of the products conformity of which could be verified by the declaration; (ii) eligibility of 
manufacturer (performer) to undertake the declaration; (iii) completeness and accuracy of the 
indication of the regulatory standardization documents provided for the confirmation of these 
products conformity; (iv) presence of all document s provided by the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan for manufacturing of these products; and, (v) accuracy of information filled in the 
declaration.  After review of submitted document s, the conformity assessment body registered the 
declaration in a special section of the registered declarations record.  The registered declaration had to be kept by manufacturer (performer) along with the documents on the basis of which the 
declaration had been filed, within the period no  less than three years after its expiry date.  
Within the same period, the conformity assessmen t body shall keep a copy of the registered 
declaration and the supporting documents.  If th e requirements of regulatory documents indicated 
in the declaration as well as reorganization of  the legal person had changed, the manufacturer 
(performer) had to issue a new declaration and submit it for registration to the conformity 
assessment body.  With respect to costs involved, she stated that the amount of payments for the 
works on review and registration of the declaratio ns had to be determined on a contractual basis 
between conformity assessment bodies and producers (performers).  As for the reasons for refusal of registration of conformity declaration, th e representative of Kazakhstan said that the 
registration could be refused only for the following reasons:  (i) a product's conformity could be WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 205 - 
 
  verified only in the form of certification; and (ii) the presented documents were not sufficient to 
verify the conformity of a product with safety re quirements provided for in the relevant technical 
regulation or, when the technical regulation had not been developed provided for in  the relevant 
regulatory legal act.  In conclusion, the representa tive of Kazakhstan stated that the registration 
requirement equally applied to and were the same for both domestic and foreign suppliers.  
Therefore, there was no provision in the legisl ation that put foreign manufacturers in a less 
favourable position compared to domestic manufacture rs.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
added that the EAEU was in the process of simplify ing the procedure of registration of declarations 
of conformity by introducing electronic registration.  Electronic registration would allow the 
manufacturer to register its declaration of conformi ty in the electronic Unified Register by filling 
out an electronic application form, submitting the declaration of conformity signed with an 
electronic signature, and the relevant evidence. 
644.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, depending on the technical regulation at 
issue, documents establishing compliance with the requirements of the technical regulation could 
include a supplier's own evidence, such as declaration of conformity with the relevant technical 
regulation, test reports, and other documents as relevant, in accordance with the legislation of 
Kazakhstan, the EAEU Treaty and other EAEU lega l instruments, or the results of conformity 
assessment procedures that Kazakhstan may accept pursuant to Article 6.1 of the 
WTO TBT Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
645.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the cost of mandatory conformity 
assessment would be paid by an applicant.  Moreover, the cost of mandatory conformity 
assessment was to be determined regardless of the country and/or place of their origin or of the 
persons acting as applicants.  She confirmed th at the cost incurred by a conformity assessment 
body formed the basis for determining the cost to the applicant.  The elements that would typically 
be considered by a conformity assessment body in the territory of Kazakhstan in determining fees 
included the costs of labour, any necessary materi als or equipment, and tests, as well as other 
usual costs and profits typical to commercial practices in this sphere.  She also noted that the 
provisions of Law "On Technical Regulation" as a whole reflected the principle of uniform 
application of requirements and conformity a ssessment procedures to domestic and imported 
products.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
646.  Some Members noted that there did not appe ar to be a commitment to ensure that 
regulatory authorities allow a reasonable period of time between the final publication of a 
conformity assessment procedure and its entry into force so that suppliers can adapt.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that tech nical regulations of the EAEU entered into force 
after a certain transitional period after their official publication (normally around 18 months).  
She clarified that the rules of conformity to a technical regulation normally would be contained 
within the regulation itself.  It meant that the conformity assessment procedures also entered into 
force after a sufficient transitional period after their official publication. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 206 - 
 
  647.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that, in cases where a positive assurance 
of conformity with technical regulations was required and technical rules and methods for ensuring compliance with technical regulations (i.e., elements of conformity assessment procedures, 
defining the methods of research, tests, measuremen ts, or selection of samples that could be used 
to comply with the technical regulations) were not included in a technical regulation, such rules 
and methods would be developed in accord ance with EEC Collegium Decision No. 306 “Regulation 
on Procedures for Development and Approval  of Lists of International and Regional 
Standards, and, in their Absence, – Nati onal (State) Standards of Customs Union 
member States, that Ensure Compliance wi th Technical Regulations of the Customs 
Union and Necessary for Conducting Conformity Assessment”  of 25 December 2012.  She 
confirmed that Decision of the  Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission  No. 48 
“Regulation on Development, Adoption, Am endment and Cancellation of Technical 
Regulations of the Customs Union” of 20 June 2012  provided for their approval by the EEC 
Collegium not later than six months before the entry into force of the relevant technical regulation 
and that EEC Collegium Decision No. 306 provided for the placement of such rules and methods on 
the official website of the EEC upon their adoption .  She added that these rules were to be based 
on relevant guides or recommendations issued by international standardizing bodies, in accordance 
with Article 5.4 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade , and would define the 
methods of research, tests, measurements, or sele ction of samples that may be used to comply 
with the technical regulations.  The rules must, where possible, list a choice of compliance methods and, in order to ensure compliance with Article 5.1.2 and other provisions of the WTO  
Agreement  on Technical Barriers to Trade , conformity assessment procedures would not be 
more strict or be applied more strictly than necessary to give adequate confidence that products 
conform with the applicable technical regulations, taking account of the risks non-conformity would 
create.  She confirmed that the above-mentioned rules would not create a bigger impediment to 
business activity than was necessary to fulfil the goals that were  specified in paragraph 1 of 
Article 52 of the EAEU Treaty.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
648.  Asked specifically about the existence of an appeal process, she said that an applicant 
could appeal decisions on conformity recognitio n to the Board of Appeals of the conformity 
recognition organization concerned, and then to the Board of Appeals of the conformity 
recognition organization concerned, th en to the Board of Appeals of the Committee on 
Technical Regulation ; the decisions of the latter could be appealed in court.  Pursuant to 
National S tandard ST RK 3.10-2007 "The Order of the Ex amination of Appeals", an appeal had to 
be filed in writing, enclosing all relevant documents, within one month of the contested decision of 
the accredited certification body.  Each  Board had to take  a decision within 15 days and the 
applicant was notified in the following 10 days. 
649.  She added that any domestic or foreign organization could act as a conformity certification 
body or a test laboratory as long as it had received accreditation in accordance with legislation of 
Kazakhstan.  Certification bodies or laboratories were not allowed to operate (e.g. issue conformity 
assessments) outside their scope of accreditation.  Test results issued by foreign authorised bodies WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 207 - 
 
  could be recognised through accreditation of th ese foreign bodies in Kazakhstan's national 
accreditation system.  At present, there were no foreign bodies accredited as conformity assessment organizations in Kazakhstan.   
650.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that pursuant to Article 33 of the 
Law "On Technical Regulation", certificates of conformity of foreign countries, testing results, 
conformity marks were recognised in accordance with international (bilateral or multilateral) 
agreements signed by Kazakhstan.  Recognition procedures were determined by the Rules of 
Recognition of Certificates of Conformity of Foreign Countries, Test Protocols, Conformity Marks 
and Other Documents Issued in Foreign Systems of Conformity Assessment approved by the Order 
of the Chairman of the Committee on Technica l Regulation and Metrology of 22 April 2005 
(hereinafter – the Rules).  Paragraph 5 of the Rules confirmed that foreign conformity certificates, testing protocols, conformity marks, and other documents had to be recognised if there was an 
international (either bilateral or multilateral) agreement with a country issuing the document, i.e., 
agreement on recognition of conformity assessmen t results.  She added that at the EAEU level 
CU Commission Decision No. 621 of 7 April 2011 established scheme No. 9 which addressed the 
issue of recognition of certificates of conformi ty issued by third-country conformity assessment 
bodies.  
651.  Asked whether Kazakhstan considered the WTO TBT Agreement as an international 
agreement or treaty within the meaning of Arti cle 33 of the Law "On Technical Regulation", the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that her country considered the WTO TBT Agreement as an international agreement within the meaning of Article 33.  Thus, it was possible under the 
Law "On Technical Regulation" for Kazakhstan to accept the results of conformity assessment 
procedures done in WTO Members on the basis of, and in compliance with, Article 6.1 of the 
WTO TBT Agreement, without requiring the conclusion  of a mutual recognition or other agreement.  
The acceptance of such results throughout th e EAEU was established by the Treaty on the 
Functioning of the Customs Union in Compliance with Customs Union Party Commitments under 
the Multilateral Trading System.  Therefore, from the date of its accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan 
would ensure, whenever possible, that results of conformity assessment procedures of conformity 
assessment bodies located in other WTO Members were accepted, provided that Kazakhstan was 
satisfied, as provided in Article 6.1 of the WTO TBT Agreement, that those procedures offered an 
assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to the own procedures of Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that as provided in 
Article 6 of the WTO TBT Agreement, such accept ance also could, for example, be achieved 
through the membership of Kazakhstan's national accreditation body in ILAC and the International 
Accreditation Forum (IAF) and signing of the ILAC Arrangement, which would build confidence in 
the adequacy and technical competence of the co nformity assessment bodies of third countries 
accredited by other ILAC and IAF members, includin g acceptance of the results of such conformity 
assessment bodies, conclusion of a Mutual Recognition Agreement and other appropriate means.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 208 - 
 
  652.  Asked to provide information on international conformity assessment bodies which issued 
certificates that were recognised in Kazakhstan, the representative of Kazakhstan said that conformity certificates were mutually recognised in accordance with signed international 
agreements.  At present, such mutual recognit ion agreements existed only with CIS Parties – 
(i) the Agreement on the Coordinated Policy on Standardization, Metrology and Certification of 
13 March 1992, which had established the Interstate Council for Standardization, Metrology and 
Certification (EASC) to carry out work on harmonizing standardization and conformity assessment 
legislation; and, (ii) the Agreement on Principles of Mutual Recognition of Certification Activities 
with the CIS Countries of 4 June 1992, in the context of which Kazakhstan had agreed to recognise 
conformity certificates issued by CIS countries and to apply inter-governmental standards (GOST) 
alongside national standards (SS RK).  Moreover, Kazakhstan planned to sign the draft Agreement 
on Mutual Recognition of Results of Accreditat ion of Test Laboratories (Centers) Conducting 
Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) Works of the CIS member States.   
653.  In addition, in 2010 the National Center of Accreditation (NCA) had become full member of 
ILAC and had signed the Multilateral Agreement on Recognition of Testing Results (ILAC MRA).  
In continuation of the work in this direction, on 3 February 2011 the NCA had signed an agreement 
with ILAC on the use of ILAC MRA Mark.  The NCA concluded the licence agreements on use of 
ILAC MRA Laboratory Mark, on the basis of which the contracts on the use of a combined MRA 
Laboratory Mark were concluded.  This MRA Mark signified that a laboratory issuing a testing 
report, a certificate of calibration/verification or other document s, was accredited by the NCA, 
which was signatory of the ILAC MRA.  To date, 62 contracts with laboratories had been concluded.  
The NCA was also a full member of the Pacific Accreditation Cooperation (PAC) organization, which 
was a regional organization of the IAF, and a signatory to the PAC Multilateral Agreement on 
Products.  Membership in these organizations provid ed the basis for acceptance of test, inspection 
and calibration data issued by laboratories accr edited by other ILAC and PAC members.  Moreover , 
necessary procedures to join the IAF as a full member and join IAF Multilateral Agreement (MLA) 
had been completed.  The application was sent to the IAF Secretariat in 2012 and it had been  
considered in October 2013 at the IAF General Assembly , and approved .  In the future, the NCA 
planned to continue its activit ies on joining multilateral agreements of the above-mentioned 
organizations in other areas. 
654.  Some Members of the Working Party noted the existence of bilateral agreements on 
standards with China and Turkey and asked whethe r the provisions of these bilateral agreements 
would be applied on a MFN basis.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the 
"Intergovernmental Agreement on Cooperation with the People's Republic of China on Quality 
Assurance and Mutual Inspection of Exported an d Imported Products" of 5 July 1996 provided for 
information exchange on legislation, conformity recognition and product supervision procedures 
applicable to both sides.  To implement the pr ovisions of this Agreement, the two parties had 
signed a Memorandum on Mutual Understanding on 17 November 2006.  Also a Memorandum of 
Understanding between the Committee of Technical Re gulating of the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the State Department of Standardization of Chin a had been signed on 1 September 2011 providing WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 209 - 
 
  for development of cooperation in the sphere of standardization on the basis of internationally 
accepted principles.  Kazakhstan had also concluded inter-governmental bilateral agreements on cooperation in the area of standardization, metrology and certification with Armenia, Azerbaijan, 
Bulgaria, Israel, Qatar, Lithuania and Turkmenistan, as well as inter-departmental agreements 
between the Ministry of Industry and New Technolo gies and its counterparts in the Czech Republic, 
Germany, Moldova, Singapore and the Slovak Repub lic.  These bilateral agreements were aimed at 
removing technical barriers in mutual trade as well as cooperating in the sphere of research and 
technology by means of mutual recognition of standardization, metrology and certification 
systems, including conformity certificates.  She said that Kazakhstan stood ready to negotiate a 
bilateral agreement on standards with an y WTO Member.  She confirmed that upon 
WTO accession, Kazakhstan would provide WTO Members with MFN treatment in relation to the application of technical barriers to trade. 
655.  A Member expressed concerns regarding application of Kazakhstan's conformity 
assessment procedure in practice, notably in the case of veterinary drugs, noting that the resulting 
process seriously distorted trade, as it was time-consuming and costly, and as such was 
incompatible with the WTO TBT Agreement.  Some Members sought information on the 
requirement to receive separate permissions from the chief veterinarian to transport imports of 
veterinary drugs within Kazakhstan, even after obtaining a valid certificate of conformity.  
In response the Representative of Kazakhstan ex plained that currently veterinary drugs were not 
included into the Unified List of Products approv ed by CU Commission Decision No. 526 and, thus, 
were not subject to mandatory conformity assessmen t.  Veterinary drugs imported to Kazakhstan 
for the first time were subject to registration by th e Ministry of Agriculture.  She also added that in 
order to import veterinary drugs to Kazakhstan permission from the chief veterinarian was 
required.  However, permission from the chief vete rinarian was not required to transport imported 
pharmaceuticals within the country. 
656.  A Member requested more information on the im plementation of the provisions of the new 
Law "On Technical Regulation", enquiring specifically about the application of mandatory 
requirements in the area of telecommunications within the framework of the new legislation.  
In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the telecommunications sector, like all other 
sectors, fell within the coverage of the Law "O n Technical Regulation".  Accordingly, the Law 
"On Communications" had been amended, in particular Article 7 (stipulating the authority of the Government to approve technical regulations) and Article 16 (conformity assessment in the area of 
telecommunications).  
(d) Transparency 
657.  With regard to the transparency and publicat ion requirements of the WTO TBT Agreement, 
the representative of Kazakhstan said that, for administrative reasons, EAEU member States 
established their own national enquiry points on technical regulations and sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures.  In case of Kazakhstan, the combined TBT/SPS Enquiry Point (Information Centre) had been established by Government Resolution "On the Rules on Creation WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 210 - 
 
  and Functioning of the Enquiry Point on TBT/SPS"  No. 718 of 11 July 2005 (hereinafter - the Rules 
on the Enquiry Point) under the Kazakhstan's Institute for Standardization and Certification, which was subordinate body of the Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Ministry of 
Investments and Development.  Any interested party could approach the Enquiry Point for 
information.  She also added that units responsible for providing information on SPS measures to 
the Enquiry Point had been appointed at the Minist ry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Public 
Health and Social Development.  According to pa ragraph 12 of the Rules on the Enquiry Point, 
government agencies submitted appropriate information on adoption and application of TBT and 
SPS measures to the Enquiry Point.  The main functions of the Enquiry Point for SPS and TBT 
measures were (i) interaction with the WTO Secretariat, WTO Members and international 
organizations to provide interested parties and foreign States with the following information and documents upon their request:  (a) copies of documents and information on adopted or proposed 
technical regulations, standards, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, amendments made to 
them, (b) conformity assessment procedures, (c) me mbership or participation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan in international organizations and international treaties on standardization, 
SPS measures, conformity assessment, bilateral an d multilateral accreditation, and (d) sources of 
publications of drafts, technical regulations, SPS measures and standards; and (ii) publication of 
notifications in the Enquiry Point's Journal.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that to 
date there were no plans to divide the Enquiry Point on TBT and SPS into two separate enquiry 
points.  The Enquiry Point could be contacted at:  
Address: Astana city, Left Bank district,  
  Orynbor st. 11, 
  Astana 010000, 
  Republic of Kazakhstan 
Telephone: +7 (7172) 22 66 63 
Fax:  +7 (7172) 20 64 81 
E-mail:  enquirypoint@mail.ru 
Website: www.wto.memst.kz 
658.  Adopted and draft regulations on TBT and SPS, including technical regulations of the EAEU, 
were regularly published on the websites of the Enquiry Point, the Committee on Technical 
Regulation and Metrology, Ministry of Public Health and Social Development and Ministry of 
Agriculture, local executive bodies and on the websites of accredited public associations.  
These regulations were also published in the journal "Bulletin of the TBT/SPS Enquiry Point". 
659.  Draft technical regulations were developed an d examined by working groups, which were 
composed of representatives of State bodies, te chnical committees on standardization and other 
interested parties (including public organizations, scientific unions, businesses and entrepreneurial associations).   
660.  In response to a Member's question on notification procedures in the EAEU, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that taking into account that EAEU member States 
acceded to the WTO separately, each of them had separate obligations on notification.  
Thus, Kazakhstan and the EAEU member States that  were also WTO Members, in accordance with WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 211 - 
 
  their commitments, would have to notify all draft technical regulations of the EAEU.  The notified 
drafts would be identical and subject to the same  deadlines for comments.  All comments received 
from third countries would be sent by the EAEU member States to the EEC.  The EEC was 
responsible for processing all the comments, publishing them on the official website of the 
Commission and forwarding them to developer of the draft technical regulations (relevant 
competent authority of the EAEU member States).  Thus, the process established within the EAEU 
ensured that there was no duplication in considering the comments received on draft documents. 
661.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, in accordance with EEC Council Decision 
No. 48, the period for public consultations for draft technical regulations had to be no less than 
60 days from the day of the placement of the draft technical regulation on the official website of 
the Commission.  Neither the Law "On Technical Regulation" nor the EAEU Treaty and acts on standardization or technical regulation defined or  limited the number or character of interested 
persons who could submit commentary or suggestions to drafts of technical regulation.  
EEC Council Decision No. 48 explicitly provided for participation of all interested persons in public 
consultations.  She also noted that the relevant international agreements and other legal acts did 
not provide for any restrictions on foreign persons to participate in the public consultations of draft 
technical regulations as interested parties.  In accordance with the EEC Council Decision No. 48, 
interested persons, including persons from third countries, could submit their proposals and 
comments on draft technical regulations of the EA EU to the EEC.  According to paragraph 9 of 
EEC Council Decision No. 48, all proposals and comments  received from interested parties of the 
EAEU and third countries, had to be published by the EEC on the official website of the EEC upon 
their receipt.  The EEC sent all comments and sugg estions to the Developer of the draft technical 
regulation (relevant competent authority of the EAEU member State) upon completion of the 
public discussion.  The Developer of the draft technical regulation revised the draft technical 
regulation and related documents taking into account the comments and proposals.  For each 
comment and proposal, the Developer of the draft technical regulation specified information on its 
acceptance or justification for its rejection.  The EEC ensured subsequent publication of the 
summary of comments on the draft technical regulation, including decisions on each of them and 
reasons for such decisions, on the official website of the EEC.   
662.  A Member asked how Kazakhstan envisaged to cope with its forthcoming obligations 
resulting from the TBT Agreement, for example, noti fication of draft technical regulations, taking 
into account ongoing transfer of competences in the field of technical regulation to the EAEU.  
In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that Kazakhstan was actively involved in 
all works undertaken at the EAEU level and could fulfil its commitments as a WTO Member, 
including the commitment to forward notification of draft  technical regulations of the EAEU.  
From the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, the TBT/SPS Enquiry Point would fulfil all 
obligations on notifications specified by the WTO Agreements on TBT and SPS, including 
notifications on the proposed technical regulations of the EAEU to the WTO Secretariat and would 
provide WTO Members with copies of proposed techni cal regulations upon request.  In response to 
a Member's request, the Representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan would confirm WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 212 - 
 
  receipt of comments whenever comments were received from WTO Members on notified 
legislation.  Moreover, in accordance with the Regulation on Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, during public consultations draft 
technical regulations of the EAEU and notifica tions about the commencement and completion of 
public consultations on draft technical regulation of  the EAEU were published on the official website 
of the EEC.  The same information was also publis hed on the official website and bulletin of the 
Committee on Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Republic of Kazakhstan as well as the 
website of the Enquiry Point on TBT/SPS of the Re public of Kazakhstan.  Upon development of the 
first draft of a technical regulation or upon completion of public consultations, a developer of the 
draft technical regulation (a designated State body of Kazakhstan) prepared and sent the relevant 
notification to the Enquiry Point on TBT/SPS of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
663.  As for standards, these were developed by te chnical committees on standardization, which 
included Government representatives and interested parties (including public organizations, 
scientific unions, businesses and entrepreneurial associations).  Comments were taken into 
account in the process of finalising draft standards, and the agreement of all interested parties was 
sought.  All interested parties could request copies  of draft standards, as well as copies of the 
comments received on a draft.  Following review and approval at the inter-agency committee level, 
the draft would be submitted to the Government fo r approval.  Once adopted, the standard would 
be published in the "Code of Normative Acts of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
Government of Kazakhstan", the republican leve l newspaper, the official publication of the 
authorised body ("Technical Regulation Bullet in"), and on the web (http://www.memst.kz).  
A draft Plan on the development of standards wa s printed in the monthly "Informational Catalog 
(register) of Standards" (ICS), published by Commi ttee on Technical Regulation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to enable interested parties to submit comments on drafts.  Drafts were published in 
the official publication of the Committee.  In a ddition, two subordinate State enterprises of the 
Committee – the Kazakhstan's Institute of Standardization and Certification, and the Kazakhstan's 
Institute of Metrology issued periodic publications ("Gosstandard News", "Metrology", and "Monthly 
Informational Index of Standards").  Electronic ve rsions of the plans for development of technical 
regulations and standards were put on the web at http://wto.memst.kz.  The EEC website, 
http://www.eurasiancommission.org, was the point of publication for documents related to the 
development, adoption, and application of  technical regulations of the EAEU.   
664.  The Representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, Kazakhstan 
would ensure that all laws, regulations, an d other measures within the scope of the 
WTO TBT Agreement, such as technical regula tions, standards, and conformity assessment 
procedures, applied in Kazakhstan complied with  the provisions of the WTO TBT Agreement.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
[to be completed]   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 213 - 
 
  - Trade-Related Investment Measures 
665.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan applied local content 
requirements, in the form of preferences for purcha se of locally produced goods, with a view to 
diversifying the national economy.  In addition to  local content requirements described in Chapters 
"State Ownership, State Trading Entities and Privatization" and "Government Procurement", 
pursuant to Kazakhstan's legislation, local content requirements were applied in procurement of 
goods and services19 by subsurface users within the framework of investment contracts in the oil 
and gas, and mining sectors and under investment agreements in the automotive sector.  
TRIMs described in this section and the local content requirements in procurement by State-owned 
enterprises and by National Managing Holdings, National Holdings, National companies, and 
JSCs/LLPs with 50% or more State participation were the only local content requirements on goods 
enforced in law in Kazakhstan, except for those applied by the Government in its procurement for 
immediate or ultimate consumption in governmental use and not otherwise for resale or use in the 
production of goods for sale. 
- TRIMs in the Oil and Gas and Mining Sectors 
666.  In the oil and gas and mining sectors, the requirement for local content was regulated by 
Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and its Use" of 24 June 2010 (hereinafter:  Law No. 291-IV), 
which had replaced Law No. 2828 "On Subsurface and its Use" of 27 January 1996.  Pursuant to 
Article 69 of Law No. 291-IV, subsurface use contracts were concluded for a period determined in 
the project documentation for carrying out extrac tion works and contained provisions for the 
possibility to extend their term.  These contract s were required by the Law No. 291-IV to contain 
commitments for subsurface users to use domestically produced goods provided that they met the 
requirements of project documentation and legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on technical 
regulation.  Amendments to signed contracts were  subject to negotiations between the authorised 
body and the subsurface user, and could be intr oduced on the basis of consensus between the 
parties.   
667.  In accordance with Article 77 of Law No. 291-IV, the purchase of goods for conducting 
subsurface operations could be carried out by one of the following methods:  (1) open tender; 
(2) price offer request; (3) from a single source; (4) through the electronic procurement system; 
or, (5) through commodity exchanges.  Article 78 of Law No. 291-IV stipulated a local content 
requirement and established that, when identifyin g an open tender winner, the tender organizer 
had to conditionally reduce by 20% the price of goods produced in Kazakhstan. 
668.  In implementation of Article 16 of Law No. 291-IV, Kazakhstan adopted the new Rules for 
Procurement of Goods and Services in Performanc e of Subsurface Use Operations, approved by 
Government Resolution No. 134 of 14 February 2013 (hereinafter: the Rules), which had replaced 
Government Resolution No. 1139 of 28 November 2007.  The main changes introduced by the 
Rules were related to the procurement procedures in oil and gas sector, where subsurface users 
                                               
19 The term "services" includes both services and work as those terms are used in Law No. 291-IV. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 214 - 
 
  were required to conduct all purchases of goods and services in electronic format.  According to 
the Rules, subsurface users placed tender documentation on the State information system – the Register of Goods and Services Used in Subsurface Operations and their Producers (hereinafter: 
Register).  This provision allowed potential suppliers to receive the tender documentation on-line 
free of charge, including technical specifications of goods and services.  However, at this stage, 
subsurface users in the mining sector could use the Registry only for purchases of goods and 
services via the currently applied electronic procurement method.  
669.  The Rules also introduced certain changes in the provisions related to the local content 
requirement.  In order to fulfill contractual local content commitments in open tender (or price 
offer request), the Rules stipulated the right of su bsurface users to include requirements on local 
content in goods and services into the tender documentation, expressed as a percentage (from 0 to 100) in each lot.  Under the Rules, an open tender was held in two stages:  (1) pre-qualification 
of potential suppliers; and, (2) determination of th e tender winner.  At the first stage, a tender 
commission examined whether proposed goods and services complied with technical requirements 
of tender documentation, including examination as to whether potential suppliers fell under 
categories of "local producer of goods" or "local  producer of services".  At the second stage, a 
tender commission determined the winner of the te nder on the basis of the lowest price bids.  
Local producers of goods and services were granted 20% conditional price discount.  In addition, 
the Rules clarified provisions on procedure of determining winner of open tender in case price bids 
were equal.  For example, in case price bids of (i) several local producers after application of 20% conditional price discount, or, (ii) several producers, who did not comply to the conditional price 
discount, were equal, the winner was determined on  the basis of the highest percentage of local 
content in offered goods and services. 
670.  The Rules expanded the list of cases when procurement could be conducted from a single 
source.  Procurement from a single source, as compared to open tenders which were more time 
consuming and lasted at least 30 days, required less time and allowed subsurface users to conduct 
procurement of goods and services without delay in subsurface use operations.  In particular, in 
accordance with paragraph 37 Article 94 of the Rules, subsurface users in the mining sector could 
purchase goods and services directly from a local producer of goods and services who was the sole 
supplier registered in the database of local goods, services and suppliers thereof, maintained by 
the Ministry of Investments and Development.  Under paragraph 37 Article 272 of the Rules, 
subsurface users in the oil and gas sector could apply this method for purchase of goods if the 
local content in goods being purchased constitute d not less than 65%.  In addition, procurement 
from a single source could be conducted in the following cases: (i) purchase of R&D from local 
producers provided that the local content in those services was not less than 65%; or, (ii) 
purchase of educational services by subsurface users in the oil and gas sector from local 
educational institutions in order to fulfill the contractual commitments on education of 
Kazakhstan's citizens employed in the course of performing subsurface use contracts.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 215 - 
 
  671.  The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that local content in goods was defined as a 
percentage value of domestic materials and inputs used in the value of finished goods produced on the territory of Kazakhstan
20.  The local origin of goods was verified with certificate "CT-KZ" issued 
by the Chamber of Commerce of Kazakhstan.  For example, in 2012, the share of local content in 
the total value of goods procured by subsurface users within the framework of investment 
contracts was 12.6%21.  Tender procedures had to take place in Kazakhstan.  Both national and 
foreign investors were equally entitled to participate in the bidding process.  In her view, such 
provisions were non-discriminatory and introduced an opportunity for imported goods.  However, 
not all subsurface users were fully compliant with their contractual obligations on local content 
requirement, which could result in penalties or term ination of contracts.  In 2012, subsurface users 
in oil and gas sector were charged US$500,000, of which they paid US$8,000. 
672.  In response to a question on the changes introduced by Law No. 291-IV, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that inter alia  Law No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and its Use" of 
24 June 2010 incorporated all the provisions on local content requirements contained in 
Law No. 2828 "On Subsurface and its Use" of 27 January 1996.  She further added that Law 
No. 291-IV "On Subsurface and its Use" of 24 June 2010 provided clarification on the definitions of 
local content in goods, services and workforce.  Particularly, two new terms had been introduced:  
(i) "a register of goods and services used in subsurface operations and their producers", which was 
a state information system established to control and monitor the purchase of goods and services 
used in subsurface operations and their producers, and, (ii) a uniform methodology for calculation of local content by organizations procuring good s and services, which was the procedure approved 
by the Government of Kazakhstan.  According to  Article 76 of Law No. 291-IV, a subsurface user 
was required to submit an annual procurement programme and report on goods and services 
purchased for implementation of the investment contract.  
673.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that amendments made to Law No. 291-IV in 
January 2012 further clarified the existing re quirement for research and development (R&D) 
funding by a subsurface user with the purpose to develop knowledge-based industries producing 
high value-added goods and services.  She furthe r clarified that according to the amendments:  
(i) a subsurface user's annual funding of R&D would not be less than 1% of aggregate annual 
income within the contractual activity; and, (ii) funding would be channelled to Kazakhstan's 
producers of goods and services.  
674.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan's economy was dominated by the 
production of hydrocarbon and mineral resources, an d the oil sector was the most attractive sector 
for both foreign and local investors.  Forecasts sh owed that the volume of foreign investments in 
                                               
20 The goods of Kazakhstan's origin were determined according to the Rules on Determining the Country 
of Origin of Goods, Drafting and Issuing Expertise Acts on Origin of Goods and Issuing a Certificate of Origin of Goods adopted by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1647 of 22 October 2009. 
21 In 2012, the total procurement of goods made by subsurface users was equal to 758.3 billion tenge, 
including goods of Kazakhstan's origin in  the amount of 95.2 billion tenge. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 216 - 
 
  oil production was continuously increasing, while other sectors of the economy remained 
underdeveloped.  Hence, her Government had introduced the local content requirement to encourage the use of domestically produced goods in order to:  (i) ensure the rational 
restructuring of subsurface use; (ii) achieve sustainable economic development through economic 
diversification and reduction of the economy's high dependence on volatile world prices for exports 
of mineral resources; and, (iii) create an envi ronment conducive to development of processing 
industries and production of high value-added goods.  She emphasized the importance of the 
diversification programme for Kazakhstan's economy, and added that creating a favourable climate 
for development of processing industries was a priority for her Government. 
675.  She added that during the period of economic adversity in the early 1990s, in order to 
attract foreign direct investments and to develop Kazakhstan's unexplored oil fields, her Government had signed long-term (up to 40 years) investment contracts with major multinational 
oil companies, on terms which granted VAT and cu stoms duty exemptions for imported goods used 
in oil operations.  Since the terms of signed contracts could not be changed retroactively 
(i.e., pursuant to a contract stability clause), the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the 
provisions of Law No. 291-IV were aimed at offs etting the discriminatory effects of those earlier 
investment contracts which created a disadvantage for domestically produced goods, which 
remained subject to the payment of VAT. 
676.  Upon request of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan said that in accordance with 
Article 50 of Law No. 291-IV, the tender offers for obtaining rights to use subsurface for exploration, extraction, combined exploration and extraction, inter alia , had to contain the 
following proposals:  (i) local content in purchasing goods and services required for 
implementation of the contract; (ii) obligations regarding local content in personnel, which had to 
increase to the extent of implementation of traini ngs thereof; and, (iii) obligations on education of 
Kazakhstani personnel.  All these provisions had to be included into the subsurface use contracts. 
677.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, local content provisions were established 
individually in each subsurface use contract depending on the specifics of the goods required for its 
implementation.  Currently there were 565 contracts signed between the Government of 
Kazakhstan and subsurface users:  203 of whic h on crude hydrocarbons and 362 in the mining 
sector.  Of 203 contracts on crude hydrocarbons, 94 would expire by 2020 and 109 in the period 
from 2021 to 2053.  Of 362 contracts in the mining sector, 144 would expire by 2020 and 218 in the period from 2021 to 2060.  She further added that, of 203 contracts on crude hydrocarbons, 
193 contained numerical local content commitments set in percentage and 10 contained textual 
local content commitments.  Of 362 contracts in the mining sector, 351 contained numerical 
commitments set in percentage and 11 contained textual local content commitments.  The typical 
textual commitment on local content in subsurface use contracts was as the following:  "To use 
equipment, materials and goods produced in the Re public of Kazakhstan provided that they meet 
the requirements of the project documentation and legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan".  
The typical numerical commitment text on local content was as the following:  "Size of the local WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 217 - 
 
  content under the contract each fiscal year shall no t be less than (...) % with respect to goods, not 
less than (...) % with respect to works and not less than (...) % with respect to services in conducting operations on subsurface". 
678.  A Member asked to explain how all WTO-inconsistent measures applied under investment 
contracts under the provisions of Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced and whether the 
future amendment to Law No. 291-IV would make only the WTO-inconsistent parts of measures of 
the contracts ineffective.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan requested a 
transitional period starting from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO to phase-out WTO-
inconsistent measures applied in existing subsurface use contracts under the provisions of Law 
No. 291-IV.  These measures would cease to be enforced through:  (i) introduction of the 
amendments to Law No. 291-IV aimed at removing measures inconsistent with the WTO TRIMs Agreement with regard to procurement of goods in new contracts ; and, (ii) signing 
supplementary agreements with subsurface users, which would remove from investment contracts 
WTO TRIMs Agreement inconsistent measures with regard to procurement of goods and replace 
them with WTO TRIMs Agreement consistent measures by the date of expiration of the transitional 
period
 starting from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO .  Contracts that expired 
prior to the termination of the transitional  period would not be renewed containing 
measures inconsistent with the WTO TRIMs Agreement .   
- TRIMs in the Automotive Sector 
679.  Regarding the automotive sector, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the legal 
basis for preferential tariffs or tariff exemptions for imports of parts and components used for 
assembling motor vehicles and parts and components thereof under "industrial assembly" regime 
was established by the Common External Tariff (CET) (as approved by the Decision of the 
Inter-State Council of EurAsEC No. 18 of 27 November 2009 and put into effect through the 
CU Commission Decision No. 130 of 27 November 2009 ) and in the relevant national legislation. 
680.  In Kazakhstan, industrial assembly agreements were concluded in accordance with the 
"Rules on Concluding the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor Vehicles" approved by Order of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Industry and New Technologies" No. 113 of 
11 June 2010 (hereinafter:  Order No. 113).  According to these rules, industrial assembly of 
motor vehicles meant a system of serial production based on technological processes providing for 
project production capacity under two-shift operatio n of no less than 25,000 pieces per year and 
featuring the following technical operations: 
- welding, assembly and painting of the body; 
- installation of cabin equipment; - installation of a power train, steering mechanism, and exhaust system; 
- installation of electrical equipment, suspension components; 
- installation of exterior elements; and - conducting control tests of finished motor vehicles. 
681.  Juridical persons that signed an agreement on industrial assembly qualified for preferential 
tariffs (from 0 to 5%) on the import of parts and components used in the assembly of automobiles WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 218 - 
 
  under tariff lines of the Common External Tariff (CET) "for the industrial assembly of motor 
vehicles under headings 8701-8705, their components and assemblies" provided they met the following conditions: 
(1) to have productive assets of at least 2 billi on tenge as of the agreement signing date; and, 
(2) to have an obligation in a period not exceeding 84 months from the signing date of the 
agreement: 
 - to launch the industrial assembly of at least one model of the motor vehicles of 
 HS heading 8703; 
 - to import car parts originating from countries not party to the EAEU under the 
 tariff lines of the Common External Tariff (CET)"For the Industrial Assembly of 
 Motor Vehicles under Headings 8701-8705, their Components and Assemblies" in  volume of no more than 70% of the total value of the auto-components used in 
 the production, taking into account the cost of the body, being classified in HS 
 heading 8707. 
682.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that in the automotive sector in accordance with 
Order No. 113, to date four companies had concluded agreements on industrial assembly with the 
Ministry of Investments and Development. Thes e companies were:  "AgromashHolding" JSC, , 
"SaryarkaAvtoProm" LLP,  "AziaAvto" JSC and "Azi aAvto Kazakhstan" JSC.  The agreements with 
"AgromashHolding" JSC, "SaryarkaAvtoProm" LLP and "AziaAvto" JSC were signed in 2010 and 
with "AziaAvto Kazakhstan" JSC in 2012  for a term of 8 years with the possibility of further 
extension.  In response to a Member's question, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
Order No. 113 provided only the assembly of automobiles under HS headings 8701-8705.  In 
response to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the industrial 
assemblies of Peugeot and Toyota automobiles were launched under the existing industrial 
assembly agreements with "AgromashHolding" an d "SaryarkaAvtoProm" LLP, respectively, which 
would expire on 1 July 2018. 
683.  Some Members considered that the requirement to use domestically produced products 
was inconsistent with the WTO TRIMs Agreement.  These Members added that this requirement also appeared to constitute prohibited expo rt subsidies under Article 3.1 of the WTO SCM 
Agreement.  These Members asked Kazakhstan to  explain how it intended to bring existing 
legislation and existing contracts into conformity with WTO requirements.  These Members sought 
a commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of WTO accession, it would not maintain 
measures that would be in conflict with the WTO TRIMs Agreement nor enforce contract provisions 
that contained such measures. 
684.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with the EAEU Treaty, 
starting from 1 January 2015, Kazakhstan woul d not include local content requirements in 
procurement of goods in new contracts with subsurface users.  Therefore, in parallel with the ratification of the EAEU Treaty, the Government planned to initiate the amendment to the Law No. 
291-IV that would remove the local content provis ion with regard to procurement of goods in 
contracts on subsurface use signed from 1 January 2015.  She further emphasized that taking into 
account the importance of the application of the local content requirements for diversification of 
the economy in investment contracts concluded prior to 1 January 2015 in accordance with Law WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 219 - 
 
  No. 291-IV and industrial assembly agreements co ncluded under the provisions of Order No. 113, 
a transitional period was required to phase-out these measures.  
685.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of its accession to the 
WTO, Kazakhstan would ensure that all laws, regulations and other measures applied in 
Kazakhstan that were within the scope of WTO TRIMs Agreement, whether adopted by Kazakhstan 
or the competent bodies of the EAEU, would be co nsistent with the relevant provisions of the 
WTO Agreement, including the TRIMs Agreement, except for measures applied under investment 
contracts concluded prior to [1 January 2015]  in accordance with the Law No. 291-IV, and 
industrial assembly agreements referred to in paragraph [682]  under the provisions of the 
Order No. 113.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that from [1 January 2015] , 
Kazakhstan would not include in any new investment contracts or industrial assembly agreements concluded with investors in any sector, or include or maintain in the renewal
[22] of any existing 
investment contracts or industrial assembly agreements, provisions that are inconsistent with the 
relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, incl uding the TRIMs Agreement.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
686.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures applied 
under investment contracts concluded prior to [1 January 2015]  in accordance with the Law 
No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced [as of the date of expiration of the initial duration of 
the contracts or by 1 January 2021 ], whichever takes place sooner].   She further 
confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures applied in accordance with industrial assembly agreements concluded under the provisions of the Order No. 113 referred to in paragraph 
[682]  would be eliminated by 1 July 2018.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that with 
respect to the measures applied under the industrial assembly agreements pursuant to the Order 
No. 113 as listed in paragraph [682]  and under the investment contracts pursuant to the Law 
No. 291-IV concluded prior to [1 January 2015] , Kazakhstan would engage in consultations with 
interested WTO Members no later than [1 July 2016] and [1 January 2019], respectively] , 
regarding WTO consistent measures that could be applied, and notify WTO Members of any 
measures planned to replace WTO-inconsistent measures at least six months prior to the adoption 
of any new measures.]  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Free Zones, Special Economic Areas 
687.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the establishment of Special Economic Zones 
(SEZs) was aimed primarily at attracting foreign direct investments; accelerating development of 
modern high technology industries, transport infrastructure, and tourism; increasing employment; 
and other purposes as defined in the legal document s establishing individual SEZs.  In Kazakhstan, 
Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011 
(hereinafter – 2011 Law on SEZs) had replaced Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Zones in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007.  The 201 1 Law on SEZs had invalidated the previous Law 
                                               
22 [The term "renewal" refers to extension of the duration of existing contracts.] WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 220 - 
 
  and now was the basic Law on SEZs.  Additional relevant provisions were contained in the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan and the Tax Code of Kazakhst an.  The representative of Kazakhstan further 
confirmed that, within the EAEU, SEZ were regulated by Article 27 "On Functioning of Free 
(Special) Economic Zones and Free Warehouses" of  the EAEU Treaty, which came into effect on 
1 January 2015, and the Agreement on Free (Special) Economic Zones on the Customs Territory of 
the Customs Union and the Customs Procedures  of the Free Customs Zones of 18 June 2010 
(hereafter the CU Agreement on SEZs) which remained in force, as well as by the CU Customs 
Code and other legal instruments.  She continued that from January 2015, these provisions of the 
EAEU Treaty and CU Agreement on SEZs provided the general framework within the EAEU for rules 
on establishment and operation of new SEZs, and application of provisions of the Agreement to 
existing SEZs, including provisions on customs regime of the free customs zone on the territory of SEZs. 
688.  Working Party Members requested further information on the current rules of 
establishment and operation of the SEZs established and administered under Kazakhstan's new 
Law on SEZs, as well as information to help them assess whether the zones met 
WTO requirements.  Members also sought information about the relationship between 
Kazakhstan's 2011 Law on SEZs and the provisions of the CU Agreement on SEZs which entered 
into force on 1 July 2010.  Information was also requested on current status of the six SEZs 
previously established under Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007, and whether they were now operated in accordance with the current legislation.  Working Party Members also asked for details on how WTO obligations would be 
enforced in all the SEZs operating on the territory of Kazakhstan after accession, in particular 
whether Articles I and III of the GATT 1994 would be applied, and whether incentives granted to 
firms established in the SEZs would be base d on export performance or local content 
requirements.  Other issues raised by Members in  this connection concerned the need to restore 
a n y  t a r i f f s  o r  t a x e s  f r o m  g o o d s  o r  i n p u t s  i m p o r t e d  f r o m  n o n - E A E U  m e m b e r  S t a t e s  u s e d  i n  t h e  
manufacturing process in the SEZs to goods eventual ly exported to the rest of Kazakhstan or the 
territory of other EAEU member States, even if imported inputs had been transformed sufficiently 
to meet the criteria as domestic goods.  One Memb er stated that, in its view, there was no level of 
transformation sufficient to eliminate the need to restore exempted duties and taxes on inputs 
imported from non-EAEU member States into the SEZ duty- and tax-free, as rules of origin operated between countries, not parts of countries.  Other Members sought information on what 
other benefits, if any, in terms of tax exemptions or otherwise, were available to firms that located 
in the SEZs.   
- (a) EAEU Regulation of SEZs 
689.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that, as previously stated, the SEZs established in 
Kazakhstan under the national Law on SEZs conformed to EAEU requirements for SEZs as well, 
including those set-out in the CU Agreement on SEZs and the CU Customs Code.  This Agreement 
and the CU Customs Code provided the general framework within the EAEU for SEZs, but left 
specific regulations on their operation establishment, management, extension, early termination, WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 221 - 
 
  types of SEZs, and types of activities allowed in SE Zs to be determined by the national legislation 
of the EAEU member States.  In many cases, th e EAEU and national regimes worked together to 
establish the specific elements of the EAEU regime for SEZs.  For example, while national laws 
provided for the registration of residents of the SEZs and national authorities would maintain a 
national register of such residents, howe ver, the CU Agreement provided that the 
EAEU member States were required to send the information on SEZ operations and their national 
register s of residents to the Commission, which in turn created and published a common EAEU 
register of residents.  The Commission had the right to decide what economic activities and 
operations could be prohibited within SEZs in  addition to those prohibited by each EAEU 
member State in its SEZs.   
690.  In response to Members' questions, the repres entative of Kazakhstan also explained that 
according to Article 1 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, a free (special) economic zone was defined as 
a part of the territory of the EAEU member State within the boundaries determined by the 
legislation of the EAEU member State, where a special (special legal) regime for entrepreneurial 
and other activities was in effect, and customs regime of free customs zone could be applied.  
The CU Agreement on SEZs also confirmed that the territories of SEZs were zones under customs 
control and that customs regime of free customs zone as defined by the CU Customs Code and the 
CU Agreement on SEZs was applied to goods placed in SEZs.  She explained that the customs 
authorities of Kazakhstan were responsible for customs control in SEZs according to the national 
legislation.  
691.  Prior to the enactment of the CU Agreement on SEZs, foreign and Kazakhstani goods had 
entered the territory of SEZs without obtaining a permission from the customs authorities.  
Such goods were only subject to regular customs clearance procedures when entering the customs 
regime of the free customs zone.  Currently, according to the CU Agreement on SEZs, goods could 
be imported into and exported from the SEZ te rritory only with the permission of customs 
a u t h o r i t i e s .   I n  r e s p o n s e  t o  a  M e m b e r ' s  q u e s tion about the legislation that described the 
procedures for issuing permits, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the Customs Control 
Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan had developed a draft Resolution "On Some Issues of 
Application of the Customs Procedure of Free Customs Zone", which established procedures for 
issuing permits for the importation and exportation of goods into/from the territory of SEZ, as well 
as forms for these documents.  According to the draft resolution, for obtaining a permit for importation of goods into the SEZ territory, SEZ residents submitted to the customs authorities 
copies of commercial, transport (shipping) or customs documents in respect of imported goods 
that contained information required for customs control of goods and vehicles.  Based on 
verification of the documents against the actual data, the customs authorities made a decision on 
the import of the goods and the means of transportation to the SEZ. 
692.  Pursuant to Article 10 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, a "free customs zone" regime was 
defined as the customs procedure within SEZ borders, under which foreign goods were placed and 
used within the territory of SEZ or its part without paying customs duties and taxes and were not WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 222 - 
 
  subject to non-tariff regulation; goods of the EAEU  were placed and used within the territory of a 
SEZ or its part without application of bans and restrictions to them. 
693.  Article 10 of the CU Agreement on SEZs also provided that goods that incorporated 
imported inputs and were manufactured by SEZ residents registered prior to 1 January 2012, 
could be recognised as EAEU goods up until 1 January 2017, i.e., they could be sold into the rest 
of the customs territory of the Customs Union wi thout paying the exempted customs duties on 
imported inputs, provided such imported inputs ha d been substantially transformed, i.e. they met 
any of the following conditions listed in Article 19 of the CU Agreement on SEZs:  
(i) manufacturing had changed the HS classifica tion code of the good at the level of  
any of the first four-digits;  
(ii) its transformation was recognised as sufficiently implementing a predetermined list 
of conditions, production and technological or manufacturing operations, necessary to be recognised as goods of the EAEU; and, 
(iii) the percentage share of the value added had reached a predetermined share of the 
price of the final good (the rule of ad valorem  share) or the percentage share of 
the cost of foreign goods did not exceed a predetermined share.  
694.  The CU Commission had the right to decide by consensus:  (i) the list of conditions and 
operations for goods manufactured in SEZs, incorp orating imported goods that were, or were not, 
sufficient for these goods to be recognised as good s of the EAEU, and, (ii) the procedure for using 
the rule of ad valorem  share as a criterion of sufficient processing for these goods to be recognised 
as goods of the EAEU.  The rule of ad valorem  share could not be applied to repairs of the goods of 
the EAEU done in the SEZs.  Goods would not be recognised as EAEU goods, if the transforming 
operations applied, did not meet the criteria for sufficient processing established by the 
Commission.  The national authority, as defined by national legislation, carried out the 
determination of the status of the goods in acco rdance with the rules of the CU Agreement on 
SEZs, issued the relevant legal findings and enforced them.  In case of Kazakhstan, this national 
authority was the Ministry of Industry and New Technologies. 
695.  In response to a Member's request to clarify what were the predetermined shares used as 
a sufficient processing criterion, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that an ad valorem  share 
rule was established by CU Commission Decision No. 515.  According to this Decision, goods 
produced with the use of foreign goods placed under the customs procedure of free customs zone 
or a free warehouse customs procedure (hereinafter – foreign goods) were considered as 
sufficiently processed if the percentage share of the cost of foreign goods used in the manufacture 
of the final product did not exceed 50% of the price of the final product.  The cost of foreign goods 
placed under the customs procedure of free cust oms zone or free warehouse customs procedure, 
and used in the manufacturing of the final product, was determined as a the customs value of such goods, established on the date the customs author ities registered the customs declaration filed for 
placing goods under the customs procedure of free customs zone or free warehouse customs 
procedure.  The price of the final product was de termined on ex-works conditions.  She further 
added that, currently, Kazakhstan applied national sufficient processing criteria established by the 
Resolution of the Government of the Republic of  Kazakhstan No. 1647 "On Approval of the Rules of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 223 - 
 
  Determining the Country of Origin of Goods, Drafting and Issuing Expertise Acts on Origin of 
Goods and Issuing a Certificate on Origin of Goods" of 22 October 2009.  
696.  She stated that Article 17 of the CU Agreement on SEZs established procedures for 
payment of customs duties and taxes applied to goods exported from the territories of SEZs.  
In particular, goods of the EAEU exported from SE Zs into the rest of the EAEU customs territory 
were not subject to payment of customs duties, including export duties.  Goods of the EAEU 
exported from SEZs to locations outside of the EAEU customs territory were subject to payment of 
export customs duties, if applicable.  When calculating export duty, the duty rate itself, value of 
goods and (or) the physical characteristics of in-kind (number, mass, volume or other 
characteristics), as well as the quantity of goods and the exchange rate, established in accordance 
with the legislation of the EAEU member State, were determined on the day of registration by 
customs authorities of the customs declaration, submitted for placing goods under customs regime 
of export.  As for foreign goods, they were subj ect to payment of import customs duties and VAT 
when exported from SEZs into the rest of the EAEU customs territory.  When foreign goods were 
exported from SEZs to locations outside of the EA EU customs territory export duties and VAT were 
not levied.  She further stated that goods produced (processed) in the SEZs by residents 
registered prior to 1 January 2012 incorporating imported components, but recognised as goods of 
the EAEU based on sufficient processing criteria, i.e., substantial transformation, were not subject 
to payment of customs duties when exported fr om SEZs into the rest of the EAEU customs 
territory.  These latter provisions expired on 1 January 2017. 
- (b) Basic Law on SEZs 
697.  The previous national law regulating special economic zones, Law No. 274 "On Special 
Economic Zones (SEZs)" 2007 had  provided that SEZs could be established for a period of not 
more than 25 years and administered by the Customs authorities as customs regimes of "free 
customs zone" within the SEZs borders.  Foreign and Kazakhstani goods placed in a SEZ and used 
there were exempt from customs duties and taxes, except for excise tax applied to imports.  Other 
than safety requirements, no non-tariff regulato r y  m e a s u r e s  w e r e  a p p l i e d .   W h e n  g o o d s  w e r e  
exported from the territory of SEZs to another country, neither taxes nor tariffs were charged.  
When goods incorporating foreign components were exported to the rest of Kazakhstan, import 
duties were not applied, provided they met the sufficient processing criteria.  The SEZ origin of 
goods was confirmed by a certificate of origin.  When such certificate of origin was not available, 
the goods were considered to be either Kazakhstani (when exported from Kazakhstan to third 
countries) or foreign (when imported into the rest of Kazakhstan). 
698.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the Law on SEZs 2011 , which applied as 
of 2011, stipulated procedures for establishing and operating SEZs on the territory of Kazakhstan.  
SEZs were considered a part of the territory of  Kazakhstan with defined boundaries within which 
the Government applied a special regime for conducti ng priority types of activities.  Within a SEZ, 
a special customs and tax regime was established for foreign and domestic goods imported into the SEZ from (a) the rest of the EAEU territory, and, (b) third countries, and to goods exported WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 224 - 
 
  from the SEZ to (a) the rest of the EAEU territory , and, (b) third countries.  Kazakhstan's products 
and products of the EAEU member States were treated as domestic goods for the purpose of applying customs duties when placed under the cu stoms regime of free customs zones, i.e., were 
not subject to customs duties.  As for VAT, Protocols and the Agreement (see section on 
"Application of Internal Taxes on Imports") established that imports from  EAEU member States 
would be subject to VAT.  However, Article 21 of the CU Agreement on SEZs, which superseded 
Kazakhstan's national legislation, indicated that goods from EAEU member States placed under the 
customs regime of free customs zone would be eligible for zero rate VAT provided that a copy of 
the customs declaration certified by customs authorities in accordance with which such goods were 
placed under the customs procedure of customs-free zone was submitted.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan emphasized that only goods included into the list of goods that were required for a 
SEZ participant to carry out priority activities could be placed under the customs regime of free 
customs zone, i.e. be exempted from payment of  import duties and VAT.  These lists of goods 
were defined in a Contract on cond ucting activity signed with each SEZ participant.  The Ministry of 
Industry and New Technologies was the relevant au thorised body administering the establishment, 
operation and termination of SEZs on the territory of Kazakhstan.   
699.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that according to the Law on SEZs 
2011 , central or local executive bodies, and juridical persons of Kazakhstan could submit a 
proposal on establishment of a SEZ to the comp etent authority, which contained the information 
on the purpose of the SEZ, priority business acti vities, current economic situation in the region, 
where the SEZ would be located, and the forecasted  impact on the economy.  Upon approval of 
the proposal by the competent authority, the entity had to conduct a feasibility study for the 
proposed SEZ with the assessment of the effect on the environment.  Upon approval of findings of 
the feasibility study by all relevant Government agencies, the competent authority submitted the 
proposal on establishment of a SEZ to the Government.  A decision on establishment of a SEZ and 
on priority business activities that corresponded to the objectives of the SEZ was adopted by the 
President based on the proposal of the Government.   
700.  Pursuant to Article 8 of the 2011 Law on SEZs, an SEZ could be established for a period of 
up to 25 years.  The term of operation of each SEZ was determined in a Presidential Decree on 
creation of that particular SEZ.  The land plots on which SEZs were established and used for 
conducting priority activities were leased to the prospective SEZ operators in accordance with the land legislation of Kazakhstan for the term for which a particular SEZ was established.  Normally, a 
SEZ was liquidated upon expiration of its term.  In case of failure to reach the target indicators of 
a SEZ by its residents, a SEZ could be terminated by the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
based on the proposal of the Government.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that once a 
SEZ was established, investors could apply to become a SEZ resident, i.e. to be registered as a 
legal entity eligible for a special tax regime and other conditions more favourable than those 
available to legal entities in the rest of the customs territory, and conclude agreements that 
specified terms of their activities within a SEZ.  The list of documents that had to be submitted by 
an applicant was described in Article 10 of the 2011 Law on SEZs.  The representative of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 225 - 
 
  Kazakhstan emphasized that foreign invested firms irrespective of the percentage of foreign 
participation could be registered as SEZ residents subject to fulfillment of respective requirements applied on a non-discriminatory basis to all applicants.  An applicant had to have financial 
resources and other property in an amount specifie d in the feasibility study report and its business 
activity had to correspond to the objectives and legitimate activities in a SEZ.  
701.  The following entities could not apply to conduct an activity within the SEZs: 
 1. subsoil users; 
 2. entities producing excisable goods, except for entities that produce, assemble  
  excisable goods stipulated in sub-paragraph 6 of Article 279 of the Tax Code; 
 3. entities using special tax regimes;  4. entities that were granted investment tax preferences; and, 
 5. entities involved in gambling business.  
702.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that the Law on SEZs envisaged the creation 
of managing companies in the form of joint-stock companies.  The following individuals could 
become founders of a managing company:   
 1. the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
 2. local executive bodies of oblasts, ci ty of a Republican status, capital city; 
 3. non-State juridical persons; or, 
4. foreign juridical persons with an experience in managing SEZ in other countries or 
in Kazakhstan. 
703.  Pursuant to the 2011 Law on SEZs, in the event a SEZ was established on the initiative of 
central or local executive bodies, the State retained ownership of at least 50% of the voting shares 
issued by the managing company, unless otherwis e provided in the Presidential Decree on the 
establishment of the SEZ.  If the SEZ was established on the initiative of a non-State juridical person, the State retained ownership of at least 26%  of the voting shares issued by the managing 
company.  The specified legal form of a managing company allowed investors to participate in the 
share capital of the managing company, and thus, to participate in the management of project 
implementation and to ensure transparency of procedures applied within SEZ.   
704.  According to the 2011 Law on SEZs, a "single window" had been introduced for the 
provision of public services within SEZs, which envisaged simplified procedures for preparation and 
submission of documents.  
705.  The six existing SEZs created under Law No. 274 of 6 July 2007 had adopted the 
operational and administrative provisions of the 2011 Law on SEZs when that Law had come into 
force (see Annex 18 of this Report for a list of the current SEZs and their purposes).   
- (c) Customs and Tax Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
706.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that a Tax Code that had entered into 
force in January 2009 established a uniform approach to tax preferences granted for SEZ 
residents, including the residents of SEZs created under Law No. 274 of 6 July 2007.  In addition 
to customs duty exemptions, Article 151 of the Tax Code provided for reduction by 100% of the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 226 - 
 
  corporate income tax rate, zero coefficient to related rates in calculation of the land tax, and 0% 
rate to the average value of the property subject to  taxation in calculation of the property tax.  
Moreover, in accordance with Article 244-2 of th e Tax Code, sales to the territory of a SEZ of 
goods that were included in the list of goods determined by the Government and fully consumed in 
conducting business activities that met the purposes of the SEZ were to be taxed at zero rate of 
VAT.  The latter provision was aimed at equalizing  the treatment provided to goods imported to 
SEZs from the territory of Kazakhstan with the treatment provided to foreign goods described in 
paragraph [ 692] of this section. 
707.  Pursuant to Article 150 of the Tax Code, to be eligible for tax preferences, SEZ residents 
had to comply with the following requirements:  (i) be registered at the tax authorities within a 
SEZ territory; (ii) have no structural divisions outside of a SEZ territory; and (iii) of the total annual income from sales of goods of own production (works, services), derive at least 90% from 
the activities that complied with the objectives of a SEZ.  Business activities that complied with the 
objectives of SEZs were identified in Article 150 of the Tax Code and included projects aimed at 
development of the IT industry; textile industry  and production of leather goods; chemical 
industry; metallurgical industry; machinery building, including production of vehicles, trailer trucks 
and two-wheel trailers; production of railroad engines and rolling stock; production of electric 
equipment and household appliances; pharmaceuticals industry; food production; paper and 
furniture production; aviation industry; petrochemical industry and related industries and 
technologies; and tourism services.   
708.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan's legislation provided uniform 
requirements both for domestic and foreign companies to be eligible for tax and customs 
preferences in SEZs.  
709.  A Member said that Kazakhstan's SEZs were authorised by legislation that contained 
provisions for granting special benefits contingent on export orientation and/or import substitution 
of enterprises.  This Member held the view that, these provisions violated both the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, as well as the WTO Agreement on 
Trade-Related Investment Measures, and, therefore,  should be eliminated.  This Member sought a 
commitment from Kazakhstan that, from the date of accession, Kazakhstan would ensure the 
enforcement of its WTO obligations in SEZs existing or established within its territory, including the 
prohibition of TRIMs or subsidies based on the us e of domestic goods or export performance.  
Kazakhstan was also asked to confirm that the right of firms to establish and operate in these 
zones would not depend on export performance, trade balancing, or local content criteria.  
In addition, Kazakhstan needed to ensure that goods produced in the SEZs under tax and tariff 
provisions that exempted imports and imported inputs from tariffs and certain taxes would be 
subject to normal customs formalities when entering the rest of Kazakhstan, including the 
application of tariffs and taxes. 
710.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that both criteria related to export performance 
and import substitution had been removed by Decree of the President of the Republic of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 227 - 
 
  Kazakhstan No. 657 "On Amendments to Decrees of the President Nos. 853 and 1166 of 
26 April 2002 and 18 August 2003 respectively".  According to Decree of the President No. 657, the term "export oriented production" used in legislation that regulated SEZs had been changed to 
the term "competitiveness", while the term "impor t substitution" had been removed from the texts 
of the Decrees.  In addition, the Resolution  of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1376 
"On Approval of the Regulation on Establishmen t and Allocation of Finances of the Fund for 
Economic and Social Development of Special Ec onomic Zones" of 26 September 1997 had been 
revoked.  Furthermore, there were no provisions re lated to the right to establish an enterprise in a 
SEZ that were made contingent upon export performance and/or import substitution contained in 
the 2011 Law on SEZs, the CU Agreement on SEZs, or any of the Presidential Decrees relating to 
SEZs.  
711.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that at the moment ten SEZs were operational in 
Kazakhstan:  "Astana-New City", "Seaport Aktau", "Informational Technologies Park", "Ontustyk", 
"National Industrial Petrochemical Techno-Park", "Burabai", "Saryarka", "Pavlodar", "Horgos-East 
Gates" and "Chemical Park "Taraz".  The first si x of these had been established under Law No. 274 
of 6 July 2007.  Their terms and periods of operation were now regulated by the 2011 Law on 
SEZs.  The other four were established as SEZs under the 2011 Law on SEZs (see Annex 18 for 
more information on these zones). 
- (d) Free Warehouse Customs Regime 
712.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that establishment and operation of free 
warehouses on the territory of Kazakhstan were regulated by Article 27 "On Functioning of Free 
(Special) Economic Zones and Free Warehouses" of the EAEU Treaty and the CU Agreement "On 
Free Warehouses and Free Warehouse Customs Procedure" of 18 June 2010 (hereinafter – the 
Agreement on Free Warehouses).  According to this Agreement, a free warehouse was a 
construction (building), within which foreign goods and goods of the EAEU placed under the 
customs regime of a free warehouse, as well as other goods in accordance with the Agreement, 
could be placed and used.  She added that according to Article 8 of the Agreement on Free 
Warehouses, a free warehouse customs regime was a customs regime under which foreign goods 
were placed and used without payment of customs duties and taxes, as well as without application 
of non-tariff regulatory measures; and goods of the EAEU were placed and used without 
application of bans and restrictions.  Goods banned for importation into the EAEU territory or for 
exportation from the EAEU territory could not be placed under free warehouse customs regime.    
713.  She further explained that according to the Agreement on Free Warehouses, the owner of 
a free warehouse was a juridical person of the EAEU member State which was registered in 
accordance with the national legislation of the relevant EAEU member State and met the 
requirements established in Article 4 of the Agreem ent.  The juridical person was recognised as an 
owner of a free warehouse upon inclusion of that person by customs authorities into the Register 
of free warehouse owners (hereinafter - the Regist er).  The procedures for including and excluding WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 228 - 
 
  owners of free warehouses into/from the Register  were established in the Resolution of the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1086 of 22 September 2011.   
714.  Pursuant to Article 11 of the Agreement on Free Warehouses, the following operations 
could be performed at free warehouses: 
(i) storage (stockpiling, splitting) of the goods; 
(ii) loading (unloading) of goods and other cargo operations associated with storage; 
(iii) operations to ensure safety of goods, as well as simple operations on preparing 
goods for shipment and sale, including fragmentation of the consignments, formation of shipments, sorting, packaging, repackaging, labelling, operations to 
improve product quality; 
(iv) processing operations as a result of which goods lost their individual 
characteristics, and (or) manufacturing  and production of goods (including 
assembly, disassembly, installation, adjustme nt), as well as repair operations; or, 
(v) operations involving transactions on transfer of ownership, use and (or) disposal 
rights for these products.   
715.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that in accordance with Article 8 of the 
CU Agreement on Free Warehouses, foreign goods placed under the customs regime of a free warehouse retained the status of foreign goods, and goods of the EAEU placed under the customs 
regime of a free warehouse retained the status of the goods of the EAEU.   
716.  Article 14 of the CU Agreement on Free Warehouses established procedures for payment of 
customs duties and taxes applied to goods exported from the free warehouses.  In particular, 
goods of the EAEU exported from free warehouses  into the rest of the EAEU customs territory, 
were not subject to payment of customs duties, including export duties.  Goods with the status of 
goods of the EAEU exported from free warehouses to locations outside of the EAEU customs 
territory were subject to payment of export cust oms duties, where applicable.  When calculating 
export duty, the duty rate itself, value of goods and (or) the physical characteristics of in-kind 
(number, mass, volume or other characteristics), as well as the quantity of goods and the 
exchange rate, established in accordance with th e legislation of the EAEU member State, were 
determined on the day of registration by customs authorities of the customs declaration, submitted 
for placing goods under the customs regime of export.  As for foreign goods, they were subject to 
payment of import customs duties and VAT when ex ported from free warehouses into the rest of 
the EAEU customs territory.  When foreign goods were exported from free warehouses outside of 
the EAEU customs territory, export duties and VAT were not levied.  She further stated that goods 
produced (processed) in free warehouses whose owners were included into the Register of free 
warehouse owners  prior to 1 January 2012 , incorporating imported components and recognised 
as goods of the EAEU , were not subject to payment of customs duties when exported from free 
warehouses into the rest of the EAEU customs te rritory.  The latter provision expired on 1 January 
2017.  Goods produced (processed) with the use of foreign goods could be recognised as EAEU 
goods if they met the following criteria of suffici ent processing described in Article 16 of the CU 
Agreement on Free Warehouses:  
(i) manufacturing had changed the goods' HS code at the level of any first four-digits;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 229 - 
 
  (ii) its transformation was recognised as sufficiently implementing a predetermined list 
of conditions, production and technological or manufacturing operations, necessary to be recognised as goods of the EAEU; and, 
(iii) the percentage share of the value added had reached a predetermined share of the 
price of the final good (the rule of ad valorem  share); or the percentage share of 
the cost of foreign goods did not exceed a predetermined share in the price of the final good.  
717.  The list of conditions and operations for goods manufactured in free warehouses 
incorporating imported goods that were, or were not, sufficient for these goods to be recognised as 
goods of the EAEU was adopted by the Commission by consensus.  The Commission also approved 
the procedure for using the rule of ad valorem  share as a criterion of sufficient processing for 
these goods to be recognised as goods of the EAEU. 
718.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that according to the national 
legislation of Kazakhstan, goods that were produced in free warehouses and sold from these areas 
to the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan were exempt from VAT if they met the sufficient 
processing criteria adopted by the Government of  the Republic of Kazakhstan and were included 
into the list of products adopted by the Governme nt of Kazakhstan.  This preference was provided 
in accordance with Article 49 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 100-IV "On Entering 
Into Force of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Taxes and Other Mandatory Payments to 
the Budget'" of 10 December 2008 and the Resoluti on of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 133 
"On the List of Goods Produced in the Territory  of Free Warehouse and Sold by the Owner of a 
Free Warehouse in the Territory of the Republic  of Kazakhstan, Sales Turnover of which are 
Exempted from VAT, and the List of Goods Produc ed in the Territory of Free Warehouse and Sold 
from this Territory to the Rest of the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 19 January 2012.  
According to the Tax Code, the preference would expire on 1 January 2017. 
719.  According to Article 7 of the Resolution of th e Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 1647 "On Approval of the Rules of Determining the Country of Origin of Goods, Drafting and 
Issuing Expertise Acts on Origin of Goods and Issuing a Certificate on Origin of Goods" of 
22 October 2009, goods were considered as meeting sufficient processing criteria if one of the following conditions were fulfilled:   
- processing of goods results in a change of the HS code at a level of any of first four-digits; 
- fulfillment of certain industrial and technological operations sufficient to recognise a 
country where these operations took place as a country of origin of these goods; or, 
- changes in the cost of a good when the perc entage share of the cost reaches a fixed share 
of the price of the finished good ( ad valorem  percentage rule).  
Resolution No.
 1647 described the terms, manufacturing and technological operations required for 
a good to acquire an origin status when goods imported from third countries were used in a 
production process. 
720.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that currently 59 juridical persons were registered 
as free warehouse owners in Kazakhstan.  Their operations were specialised primarily in the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 230 - 
 
  following activities:  assembly of vehicles, assembly of agricultural machines and equipment, food 
production, and production of construction materials.  
721.  Members recalled that substantial transformation and local content level could not be 
applied to goods produced or processed in SEZs or free warehouse customs regimes with imported 
goods from non-EAEU member States for the purp ose of exempting these goods from application 
of customs duties or taxes when sold into the rest of Kazakhstan.  These imported inputs should 
re-acquire their tariffs or taxes when entering Ka zakhstan or EAEU territory, whether or not they 
have been processed in SEZs or free warehouses and transformed into other products.  In their 
view, to treat these imported inputs differently for tax or tariff purposes would not be consistent 
with Article I of the GATT 1994, and exempting these charges based on an assessment of local 
content (substantial transformation criteria) could constitute a prohibited subsidy.  Members asked 
Kazakhstan to eliminate these provisions and to operate its SEZs and free warehouses in 
conformity with WTO provisions.   
722.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, subject to the exceptions that applied for 
the transition periods specified below in respect of the goods of juridical persons registered in SEZs 
and/or operating free warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, SEZs and free 
warehouses in Kazakhstan would be established, maintained and administered from the date of 
accession in conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agreement.  She added that Kazakhstan 
would apply the provisions of the WTO Agreement in  all of its SEZs and in the operation of free 
warehouses.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
723.  With respect to local content requirements, sufficient processing, i.e., substantial 
transformation, and exemptions from tariffs and taxes, the goods of juridical persons which had 
been registered and active in SEZs and free warehouses prior to Kazakhstan's accession to the 
WTO, would continue to enjoy the treatment described in paragraphs [ 693], [696], [716], and 
[718] of this Report, during the transition period ending on 1 January 2017.  Upon expiration of 
the transition period, firms registered in SEZs and operating these free warehouses would not be 
subject to export performance, trade balancing, or local content criteria requirements, in law or in 
practice, nor would any new firms registering in SEZs or operating a free warehouse be subject to 
such requirements.  In addition, goods imported into free warehouses and SEZs under provisions 
that exempt imports from non-EAEU member States  from customs duties and certain taxes, which 
were then released to the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the EAEU, would 
be subject to those duties and taxes as applicable  and customs formalities when entering the rest 
of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory  of the EAEU.  If those imported goods were 
reprocessed, i.e., substantially transformed, within  the territory of a SEZ or in a free warehouse, 
the duties and taxes that would otherwise have been assessed for those goods were to be paid 
when the final products entered the rest of the territory of Kazakhstan and the territory of the 
EAEU.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 231 - 
 
  - Government Procurement 
724.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated th at government procurement was governed by: 
the Law No. 303 "On Government Procurement" (Law  No. 303) of 21 July 2007 as last amended in 
April 2012 by Law No. 15-V, Government Resoluti on No. 1301 "On Rules for Holding Government 
Procurement" of 27 December 2007, Government Resolution No. 623 "On Approval of the Rules for 
Holding Electronic Government Procurement" of 15 May 2012, and Government Resolution 
No. 1301 "On the Determination of State Support for Domestic Categories of Potential Suppliers" of 27 December 2007.  The above legislation had been developed taking into account the 
requirements of international law, specifically the Model Law of the United Nations Commission on 
International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).   
725.  Kazakhstan's government procurement legislation was aimed at developing of fair 
competition among potential suppliers, providing equal opportunities for potential suppliers to 
participate in government procurement, optimal and effective expenditure of cash assets used for 
Government, and providing publicity and transparen cy of the government procurement process.  
The body responsible for development and implem entation of State policy in the area of 
government procurement was the Ministry of Finance. 
726.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that pursuant to the Law No. 303, government 
procurement was defined as purchases made by customers of goods and services
23 essential for 
their operation, performance of State functions or customer's statutory activity, conducted in 
accordance with Law No. 303 and civil legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, except for the 
services purchased from natural persons under employment contracts or from natural persons not 
involved in entrepreneurial activity, on the base of paid services contracts, in the framework of 
fulfilment of State tasks and contributions, including contributions to the capital stock of newly 
established juridical persons.  Customers were State bodies, State agencies, as well as State 
enterprises24, juridical persons and any affiliates thereof,  with 50% or more of voting shares held 
by the Government, except for national managing holdings, national holdings, national managing 
companies and national companies, and their affiliated entities, including the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", which was a national mana ging holding.  The procurement regulations of 
national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies, and their affiliated entities, 
including the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Kazyna", which was a national managing holding, 
were described in Section "State Ownership, State-Trading Entities and Privatization".  
727.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the process of government procurement 
included the following stages:  (i) elaboration and approval of an annual government procurement 
plan; (ii) selection of a supplier and conclusion of a State procurement contract; and, 
(iii) fulfilment of the State procurement contract.  
                                               
23 The term "services" included both "services" and "works" as those terms were used in the legislation 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
24 State enterprises are defined in Section "State Ownership, State Tr ading Entities and Privatization" of 
this Report . WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 232 - 
 
  728.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that  government procurement could be conducted 
through the following methods:  (i) tender; (ii) one source procurement; (iii) supplier selection on the basis of price quotation requests; (iv) auctio n; and, (v) commodity exchange.  The method for 
conducting government procurement could be selected by the customer without coordination with 
the Ministry of Finance.  Government procurement by auction and price quotation requests could 
be conducted only in electronic format.  Government procurement by tender and one source 
methods could be conducted in both paper and electronic formats.  From 1 July 2012, government 
procurement by tender was conducted only in electronic format.  The lists of goods eligible for 
procurement through auction, one so urce and commodity exchange were contained  in 
Annexes 19(A), (B) and (C) of this Report.  
729.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the tender was the main method of 
government procurement and could be used in all cases.  Government procurement by the one 
source method could be conducted in the following cases:  (i) State enterprises and juridical 
persons and affiliates thereof, with 50 % o r  m o r e  o f  v o t i n g  s h a r e s  h e l d  b y  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t ,  
needed to conduct other purchases from the same supplier for the purposes of unification, 
standardisation or ensuring of compatibility with already purchased goods, equipment, technology 
or services; (ii) government procurement by the tender method had been recognised as invalid; 
(iii) there was a necessity to conduct government procurement of goods and services of daily 
and/or weekly needs as an interim measure while the results of the ongoing government 
procurement by tender were concluded and entere d into force; or (iv) measures provided by 
Law No. 303 -III that were undertaken by a customer did not result in conclusion of a government 
procurement contract by the method of price quotation requests.  Government procurement by 
the price quotation request method had to be conducted in relation to like goods and services in 
cases where the volume of such goods and servic es did not exceed 4,000 MCI established for the 
relevant fiscal year on the basis of the law on the national budget.  Moreover, the price was a 
determining factor in government procurement by the price quotation request method .  
Government procurement by the auctions method had to be conducted through official web portal 
of government procurement in the real time mode.  Government procurement by auctions had to 
be conducted by single operator in government procurement.  The government procurement 
subject to auction were goods and services according to the list approved by the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, with an annual volume more than 4,000 MCI established for the relevant fiscal year by the Law "On the National Budget".  Government procurement of goods 
through commodity exchanges had to be conduc ted based on the list of commodity exchange 
goods in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on commodity exchanges. 
730.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Law No. 303 contained provisions on 
transparency of the procedures for conducting government procurement.  All the information on 
government procurement was provided on the official website (web portal) - 
www.goszakup.gov.kz.  No later than three working days from the date of approval of the 
competitive bid documents, but not less than 30 calendar days and, in case of electronic 
government procurement, not less than 20 calendar days, before the final date for submission of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 233 - 
 
  applications for participation in the competitive bidding by potential suppliers, the organizer of 
government procurement was obliged:  (i) to place on the customer's website the text of the announcement on conducting the government procurement by tender, and the list of competitive 
bid documents; (ii) to place on the official web portal of government procurement the text of the 
announcement on conducting the government procurement by tender; and, (iii) to ensure in the 
chronological order registration on the customer's website the facts of presentation of competitive 
bid documents.  Notices of invitation for participation in government procurement had to include 
the following information:  full name; postal  and electronic addresses of the organizer of 
government procurement; the subject of the contra ct; the required amount; the location and date 
of delivery of goods and services; the place and ways for obtaining a copy of the tender 
documentation; the place and deadline for submission of applications for participation in the tender; and the date, time and place of opening envelopes with applications for participation in the 
tender. 
731.  She noted that the winner of the tender was selected in accordance with the rules 
established in the national legislation, i.e., the laws  and rules laid out in the first paragraph of this 
section.  Within two working days after completion of the tender process, the protocol of the 
government procurement results was published on an official website of the entity and on the 
web portal on government procurement. 
732.  In response to questions about the local content requirements in Kazakhstan's government 
procurement laws, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that such requirements were set-out by Law No.303, Rules No. 1301 and No.623.  Wh en the Tender Commission evaluated and 
compared all submitted bids, it took into account the criteria stipulated in paragraph 4 of Article 17 
of Law No.303.  These criteria had to be specifie d in the tender documentation and applied equally 
to all competitive bids.  In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 17 of the Law No.303, the 
competitive price quotations of participants were affected by the following criteria:  
(i) characteristics of a potential supplier as follows:  (a) experience in the market of goods and 
services which was required for conducted government procurement; (b) a document confirming 
performance of voluntary certification of goods by domestic producers in accordance with 
Kazakhstan legislation on technical regulation; (c) certified system on management quality in 
accordance with State standards; (d) a certified system on management of environmental control 
in accordance with the requirements of State standards and/or the confirmation of compliance with standard of ecologically clean production in accordance with Kazakhstan legislation on technical 
regulation; (ii) the functional, technical and qualitative characteristics of goods and services, and 
(or) the costs of operation, maintenance and repair of the purchased goods; and, (iii) local 
content.  In accordance with Law No.303, Rules No.1301 and No.623 the Tender Commission 
could reduce the conditional competitive price quotation for domestic producers of goods by up to 
20% and for domestic suppliers of  services (works) up to 15%.  
733.  The potential supplier had the right to appeal actions (omission) of the customer, organizer 
of government procurement, commissions, expert and single operator involved in government WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 234 - 
 
  procurement where their actions (omission) infringed rights and legal interests of the potential 
supplier. 
734.  In response to the question of a Member on whether there would be a common EAEU 
procurement regime for state and (or) municipal procurement, the representative of Kazakhstan 
stated that the legal basis for the common policy was Section XXII (Government (Municipal) 
Procurement) and Annex No.25 (Protocol on Regulati on of Procurement) of the EAEU Treaty, which 
came into effect on 1 January 2015.  These provisions replaced the Single Economic Space 
Agreement on State (Municipal) Procurement of 1 January 2012. Article 88 of Section XXII of the 
EAEU Treaty  stipulated that member States granted  national treatment for government 
procurement conducted by State bodies and State agencies to other EAEU member States on a 
reciprocity basis. The EAEU Treaty covered procurement conducted by State bodies, budget-
funded organizations, including State agencies as well as other entities specified by the 
government procurement legislation of EAEU member States. The EAEU Treaty did not cover 
procurement of State enterprises performing activities of commercial character and enterprises 
with State participation as well as procurement of the National (Central)  banks.  
735.  Members noted that the scope of "government procurement", as provided for in current 
Kazakhstani legislation, covered more than "procurement", as defined in Articles III:8 and XVII:2 
of the GATT 1994 and Article XIII: 1 of the GATS, i.e., products and services purchased for 
governmental purposes and not with a view to co mmercial re-sale or, with a view, to use in the 
production of goods for commercial sale, or to use in the supply of services for commercial sale.  "Procurement" also appeared to cover more than the goods and services typically subject to the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurement.  Laws, regulations and other measures relating to 
purchases that fell outside the scope of the definitions in Articles III:8 and XVII:2 of 
the GATT 1994, and Article XIII:1 of  the GATS, would not be excluded from the coverage of the 
Agreements in Annex 1 of the Marrakesh Agreemen t Establishing the World Trade Organization.  
These Members noted that in Kazakhstan's legislation, "procurement" appeared to include, in 
addition to goods for governmental purposes, goods and services for direct consumption and 
support, i.e., products or services by firms that were sold commercially or used to produce goods 
and services for commercial sale.  They sought confirmation that, in making purchases that would 
not be considered as government procurement within the meaning of Article III:8 and XVII:2 of 
the GATT 1994 and Article XIII:1 of  the GATS, and that national treatment and MFN requirements 
would apply.  These Members also sought confirmation that Kazakhstan would ensure that goods 
and services procured under Kazakhstan's legislation on Government Procurement would not be 
re-sold in the commercial sphere or used in the production of goods or the supply of services for 
commercial sale.   
736.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, in respect of procurement of goods and 
services, including by State-owned and State-controlled enterprises, which were not purchased for 
governmental purposes, but with a view to commercial re-sale or with a view to use for production 
of goods and supply of services for commercial sale, from the date of accession, such purchases WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 235 - 
 
  and sales would not be considered to be "gov ernment procurement" within the meaning of 
Articles III:8(a) of the GATT 1994 and XIII:1 of th e GATS, and thus, the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and the competent bodies of the EAEU would comply with all applicable provisions of the WTO 
Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
737.  Some Members of the Working Party sought a commitment from Kazakhstan that it would 
initiate negotiations for membership in the Agreement on Government Procurement by tabling an 
entity offer immediately after its accession to the WTO. 
738.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the intention of Kazakhstan to join the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurement and to notify the Committee on Government 
Procurement to this effect at the time of accessi on of Kazakhstan to the WTO and to ensure that 
from the date of accession, its Government agencies would award contracts in a transparent manner according to published laws, regulations and guidelines.  She also confirmed that 
Kazakhstan would request the status of an "observer"  in the WTO Agreement on Government 
Procurement at the time of its accession to the WTO and would initiate negotiations for 
membership in the WTO Agreement on Government  Procurement by tabling an Appendix 1 offer 
within four years after accession.  She confirmed that, if the results of the negotiations were 
satisfactory to the interests of Kazakhstan and the other Members of the Agreement, Kazakhstan 
would accede to that Agreement.  The Work ing Party took note of these commitments. 
739.  The Government of Kazakhstan was developing amendments to the legislation on 
government procurement with the purpose to ex clude procurements made by state enterprises 
and enterprises with state participation, i.e. State-owned and State-controlled enterprises, 
procuring goods and services for the purpose of commercial sale (resale) from the coverage of Law 
No. 303 "On Government Procurement" of 21 Ju ly 2007.  The relevant amendments to the 
legislation of Kazakhstan regulating government  procurement would be enacted by the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. 
- Transit 
740.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan allowed free transit consistent 
with the provisions of Article V of the GATT 199 4.  She added that the basic principles that 
Kazakhstan had followed previously had not been affected by the participation of Kazakhstan 
either in the Customs Union or the Eurasian Econ omic Union.  From 1 July 2010, customs control 
of goods in transit through the territory of Ka zakhstan had been based on the provisions of 
Chapter 32 of the CU Customs Code.  The provisions  of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
No. 296-IV "On Customs Procedures" of 30 June 2010 (hereinafter – the Customs Code of 
Kazakhstan) concerning transit control were applied to the extent that they did not conflict with 
the CU Customs Code.   
741.  Specifically, Article 215 of the CU Customs Code stated that customs transit was a customs 
procedure under which foreign goods (i.e., not Russian, Kazakhstani, or Belarusian) were 
transported:  (i) across the EAEU customs territo ry under customs custody between the point of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 236 - 
 
  their entry into and departure from the EAEU customs territory (i.e., if transit constituted a part of 
their itinerary which began and ended outside th e boundaries of the EAEU customs territory); 
(ii) from the point of entry into the EAEU to a customs point of entry within the EAEU; (iii) from an 
internal customs point to the point of depa rture from the EAEU customs territory; and, 
(iv) between two customs entry points within the EA EU customs territory.  In addition, it provided 
that the customs procedure of customs transit wa s applied to goods transported by international 
mail, by pipelines and by power transmission lines.   Goods in customs transit were exempted from 
any customs taxes and duties or application of any economic restrictions or prohibitions, except 
for:  (i) prohibitions applied to the goods listed in Sub-Section 1 of the Common List of Goods that 
are Subject to Bans and Restrictions on Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Customs 
Union of the Eurasian Economic Community in Trade with Third Countries, adopted by CU Commission Decision No.132 of 27 November 2009, re-approved by Collegium Decision 
No.134, and included in Annex 14 of this Report; (ii) SPS measures described in paragraphs [...] 
through [...] of this Report; and, (iii) prohibitio ns introduced by the Republic of Kazakhstan in 
regulations implementing UN Security Council Decisions.   
742.  Any foreign merchandise could be subject to international customs transit, except for 
goods whose transit was prohibited pursuant to laws, other statutes and legal norms of the 
EAEU and Kazakhstan and other international treaties to which Kazakhstan was a party.  However, 
specific control procedures for goods in transit transported by railway on the territory of the 
Customs Union were defined by a separate CU Agreement, i.e., the Agreement "On the Specificity of Customs Transit of Goods, Transported by  Railway on the Customs Territory of the 
Customs Union" of  21 May 2010, and in effect since 1 July 2010.  Furthermore, as stipulated in 
Article 215 of the CU Customs Code, customs transit procedure was not applied to the goods 
transported by air transport, if the air vessel, in an international flight, performed an intermediate 
landing or a landing by necessity (technical landing) without a partial discharging (unloading) of 
goods.  She added that customs transit could be applied to goods of EAEU member States if these 
goods were transported from a point of departure in the EAEU to the point of entry in the EAEU 
through a third country.  Goods of EAEU member St ates originating from one EAEU member State, 
exported through the territory of another EAEU member State, were placed in the customs 
procedure of export and transported through the territory of the EAEU without being placed in 
customs procedure of transit, unless it had ot herwise been decided by the Commission.   
743.  She further noted that, pursuant to Article 216 of the CU Customs Code, the placement of 
goods under the customs procedure of customs transit was allowed, if the following conditions 
were fulfilled:  (i) the import of goods into the customs territory of the EAEU was not prohibited; 
(ii) the documents, confirming that requirements (if any) for the transportation of goods through 
the customs border of the EAEU had been fulfilled, were presented; (iii) if the goods were to be 
subject to such control at the place of arrival, the customs control and other forms of State control 
had been performed at their point of entry; (iv)  the transit declaration had been presented (i.e. 
the goods had been declared); (v) the measures en suring the customs transit in accordance with 
Article 217 of the CU Customs Code were fulfilled; (vi) the identification of goods in accordance WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 237 - 
 
  with the Article 109 of the CU Customs Code was ensured; (vii) the international transport vehicle 
was equipped in a due manner, if the goods were transported under the customs seals.  According 
to Article 156 of the CU Customs Code, the requ irement specified in point and, (viii) of the 
previous sentence did not apply to goods carried by sea or river vessels or aircrafts crossing the 
customs territory of the EAEU without stopping at a port or airport located in the customs territory 
of the EAEU, or to the goods transported via pipelines and electricity transmission lines. 
744.  As of 1 January 2009, transit fees for vehicles were regulated by Article 461 of the 
Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV of 10 December 2008.  Pursuant to Article 461 
of the Tax Code, transit fees for foreign vehicles transporting international cargoes by automobile 
roads were fixed at 10 Monthly Calculated Indices.  In 2014, the transit fee had been equal to 
KZT 18,520 (approximately US$100).  As for railway transit, the representative of Kazakhstan 
stated that Kazakhstan was a party to the Agreement on International Transit Tariffs (ITT) and the 
Agreement on the Single Transit Tariffs (STT).  Thus, railway tariff rates for carrying goods in 
transit were established according to the principles of these international Agreements and 
calculated on a non-discriminatory basis.  Basic ceiling tariffs were calculated on the principles 
provided for by these Agreements and the Member s established applied tariffs below the ceiling 
calculated annually.  The transit tariff rates for same railways/destinations were unique and did not 
depend on the nationality of goods.  Generally, th e transit tariff policy was mostly dependent on 
competitive capacity of international transit routes, crossing several countries, and the rates were 
established by such countries jointly (see the section on "Pricing Policies" for more information).  
745.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as of 1 July 2010, pursuant to Article 217 of 
the CU Customs Code, measures of provision compliance with the customs transit  included:  
(i) a guarantee for payment of customs duties and taxes in relation to foreign goods in accordance 
with Chapter 12 of the CU Customs Code; (ii) customs escort; and, (iii) establishment of routes for 
transportation of goods (applied only as an additional measure to the above-mentioned 
measures).  Customs escort charges and related procedures were described in the section "Fees 
and Charges for Services Rendered".   
746.  Pursuant to Article 218 of the CU Customs Code, customs bodies had the right to put 
goods in transit under customs escort in the following cases:   
- defined on the basis of the risk management system; 
- upon non-presentation of guarantee of payment of customs duties and taxes; - due to repeated non-fulfilment by the transport operator of the operators' obligations in 
transport of goods in accordance with the customs procedure of customs transit, which 
was established by the resolutions, entered into legal effect, on imposing administrative 
penalty for cases of administrative customs law infringement, if at least one of the above-mentioned resolutions had not been fulfilled; and, 
- due to non-fulfilment by the transport operator of the obligation to pay the customs taxes, 
duties in accordance with Article 227 of the CU Customs Code. 
747.  She confirmed that these were all of the circumstances in which customs escort could be 
required, but that this list of circumstance s could be changed through amendment of the 
CU Customs Code or establishment of domestic legislation conforming to that Code.  Customs WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 238 - 
 
  escort of goods was to be carried out to ensu re observance of applicable customs transit 
procedure.  Expenses associated with customs escort had to be fully reimbursed in the form of customs fees levied, in accordance with the legislation of Kazakhstan on taxes and duties.   
748.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that guarantees for customs transit were 
regulated by Articles 85 to 88 of the CU Customs Code.  These provisions set-out that guarantees 
could be required to secure the fulfilment of th e customs taxes and duties payable, unless:  (a) a 
procedure for transit escort was applied; (b) transit was conducted by Kazakhstan's authorised 
customs transport operators or accredited economic operators; or (c) customs transit was 
regulated by the obligations of Kazakhstan under international treaties, inter alia , the International 
Road Transport (TIR) Convention, that provided ot herwise.  Transit by power transmission lines, 
pipelines and railways was also exempt from cu stoms guarantees.  The payer had the right to 
choose the means of guarantees:  (i) payment in cash; (ii) bank guarantee; (iii) surety; and, 
(iv) pledge of property; or other means foreseen in the national legislation of an EAEU Member.  
The representative of Kazakhstan informed Me mbers that Article 88 of the CU Customs Code 
outlined the rules to assess the value of guar antees and noted that guarantees would be 
approximated to the value of the customs taxes an d duties payable.  She further explained that 
guarantees on customs transit were applied in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner and, 
in her view, were in line with the requirements of  Article V of the GATT 1994 on freedom of transit. 
749.  Asked about the redemption of a guarantee, th e representative of Kazakhstan replied that, 
as of 1 July 2010, pursuant to the CU Customs Code, a guarantee for payment of customs duties 
and taxes was refunded after the customs body  determined that all commitments had been 
fulfilled or if there were no  commitments (Article 85.6 of the CU Customs Code).   
750.  In response to а question from a Member on the impl ementation of the CU Customs Code 
in the area of trade in transit in the national legislation of Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that Chapter 38 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan included provisions of the 
CU Customs Code related to trade in transit.  She noted that the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
incorporated the provisions of the CU Customs Code and EAEU legal instruments concerning the 
customs issues, and additional provisions addressi ng the issues left by the CU Customs Code to 
the national competency of the EAEU member St ates.  In particular, Article 319 of the Customs 
Code of Kazakhstan incorporated Article 215 of the CU Customs Code.   
751.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would apply all its laws, 
regulations and other measures governing transit of goods (including energy), such as those 
governing charges for transportation of goods in transit by road, rail and air, as well as other 
charges and customs fees imposed in connection with  transit in conformity with the provisions of 
Article V of the GATT 1994 and other relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, from the date of accession, all laws and 
regulations regarding the application and the level of charges and customs fees imposed in 
connection with transit would be published.  Further, upon receipt of a written request of a 
concerned Member, Kazakhstan would provide to that Member information on the revenue WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 239 - 
 
  collected from customs fees and customs charges and on the costs of providing the associated 
services.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- Government-mandated Counter-trade and Barter 
752.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that barter trade was not regulated by the 
Government.  Government approval was not required to engage in counter-trade and barter 
transactions.  Moreover, where barter trade occu rred, the products traded were subject to the 
same tariff and non-tariff measures and customs formalities as like products imported through normal channels.  For example, Kazakhstan applied the same WTO-based customs valuation 
system for such transactions as was applied to g oods imported through normal channels – i.e., if 
the transaction value of the imported merchandise could not be determined, then the goods were 
valued on the basis of one of the other valuat ion methods provided under the Customs Valuation 
Agreement, applied in sequential order.  Any barter and counter-trade arrangements were only 
conducted on a company-to-company basis. 
- Agricultural Policies 
[to be completed] 
- Trade in Civil Aircraft 
753.  Some Members asked that Kazakhstan commit to join the Agreement on Trade in Civil 
Aircraft upon accession and to establish zero rates of tariff duty on imports of civil aircraft and 
parts.  These Members also requested that all internal taxes would be applied to the sale or lease 
of civil aircraft in a non-discriminatory fashion between such imported and domestically produced 
goods and between such goods imported from third countries.  Finally, they requested additional 
information on Kazakhstan's customs requirements for imported civil aircraft and parts, e.g., 
import licensing, leasing, and tariff duties, particularly with regard to how Kazakhstan's 
participation in the EAEU might affect market access in Kazakhstan for such imported goods. 
754.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan did not plan to join the 
Agreement on Civil Aircraft prior to its accession to the WTO.  Applied tariff duties and import 
licensing requirements corresponded to those laid out in the Common External Tariff of the EAEU 
(CET) and Annex No. 7 of the EAEU Treaty.  Kazakhstan did not require licenses for imported civil 
aircraft and parts.  She explained that under the CET, Kazakhstan as well as other 
EAEU member States, currently applied 0% rate of customs duty on imports of certain types of 
aircrafts, including small aircrafts (i.e., thos e with fewer than 50 seats and weighing between 
2,000 and 20,000 kg), aircrafts with more than 300 seats, aircrafts with 50 to 300 seats and weight in the range of 90,000 to 120,000 kg, and large aircrafts (i.e., with weight exceeding 
120,000 kg).  For imports of all other types of civil aircrafts, Kazakhstan as well as other 
EAEU member States currently applied the CET of  20%.  The VAT of 12% was normally collected 
on aircraft purchases, both on those of EAEU origin or imports except as provided below. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 240 - 
 
  755.  In addition, CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 allowed temporary imports 
of aircrafts under HS Codes 8802 40 003 2 and 8802 40 004 2 with 50 to 111 and 170 to 219 seats with conditional customs duty and tax (VAT) exemptions, provided that the following 
conditions were met:  (i) the importers concluded foreign trade contracts (e.g. leasing contracts); 
and, (ii) an aircraft was placed under the customs procedure of temporary imports until 
31 December 2013 for a period not exceeding five years from this date.  The Decision additionally 
allowed duty and tax-free importation of civil passenger aircrafts with no more than 19 passenger 
seats (HS 8802 30 000 2 and 8802 40 001 1) owned by foreign persons and used for 
non-commercial flights within the EAEU customs territory.  
756.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the EEC Council Decision No. 6 of 
31 January 2014 introduced amendments to the CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010.  Civil passenger aircrafts under HS codes 8802 40 003 5, 8802 40 003 6 and 8802 
40 004 6 with 50 to 110 seats were added into the list of goods subject to temporary importation 
with conditional customs duty and tax exemptions, provided that contracts were concluded and 
aircrafts were placed under customs procedure of temporary importation (access) until 
1 January 2017.  Period for application of conditional customs duties and tax exemptions for these 
aircrafts was 5 years from the date of placing the aircrafts under the customs procedure of 
temporary importation (access).  She further added that the EEC Council Decision No. 20 of 
4 March 2014 introduced amendments to the CU Commission Decision No. 331 of 18 June 2010 by 
adding civil freight aircrafts not equipped with loading ramp with maximum gross weight in the range of 60,000 to 80,000 kg (HS code 8802 40 00 3 9) and more than 370,000 kg (HS code 8802 
40 009 6) placed under the customs procedure of temporary importation (access) until 
31 December 2017, for the period of their temporary imports. 
757.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that in accordance with CU Commissions Decision 
No. 130 of 27 November 2009 (as last amended by the EEC Council Decision No. 55 of 
25 September 2013), customs duty exemptions were  granted for civil passenger aircrafts under 
HS codes 8802 40 003 5 and 8802 40 003 6 imported for international and (or) domestic flights on 
the territory of a Member State, and/or flights on the territories of the EAEU Member States: 
(i) with 50 to 300 passenger seats, which were import ed to the Republic of Belarus and Republic of 
Kazakhstan until 1 July 2014; (ii) with 110 to passenger 300 seats, determined in accordance with 
a type certificate, which were imported to the terri tory of the Republic of Belarus and the Republic 
of Kazakhstan until 31 December 2016; (iii) with 110 to 300 passenger seats determined in 
accordance with the Layout of Passenger Accomm odations (LOPA), which were imported to the 
territory of the Republic of Belarus and the Re public of Kazakhstan from 1 January 2017 till 
30 June 2019.  She further added that in acco rdance with the EEC Council Decision No. 29 
of 4 March 2014, customs duty exemptions were also granted for civil freight aircrafts under HS 
code 8802 10 003 9 with maximum gross weight from 60,000 to 80,000 kg, imported to 
Kazakhstan until 31 December 2017. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 241 - 
 
  V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME 
- GENERAL - Industrial Property Protection 758.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan's policies in the area of intellectual 
property rights protection were aimed at (i) br inging its legislation in line with international 
standards; (ii) developing relevant enforcement mechanisms; and, (iii) training experts in this 
area.  The objective of these policies was to ensu re the lawful use and protection of intellectual 
property rights in Kazakhstan, as set forth in the Concept of Protection of Intellectual Property 
Rights, approved by Government Resolution No. 1249 of 26 September 2001.   
759.  She added that legislation governing the protecti on of intellectual property rights included 
the General Part of the Civil Code of 27 December 1994, the Special Part of the Civil Code  
No. 409  of 1 July 1999, the Civil Procedure Code  of 13 July 1999, the Criminal Code of 
16 July 1997, the Code on Administrative Violat ions of 30  January 2001, the Customs Code of 
30 June 2010, the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 10 June 1996, the Law "On Trade 
Marks, Service Marks and Appellations of Or igin" of 26 July 1999, the "Patent Law" of 
16 July 1999, the Law "On Protection of Selective Achievements" of 13 July 1999, and the Law "On 
Legal Protection of Layout Design of Integrat ed Microcircuits" of 29 June 2001.  The Law "On 
Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  o n  I n t e l l e c t u a l  
Property" of 9 July 2004 had introduced changes to all principal legislation that regulated the 
protection of intellectual property rights in Kazakhstan.  In addition, the Law "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 
22 November 2005 had increased the administrative and criminal liability for violation of 
intellectual property rights and had improved an d streamlined existing criminal procedures.  She 
added that Kazakhstan would continue to amen d existing legislation and implement programmes 
to improve legal practices.  In an effort to improve inter-ministerial cooperation in this area, a 
number of joint orders had been adopted in September 2005.  These orders addressed 
coordination and collaboration procedures between the public prosecutor's offices, the financial 
police, the internal affairs bodies , customs, as well as the taxation and judicial bodies.   
760.  With regard to efforts made to educate the public on intellectual property rights, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the Ministry of Justice  regularly held regional and 
national workshops on protection of intellectual property rights in order to upgrade the 
qualifications of intellectual property rights prot ection experts, and to share experiences in this 
field.  Officials of the justice, and customs bodies, judges, owners of intellectual property rights, as 
well as users and the media took part in these workshops.  She further noted that the Ministry of 
Justice  conducted seminars jointly with international organizations, including the 
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights 
(CIPR) , the International Federation of Phonograms Producers (IFPI)  and the United States 
Agency for International Development ( USAID ).  In addition, officials of the Ministry of 
Justice  actively participated in radio and television shows on protection of intellectual property WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 242 - 
 
  rights in Kazakhstan.  Twice a year, the Ministry of Justice held a national campaign ("Intellect").  
This was a permanent large-scale campaign with the active participation of interested public bodies, international agencies, public associations, commercial organizations, educational 
institutions, the media, and the citizens of Kazakhstan.  The campaign aimed at promoting the 
concept of intellectual property, increasing the pu blic's awareness of the need to take action 
against piracy and the distribution of counter feit products, and strengthening the role of 
intellectual property and the status of authors, innovators and inventors.   
761.  In addition, she noted that the number of app lications for registration of copyright and 
related rights, as well as of licence agreements for the use of copyright and related rights, had 
increased.  In her opinion, these developments demonstrated that the number of authors and 
persons aware of copyright and related laws had increased. 
- Responsible Agencies for Policy Formulation and Implementation 
762.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Ministry of Justice was authorised to 
perform specific executive, monitoring, and supervisory functions, as well as general 
administrative functions, in the area of intellec tual property, including copyrights, patents, and 
trademarks.  Earlier these functions had been perfor med by the Committee on Intellectual 
Property Rights that had been abolis hed by Government Resolution No.933 “On 
Agencies of Central Bodies of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan” of 14 August 2014.  She noted 
that the responsibility for evaluating, issuing, and promoting the commercialization of industrial 
property rights had been delegated to the Republican State Enterprise "National Institute on 
Intellectual Property (NIIP)" of the Ministry of  Justice.  The NIIP had been established by 
Government Resolution No. 756 "On the State Enterprise 'National Institute of Intellectual 
Property' of the Committee on Intellectual Property Ri ghts of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan" of 11 July 2002.  Its main task was to examine applications for intellectual property 
protection, including inventions, utility  models, trademarks, appellations of origin (geographical 
indications) , industrial designs and plant selection achievements.  It also kept the State Register 
of intellectual property protection documents (patents for inventions and certificates for trademarks and copyrights) and prepared them fo r issuance.  The NIIP also conducted scientific 
and research activities, and evaluated and promoted  the commercialization of industrial property.  
Through its Training Centre, it conducted training seminars on intellectual property protection and 
retrained intellectual property protection specialists working at the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of 
Education and Science, and the private sector.   
763.  A Member requested additional information on how collecting societies were regulated by 
the Government of Kazakhstan and whether collecting societies must be accredited by the 
Government in order to operate in Kazakhstan.  This Member also asked whether collecting 
societies might represent/collect royalties for only a single exclusive right or for multiple exclusive 
rights and whether more than one collecting society might represent/collect for the same exclusive 
right.  This Member also inquired whether a collecting society might represent/collect for rights holders with whom a collective management agre ement had been concluded as well as for rights WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 243 - 
 
  holders with whom a collective management agreement had not been concluded and how 
Kazakhstan ensured transparency and accountability in each collecting society's operations. 
764.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Articles 43 through 47 of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" addressed the collective management of intellectual 
property rights.  As provided in Article 43(1), authors had the right to establish organizations that 
managed intellectual property rights on a collective basis.  Under Article 43(3), authors could 
establish collecting societies that managed:  various rights for various categories of rights holders; 
various rights for a single category of right holder; or one type of right for various categories of 
rights holders.  Articles 46 and 47 contained several transparency and accountability requirements, 
including the requirement to:  provide information on royalty collection to rights holders; maintain 
a website containing information on the collecting so ciety, the rights that had been transferred to 
that organization; and to provide such information to the relevant regulatory authority.  In reply to 
a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that collecting societies had to 
regularly report to all right-holders they represented, whether directly or under reciprocal 
agreements, on any licenses granted, applicable tari ffs and royalties collected and distributed.  She 
further explained that the members of such organizations collectively granted their respective 
organization permission to use their works.  She further explained that these organizations 
represented/collected for rights holders with whom a collective management agreement had been 
concluded as well as for rights holders with whom a collective management agreement had not 
been concluded.  In response to a further question regarding representation of or collection on behalf of right holders who did not have a collective management agreement, she explained that 
under Article 46(1)(2), organizations had to obtain an accreditation certificate from the 
Government in order to represent/collect for rights holders with whom a collective management 
agreement had not been concluded.  Each collective rights management organization was required 
to report on a yearly basis on aspects of its op eration to the authorised body of the Government, 
including on auditing inspections, unclaimed royalties and other information specified in Article 47 
of the Copyright Law.  In addition, she clarif ied that this information could also include 
amendments made to the charter and other documents of the collecting society; agreements 
concluded with foreign collecting societies; financial reports and names of the collecting society 
representatives.  She explained that currently nine non-governmental organizations - including the 
Kazakhstani Collecting Society for Performers, the Association of Producers of Phonograms, the Union of Producers and Performers "Demeu", the Performers of Kazakh Songs, the Kazakhstani 
Copyright Society, the Union of Songwriters, th e Copyright Society "Abyroi", the non-commercial 
Organization on Protection of Copyright and rela ted Rights "Amanat", and the National Society on 
Reprographic Rights - acted as collecting societies and specialised in copyright protection for 
composers, poets, writers, artists, scientists, jo urnalists and other rights holders.  She further 
noted that all rights holders, foreign and domestic, were covered equally by these provisions of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", and that several Kazakhstani collecting societies had 
reciprocal collecting arrangements with foreign collecting societies. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 244 - 
 
  - Participation in International In tellectual Property Agreements 
765.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that Kazakhstan was party to a number of 
international treaties, agreements, and conventions – notably the Convention Establishing the 
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO Convention); the Paris Convention for the 
Protection of Industrial Property (1967); the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International 
Registration of Marks; the Madrid Protocol Concerning the International Registration of Marks; the 
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT); the Patent La w Treaty (PLT); the Berne Convention for the 
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1971); the Nice Agreement Concerning the International 
Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks; the 
Strasbourg Agreement Concerning the International Patent Classification; the Budapest Treaty on 
the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent 
Procedure; the Universal Copyright Conventi on; the Locarno Agreement Establishing an 
International Classification for Industrial Designs; the Trademark Law Treaty; the Eurasian Patent 
Convention; the Convention for the Protection of  Producers of Phonograms Against Unauthorised 
Duplication of Their Phonograms; the Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol; the 
Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting 
Organizations; and the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks.  In addition, Kazakhstan had 
acceded to the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty in April 2004.   
766.  Asked specifically about Kazakhstan's participation in the Eurasian Patent Convention, she 
said that, by acceding to the Convention, Kazakhstan had not undertaken any obligations 
extending beyond the framework of the Paris Convention.   
767.  She noted that Kazakhstan had bilateral cooperation agreements in the area of intellectual 
property with Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Re public, the Russian Federation, the United States 
and Uzbekistan.  The bilateral agreements with these countries and other CIS countries did not 
contain any specific obligations, which would not be extended to other countries. 
768.  Legal basis for the common principles of regulation in the sphere of protection of 
intellectual property rights within the EAEU was Section XXIII "Intellectual Property" and Annex 
No. 26 "Protocol on Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights" to the EAEU 
Treaty.  The EAEU Treaty fully reflected provisions of the Agreement on Common Principles of 
Regulation in the Sphere of Protection of Intelle ctual Property Rights of 9 December 2010 and had 
replaced it.  Main provisions of the EAEU Treaty were based on the norms that were common for 
the national legislation of the EAEU Member States  in the field of intellectual property rights.  
They included general provisions, provisions on copyright and related rights, trademarks, 
appellations of origin ( geographical indications ), patents, selective achievements, layout 
designs of integrated circuits and know-how and enforcement.  The EAEU Treaty provided for the 
principle of regional exhaustion of rights, under which the first sale of the goods marked with a 
protected trademark by its owner or with his/he r consent exhausted any rights to the trademark 
for these given goods not only domestically, but within the whole region, and parallel imports WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 245 - 
 
  within the region could no longer be opposed based on the rights to trademarks.  By the Decision 
No. 172 of 25 September 2012, the EEC had created the Consultative Committee on Intellectual 
Property.  The main purposes of the Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property included 
elaboration of proposals for the EEC on the issues  of protection and enforcement of intellectual 
property rights and organization of consultations with the representatives of the EAEU Member 
States.  Specifically, the Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property participated in analysis of 
international agreements and national legislation of the EAEU member States; prepared proposals 
on harmonization and improvement of the national legislation; and assisted in information 
exchange between the EEC, authorised bodies of the EAEU member States and international 
organizations.  Meetings of the Consultative Committee on Intellectual Property were held as and 
when needed, but at least  once in a half year period. 
769.  A Member asked the question on the specific pr ovisions of the EAEU Treaty that related to 
copyright protection and enforcement an d how the copyright protection of the EAEU Treaty  
related to and interacted with the Kazakh 's National Law on Copyrights and Related Rights.  
In response, representative of Kazakhstan clarified that Section II to Annex No. 26 of the 
EAEU Treaty contained provisions on copyright and related rights, which stipulated that 
member States would secure protection of intellec tual property based on the Berne Convention for 
the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works,  and the Rome Convention for Protection of 
Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations.  Specific provisions could 
be found on author rights, terms of protection; compound and derivative works; cinematographic works; related rights, including rights of perfor mers and producers of phonograms; and collective 
management organizations.  Section XIII of Annex No. 26 of the Treaty contained reference to the 
international t reaty that was planned to be concluded among the member States in order to 
ensure coordination of member States on enforcem ent of intellectual property rights.  The EAEU 
Treaty was an international agreement that had a priority over the national legislation of 
Kazakhstan and could be directly applicable without adoption of national legislation on  
implementation of its provisions. 
770.  In response to the question on the plans for intellectual property protection harmonization 
within the framework of the EAEU, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that the 
EAEU member States intended to conclude the following agreements on intellectual property 
rights:  the Agreement on Trade Marks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin at the Territories 
of the members States ; the Agreement on Uniform Procedure for Collective Management of 
Copyright and Related Rights; and the Treaty on  Coordination of Enforcement of Intellectual 
Protection Rights.  Upon their ratification in Kazakhstan and the other EAEU member States, these 
Agreements would have a priority over the national legislation. 
- Application of National and MFN Treatment to Foreign Nationals 
771.  Some Members noted that Articles 3 and 4 of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related 
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) provided that Members would accord 
national treatment and most-favoured-nation treatment, respectively, to each other's nationals WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 246 - 
 
  with regard to the protection of intellectual property.  This protection included matters affecting 
the availability, acquisition, scope, maintenance and enforcement of intellectual property rights, as well as those matters specifically addressed in the TRIPS Agreement.  These Members asked what 
provisions Kazakhstan had made to comply with these WTO provisions.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that Articl e 12.4 of the Constitution, Article 3.7 of the 
Civil Code, as well as Article 5 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", Article 48 of the Law 
"On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin" and Article 38 of the Patent Law, 
ensured that foreign natural and juridical persons were granted national and most-favoured-nation 
treatment with respect to the protection of their intellectual property rights in Kazakhstan.   
772.  In reply to a specific question, she confirmed that any foreign right holder had the ability 
to directly apply for appellations of origin of goods ( geographical indications ) protection, 
without the intercession of its Government. 
- Fees and Taxes  
773.  Some Members were concerned about nationals and non-nationals of Kazakhstan being 
charged different fees for the grant of certain in dustrial property rights and enquired how such 
differences could be justified considering that Kazakhstan's Constitution and Civil Code required 
that foreign natural and juridical persons be given national treatment.  In addition, some Members 
noted that nationals of the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, and Uzbekistan could pay for patent fees in Russian rubles or Kyrgyz soms, according to the schedule 
applicable to Kazakhstani nationals, and did no t require the services of a Kazakhstani patent 
attorney when filing applications with the Ministry of Justice .  Kazakhstan was asked how it 
intended to bring its legislation into conformity with the most-favoured-nation principle.   
774.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, pursuant to the Order of 27 May 2004 of  
the Chairman of the Committee on Intellectual Prop erty Rights, approved by the Agency for the 
Regulation of Natural Monopolies, and Protection of Competition and Support of Small Businesses 
of 27 May 2004, the new list of fees charged by the Republican State Enterprise "National Institute 
of Intellectual Property" had been adopted to remove any element of discrimination vis-à-vis  
foreign right holders (provided in Annex 20 of this Report).  As for the treatment of Russian 
Federation and Kyrgyz Republic nationals, she repl ied that they could pay for patent fees only in 
Kazakhstani currency - tenge - as provided by the national legislation of Kazakhstan.  According to 
bilateral agreements concluded with the Russian  Federation, Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz 
Republic, and Uzbekistan, their nationals were not required to use the services of a Kazakhstani 
patent attorney.  This was, in her view, in conf ormity with Article 4(d) of the TRIPS Agreement. 
775.  One Member noted that Article 4(d) of the TR IPS Agreement applied only to international 
agreements entered into prior to entry into force of the WTO Agreement, i.e., on or before 
1 January 1995.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 247 - 
 
  776.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan, from the date of its 
accession to the WTO, would implement fully the provisions of Articles 3 and 4 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
- SUBSTANTIVE STANDARDS OF PROTECTION, INCLUDING PROCEDURES FOR THE 
ACQUISITION AND MAINTENANCE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
- Copyright and Related Rights 
777.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 
10 June 1996 and the provisions of the Berne Convention (which applied directly pursuant to 
Article 4 of the Constitution) extended protection  of literary, artistic and scientific works to 
incorporate all forms of copyright covered by th e TRIPS Agreement.  The protection included 
computer programs, computer operating systems and databases (defined as a collection of 
information).  Rental rights for musical works in text of note form, phonogram works, audio and visual items, databases and computer software were stipulated in Article 16 of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".   
778.  Article 28 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" provided a term of protection for 
the lifetime of the author and 70 years following his/her death, except in cases stipulated in the 
Article.  The copyright for a work first published within 30 years of the author's death was 
protected for 70 years after the publication date.  Works, published anonymously or under a 
pseudonym, were protected for 70 years after the date of publication, unless the author had been 
revealed.  The rights of performers, phonograms and broadcasters were protected for 70 years 
from the date of performance/publication/broa dcast.  Special terms for cinematographic and 
photographic works were not foreseen.   
779.  Asked specifically about the protection of works that were still protected in their country of 
origin and that had not had a full term of protection in Kazakhstan, the representative of 
K a z a k h s t a n  r e p l i e d  t h a t  K a z a k h s t a n  e x t e n d e d  p r o t e c t i o n  t o  s u c h  w o r k s ,  a s  p r o v i d e d  f o r  i n  
Article 28 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Ri ghts", unless they had become available in the 
public domain in their country of origin.  Works with expired terms of protection fell into the public 
domain and were deemed to be national property that could be used free of charge by any person 
in accordance with Article 29 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".   
780.  A Member noted that the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" did not contain a clear 
provision on the protection of pre-existing work s and sound recordings and requested more detail 
on the Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Legisl ative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Intellectual Property", more specifically on its provisions addressing the protection of pre-existing 
works and sound recordings. 
781.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Law "On Amendments and Addenda to 
Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan  on Intellectual Property" of 9 July 2004 had WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 248 - 
 
  introduced retroactive protection procedures and other amendments to the Law "On Copyright and 
Related Rights" and, specifically, amendments pertai ning to the protection of pre-existing works. 
782.  With regard to the enforcement of copyri ghts, a Member urged the Government of 
Kazakhstan to increase the penalties for copyright piracy and impose penalties that were sufficient 
to act as an effective deterrent to potential pirates and counterfeiters.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that, in her view, existing penalties were sufficiently strict.  
However, her Government had adopted the Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislative Acts 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Pr operty" of 22 November 2005 which provided for 
the enforcement of measures against the infringement of intellectual property rights and the illegal 
use of copyright.  Overall, 11 legislative acts had been amended, including the Criminal Code 
(Article 184(1)) and the Administrative Offences Code (Articles 128, 129 and 145).  These 
amendments introduced  the categories of "selection achievements" and "integrated circuit 
layouts"; defined such  types of infringement as illegal acquisition, storage or hauling of 
counterfeit copies of works and phonograms; almost doubled  applicable penalties, the maximum 
penalty being five years of imprisonment; introduced measures against recurring offences; and, 
authorized seizure of equipment used for production of counterfeit products.   
783.  The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that, in 2009, the Law "On Copyright 
and Related Rights" had been amended in order to  bring it into compliance with the WIPO's 
Copyright Treaty and the Performances and Ph onograms Treaty, and the term "technological 
measure" had been introduced into the law.  In re ply to a specific question, the representative of 
Kazakhstan clarified that, in accordance with the 2008 Amendments, "technological measure" was 
understood as technology (programme technology) or its components that controlled access to 
copyright works or objects of related rights and pr evented or restricted actions prohibited by the 
author, owner of related rights, or other owner of exclusive copyright or related rights.   
784.  A Member noted that Article 2(39) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" defined a 
"work of amateur and folk arts" as "a work including peculiar elements of traditional art heritage 
(folk fairy tales, folk poetry, folk songs, instrumental folk music, folk dances and plays, artistic 
forms of folk traditions, etc.)".  This Member asked whether these were works intended to be 
included within Article 6 ("Copyrighted Items an d General Provisions") of the Law "On Copyright 
and Related Rights", and whether these works we re excluded under Article 8(3) ("Works of 
Folklore") of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  This Member also inquired whether works of amateur and folk arts were protected under other laws and, if so, asked the 
representative of Kazakhstan to describe the scope and nature of such protection. 
785.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that works of "amateur and folk arts", as defined 
by Article 2(39) of the Law "On Copyright and Rela ted Rights", were not protected by copyright or 
other laws of the Kazakhstan.  To be a "work of  amateur and folk art" excluded from copyright 
protection under Article 8(3) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", a work had to not 
have an author(s), but instead had to have b een created by a community.  Anonymous works and 
works created under a pseudonym had an author; it  was only works created by a community that WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 249 - 
 
  were not protected under sub-paragraph 39 of  Article 2 and paragraph 3 of Article  8 of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  Derivative works using an underlying work of amateur or folk arts, like derivative works using other public domain works, would be protected as 
independent works under Article 7(3) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  For example, 
a musical composer who created an arrangement of  a work of amateur and folk art would have 
that arrangement protected by Articles 7(1)(5) and 7(3)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related 
Rights".  Likewise, sound recordings, audio-visual works and other fixations of works covered by 
Article 2(39) would be protected under the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights".  
Performers/producers/broadcasting organizations had the rights enumerated in Chapter III, 
Related Rights, of the Law "On Copyright and Relate d Rights" to fixations of works of amateur and 
folk arts.  Works that could arguably fall under th e folklore definition of Article 2(39) of the Law 
"On Copyright and Related Rights", but which were protected as copyrighted works in the country 
of origin, would be protected as copyrighted works in Kazakhstan.   
786.  A Member noted that a number of terms used in the Law "On Copyright and Related 
Rights" were unclear and asked the representative of Kazakhstan to explain their meanings.  
In particular, this Member requested a clarification of the meaning of the term "cite" and the 
citation in Article 19(1)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" and the meaning of the 
term "training nature" in Article 19(1)(2) of that Law.  A Member also asked Kazakhstan to clarify 
the meaning of the term "information purposes" in Article 41(1)(3).   
787.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the terms "cite" and "citation" in 
Article 19(1)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "quotation" as used in 
Article 10(1) of the Berne Convention.  The term "training nature" in Article 19(1)(2) of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "teaching" as used in Article 10(2) of the 
Berne Convention.  She noted that the term "inf ormational purposes" in Article 41(1)(3) of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "to report events that are expected to occur in the 
near future" and "to report recent historical events".  She added that the term "current events" in 
Article 41(1)(1) of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" meant "an event that is occurring at 
the present time, e.g., a live report".   
788.  A Member noted that Article 41 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" referred to 
the use of certain works without authorisation or payment and asked Kazakhstan to clarify what 
was meant by "exclusively" in Article (41)(1)(2).   
789.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the term "exclusively" in Article 41(1)(2) 
of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" mean t "solely" as used in Article 15(1)(d) of the 
Rome Convention. 
- Trademarks, including Service Marks 
790.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that wi th the adoption of the Law "On Trade Marks, 
Service Marks and Appellations of Origin" (Trademark Law) of 26 July 1999, Kazakhstan had 
ensured that all requirements of Articles 15- 24 of the TRIPS Agreement had been taken into WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 250 - 
 
  account.  Other relevant legislation included Decree No. 136 adopting "The Instruction on 
Acknowledgement of Trademark (Service Mark) as Well-Known" of 23 April 2010 stipulating the rules for filing, submission and processing of app lications for the registration of a trademark.  
In addition, some changes and amendments to br ing the Law "On Trade Marks, Service Marks and 
Appellations of Origin" in full compliance with the TRIPS Agreement had been introduced in 2004 
and 2007.  She also noted that the terms of th e Paris Convention, specifically Articles 6 bis and 
10bis, were directly applicable pursuant to Article 4 of the Constitution. 
791.  She added that the Trademark Law accorded trad emark protection to all pictorial, verbal, 
letter, digital, volumetric and other designations or their combinations that allowed a person to 
distinguish the goods and services of one manufactu rer from those of another.  Signs could not be 
registered if identical, or confusingly similar to those already protected, and when they had 
become generally accepted symbols.  Pursuant to Article 6 paragraph 3(1), signs that were false or 
could mislead the public about the product or its manufacturer – including geographical indications 
that could mislead the public about the product's place of production – could not be registered.  
All well-known trademarks (for goods and services) were protected without any restrictions.  
She held the view that these provisions were in compliance with Article 16 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.   
792.  Protection of trademarks was provided on th e basis of registration and issuance of a 
trademark certificate by the Ministry of Justice  and was also available to all owners of well-
known trademarks, regardless of whether or not their trademark rights were registered in 
Kazakhstan.  The registration of a trademark could be contested and deemed invalid, in full or in 
part, and owners of a well-known trademark could petition in Kazakhstani courts for recognition of 
their mark as well-known and to prevent its continued unauthorised use.  The owner bore the 
burden of proof to establish that the trad emark was "well-known" and was required to 
demonstrate this on the basis of public-opinion poll (s urvey) results.  In addition to survey results, 
the authorities could also consider information on the extent of use of the trademark in 
Kazakhstan, the methods of its use, the sales volume and the marketing outlets; information 
about the average annual number of consumers, the value of the trademark, the extent of 
advertising of the trademark, and the extent of initial or acquired distinctiveness of the trademark; 
and information about the trademark's use or a similar trademark by third parties, about the 
number of licenses, and about the trademark's registration abroad.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that  in order to comply with the requirement of 
Article 16 of the TRIPS Agreement and determine th e knowledge of the trademark in the relevant 
sector of the public, Kazakhstan took public opinion results into account.  In addition, owners were 
allowed to use other means to demonstrate that the trademark was well-known, including those 
mentioned in the WIPO Joint Recommendations on the Protection of Well-Known Marks.  
According to Article 2 of these Recommendations the competent authority could consider:  (i) the 
degree of knowledge or recognitio n of the mark in the relevant sector of the public; (ii) the 
duration, extent and geographical area of any use of the mark; (iii) the duration, extent and 
geographical area of any promotion of the mark, including advertising or publicity and the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 251 - 
 
  presentation, at fairs or exhibitions, of the g oods and/or services to which the mark applied; 
(iv) the duration and geographical area of any registrations, and/or any applications for registration, of the mark, to the extent that they  reflected use or recognition of the mark; (v) the 
record of successful enforcement of rights in the mark, in particular, the extent to which the mark 
was recognised as well known by competent authorit ies; and, (vi) the value associated with the 
mark. 
793.  The validity of an initial registration and each renewal of registration of a trademark was 
10 years.  The registration of a trademark was renewable indefinitely.  Any person could file for a 
cancellation of a trademark to the Board of Appeal of the  Ministry of Justice  after three years 
of non-use.  However, trademark owners could submit evidence to demonstrate that non-use had 
occurred due to circumstances beyond their control.   
794.  Asked whether a trademark could be assigned with or without the goodwill of a company, 
the representative of Kazakhstan replied that a ssigning trademark rights entailed transferring of 
the trademark itself, when used with certain produc ts or services, as well as transferring of the 
trademark's business reputation (goodwill) that had been gained through its use.  Pursuant to the 
Trademark Law, the owner of a registered tradem ark (licensor) could license the right to use a 
registered trademark to another party (licensee).  For licensing rights to a trademark, a written 
agreement had to contain provisions stipulating that the quality of goods associated with the 
licensee's use of the trademark must not be inferior to that of the licensor's, as well as provisions 
providing for the licensor's right to supervise compliance with the terms of the agreement.  
Licensing and assignment agreements had to be registered with the Ministry of Justice .  Asked 
about any possible negative effects of the registra tion procedure for such agreements, she clarified 
that official registration of agreements with the Ministry  implied that the rights of a person, to 
whom the rights for industrial property were assigned, must not be infringed in any way – in the 
event that the other party requested to make fu rther changes to the agreement – and that such 
changes could only be made by court decision.  In her view, the provisions of the Trademark Law 
met the requirements of Article 6 quater  of the Paris Convention. 
795.  A Member questioned the value of the mandatory licence recording, in particular as it could 
affect the rights of legitimate trademark owners.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan 
said that the mandatory licence recording procedure protected the rights of intellectual property 
owners and, as such, was in compliance with Article 21 of the TRIPS Agreement.   
796.  In reply to the specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that according 
to Article 6 of the Trademark Law, registration of generic names was not allowed.  Such names 
could be used as unprotected elements of a trademark if they were not predominant. 
- Geographical Indications, including Appellations of Origin 
797.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that, according to the Law "On Trade Marks, Service 
Marks and Appellations of Origin" (Trademark Law), the term "appellation of origin" was equal to 
the term "geographical indication" as used in the TRIPS Agreement.  Appellations of origin WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 252 - 
 
  (geographical indications) could be registered if they denominated a product with specific qualities 
which were mainly or exclusively associated with its place of origin (including natural conditions and/or human factors).  Only appellations of origin (geographical indications) associated with a 
particular product could be registered.  The registration certificate entitled the owner to the right 
to use the appellation of origin for the goods listed in  the certificate.  Registration of appellations of 
origin (geographical indications) was prohibited when it could mislead consumers about the place 
of origin, or when registration could infringe upon th e rights of third parties.  Appellations of origin 
(geographical indications) which were false, identical, confusingly similar, or clearly misled 
consumers about the product's place of origin, were not protected.  In reply to a specific question 
from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that registration of the appellation of 
origin ( geographical indication ) which, although literally true as to the place in which the goods 
originated , falsely represented to the public that the goods originated in another territory, was 
also not allowed.  She added that the Trademark Law provided for the protection of wines and 
spirits as required under Articles 22 and 23 of the TRIPS Agreement.  Asked whether geographical 
indications were protected against unfair competition, she referred to Articles 16 and 17 of Law 
"On Competition".   
798.  Applications for protection of appellations of origin (geographical indications) were filed 
with the National Institute on Intellectual Property Rights (NIIP) and included (i) a single name  
(composed of one or more words) indicating the place of origin of a good; (ii) the name and 
address of the applicant(s); (iii) the good's designation; and, (iv) the type of product for which appellation of origin (geographical indication)  registration was sought, including its place of 
manufacture and/or natural occurrence and a description of the specific properties of the good.  In 
addition to the above, foreigners had to submit ap plications through a patent attorney along with a 
document confirming the authority of the patent attorney to act on behalf of the applicant.  
National applicants had to provide a statement from the relevant local administrative body 
certifying that the applicant resided on its territory  and that the quality of goods originating therein 
was associated with the natural conditions and/or human factors of that particular geographical 
area.  Similarly, foreign applicants had to accompany their applications by a document attesting 
the applicant's right to use the appellation of origin (geographical indication) in their country of 
origin (Article 29, paragraph 3(3) of the Trademark Law).  In reply to the specific question, the 
representative of Kazakhstan clarified that proof of registration in the country of origin could qualify for this requirement.  Besides, Kazakhstan would accept certification mark registration, or 
other evidence of use and control of the term, as long as it demonstrated that the appellation of 
origin (geographical indication) was protected in the country of origin.  In the view of 
representative of Kazakhstan, provisions stipulating these requirements did not create any 
preconditions to use them in such a way as to raise national treatment and MFN concerns. 
799.  One Member noted that a provision specifying that foreigners had to submit applications 
through a patent attorney could read like a discrim inatory treatment of foreigners and questioned 
whether domestic nationals had to use services of a patent attorney.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that nationals were not required to recourse to a patent attorney.  In her WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 253 - 
 
  opinion, it could be justified within the WTO accession since Kazakhstan did not take any 
commitments with regard to services of patent attorneys in accordance with its Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services.  Moreover, paragraph 3 of Article 2 of Paris Convention 
(reflected in paragraph 2 of the TRIPS Agreement on  exceptions) provided that:  "the provisions of 
the laws of each of the countries of the Union rela ting to [...] the appointment of an agent, which 
may be required by the laws on industrial property, were expressly reserved". 
800.  Some Members continued to have concerns that the requirement for foreigners to use a 
patent attorney was contrary to the MFN provisions of the TRIPS Agreement and asked for 
establishment of non-discriminatory treatment in this matter.  In reply, the representative of 
Kazakhstan agreed that this requirement had to ap ply in accordance with the MFN provision of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  In this regard bilatera l agreements concluded with Uzbekistan, the 
Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan and Georgia had to be revised in order to exclude preferential 
provisions allowing their nationals to submit applications without recourse to a patent attorney.  
Kazakhstan confirmed that it did not have any non-MFN arrangements with any other 
CIS countries or EAEU member States in the area of intellectual property protection. 
801.  In reply to a specific question the representative of Kazakhstan said that, in terms of 
applications which had to be made through patent attorneys, "foreigners" had to be understood as 
"non-residents" of the Republic of Kazakhstan as  defined in the Tax Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan. 
802.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify whether, in order to have a geographical indication 
protected, it had to be registered in Kazakhstan.  This Member noted that such a provision would 
be in conflict with Article 22.2 of the TRIPS Ag reement, which set an obligation for Members to 
provide legal protection regardless of registration.   
803.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Article 37(2) of the Trademark Law 
prohibited the use of unregistered appellations of origin (geographical indications) that were 
identical or similar to registered ones, where such use would result in confusion.  Such protection 
of appellations of origin (geographical indications) in Kazakhstan could be provided only through 
registration, which could be made on the basis of a document proving that a n appellation of 
origin  (geographical indication) was protected in the country of origin.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan also added that, in her view, registration was a sufficient legal mean s for interested 
parties to prevent illegal use of appellations of origin (geographical indications) as required under Article 22.2 of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  According to Articles 16 and 17 of the Law "On 
Competition", illegal use of another person's appellation of origin (geographical indication) for 
similar goods was recognised as unfair use of appellation of origin (geographical indication) in 
Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that any interested party could challenge the 
illegal registration in Kazakhstan or use in Kazakhstan of another person's appellation of origin 
(geographical indication).  To challenge the illegal registration in Kazakhstan or use in Kazakhstan 
of another person's appellation of origin (geographical indication), an interested party was not WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 254 - 
 
  required to provide either proof of registration of  an appellation of origin (geographical indication) 
in Kazakhstan or proof of use of an appellation of origin (geographical indication) in Kazakhstan.   
804.  A Member raised a concern that Articles 16 an d 17 of the Law "On Competition" limited the 
scope of protection of Article 22 of the TRIPS Ag reement to cases where a specific geographical 
indication was illegally used for "similar goods".  A Member asked for clarification concerning the 
protection granted to geographical indication s according to the legislation of Kazakhstan 
implementing Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement and in particular to know whether this protection 
applied to any kind of products.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Article 27 of 
Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods" fully implemented the 
provisions of the Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreemen t providing that the following designations could 
not be registered as appellations of origin ( geographical indications ):  (i) representing the 
names of geographical objects (i.e., an indication that identified a product originating from a 
particular territory, region or locality) in a manner that misled the public as to the geographical 
origin of the good; (ii) those that, although literally true as to the territory in which the goods 
originated, falsely represented to the public that the goods originated in another territory; and, 
(iii) containing names of geographical objects not related to the place of origin of the goods.  
Therefore, Article 27 contained legal means of protec tion that were not limited to the specific type 
of good designated by the relevant geographic al indication.  Articles 16 and 17 of Law "On 
Competition" implemented provisions of Article 22.2(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, which required 
Parties to prevent any use which constituted an act of unfair competition within the meaning of Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention (1967). 
805.  A Member was concerned that Kazakhstan would not be providing national treatment to 
the nationals of WTO Members and would also be de nying MFN treatment to at least some of those 
Members, if a bilateral agreement was required in order to obtain protection for foreign 
geographical indications.   
806.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, pursuant to Article 48 of the 
Trademark Law, foreign natural and juridical persons had the same rights and obligations as 
Kazakhstani nationals, unless otherwise provided in Kazakhstan's legislation.  In particular, 
foreigners could apply directly for protection of appellations of origin (geographical indications) in 
Kazakhstan without the need for a bilatera l agreement or government intervention.  
807.  Asked whether earlier protected trademarks would be protected from confusingly similar 
and later in time geographical indications, she said that Kazakhstan had developed a draft 
Law "On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Intellectual Property" which amended Article 39.3 of the Trademark Law.  According to the new 
amendments, the registration of an appellation of origin (geographical indication) could be 
contested and invalidated if it was likely to cause confusion for consumers as to the true identity 
of the good or its manufacturer due to the existe nce of an earlier in time trademark which had 
become renown in Kazakhstan due to its active use, including its promotion or its use in 
advertisements.  The amendments represented li mited exceptions to trademark rights because WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 255 - 
 
  they provided for coexistence only in the case s where the likelihood of confusion between the 
trademark and appellation of origin (geographical indication) was low.  In cases where the likelihood of confusion was high, registration of appellation of origin (geographical indication) could 
be challenged in the court by the interested third parties. 
808.  A Member raised a concern that by referring to the possibility to invalidate a protected 
geographical indication, paragraph [ 807] of this Report seemed, however, to suggest that owners 
of trademarks containing of a geographical indication could not only contest later applications for 
geographical indication registration but also require the invalidation of a protected geographical 
indication .  
809.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that paragraph [ 807] as well as the 
amendments made to the Law suggested the possibili ty to contest and invalidate registration of 
the appellation of origin ( geographical indication ) in certain circumstances, specifically if it could 
mislead consumers as to the true identity of the good or its manufacturer due to the existence of 
an earlier in time trademark which had become renown in Kazakhstan due to its active use, 
including its promotion or its use in advertisements.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed 
that in practice the possibility to contest and invalidate registration of the geographical 
indication  existed for a pending application and a registered geographical indication . 
810.  In reply to a specific question, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that 
interpretation of "low" and "high" degree of the likelihood of confusion had to be made by the 
court in each case individually on the basis of  such criteria as renown of the trademark in 
Kazakhstan acquired due to its active use.  The time period limitation to contest and invalidate 
registration of appellation of origin ( geographical indication ) due to the existence of an earlier in 
time trademark was five years from the moment of publication of the information on the State 
registration of the appellation of origin ( geographical indication ) in the official bulletin.  
811.  With regard to subsequent registration of trademarks the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that according to Article 23 of the Trademark Law it could be contested and invalidated 
during five years after the registration.  Bad faith registrations could be opposed without any 
limitations in time.  According to paragraph 1(1) of  Article 42, disputes on legality of the 
certificates confirming the registration of trademark or appellation of origin  (geographical 
indication ) were subject to consideration in court.  
812.  Asked to clarify if active use included use outside of Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that according to paragraph 4 of Article 19 of the Trademark Law manufacture, 
importation, storage, offering for sale, sale of goods with a trademark, its use in advertising, 
billboards, printed publications, on official le tterhead or other business document, transfer of 
trademark rights or its demonstration at exhibitions held in the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as 
other introduction into civil circulation were recognised as use of a trademark.  Therefore, active 
use included also use outside of Kazakhstan.  Taking into account that trademark must be renown 
in Kazakhstan, it had to be actively  used in Kazakhstan as well.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 256 - 
 
  813.  With respect to the statement that the trademark had to be actively used in Kazakhstan, a 
Member pointed out that TRIPS Article 16(2) indicated that use in other States was sufficient.  In response the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the term "use" in Article 39.3 of the 
Trademark Law had the same meaning and, in he r view, its definition in Article 19 of the 
Trademark Law covered the concept of promotion in the sense of Article 16 of the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement.  The competent authorit y considered whether a mark had been used 
intensively taking into account, inter alia , the advertising budget (proved by annual financial 
reports), the degree of familiarity of the mark to customers, and the information on countries 
where the mark was renown. 
814.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that traditional non-geographical names 
could be protected as appellations of origin ( geographical indications ) in Kazakhstan, if they 
were protected as appellations of origin ( geographical indications ) in their country of origin. 
- Industrial Designs 
815.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that th e rights of industrial designs were regulated 
by the Patent Law and certified only by patents, provided that the applied industrial design met 
patentability requirements, such as novelty and originality.  The "industrial applicability" criterion – 
i.e., the possibility to industrially reproduce the industrial design – was the main criterion for an 
industrial design.  Architectural objects (except for small architectural forms), industrial, hydraulic engineering and other stationary constructions were  not recognised as industrial designs because 
they did not meet the "industrial applicability" criterion.  However, these constructions qualified for 
copyright protection.  Artistic-design solutions that determined the exterior of a product, textile 
goods, as well as small architectural forms were considered to be industrial designs (Article 8 of 
the Patent Law).  Small architectural forms recognised as industrial design included solutions that 
determined the exterior of different stands, tents or exhibition pavilions that could be reproduced 
serially.   
816.  She added that an industrial design patent was valid for 15 years as of the date of 
application.  Industrial design patents could be ex tended upon request of the owner for a period of 
up to five years.  The owner of an industrial de sign patent had the exclusive right to its use.  
A person other than the patent owner could use the protected industrial design only by permission 
of the patent owner and under a licence agreemen t subject to compulsory registration with the 
Ministry of Justice . 
- Patents 
817.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, the Patent Law (as amended by 
the Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Legislat i v e  A c t s  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  o n  
Intellectual Property" of 2 March 2009) met all the provisions of Articles 25-34 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  The Law covered inventions, industrial designs and utility models and 
stipulated an expanded list of ways for protecting  the rights of patent owners.  An invention was 
granted legal protection if it was new, involved an inventive step and was industrially applicable.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 257 - 
 
  Article 6, paragraph 2 of this Law provided an exhaustive list of subject matter that could be 
patented as an invention – including a device, process, substance, micro-organism strain or culture of plant or animal cells, as well as the use of a known device, process, substance or strain 
for a new purpose.  Diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods could also be protected as 
inventions under the Article 6 criteria.  The Patent Law did not recognise as inventions 
(i) discoveries; (ii) scientific theories; (iii) mathematical methods; (iv) methods of economic 
organization and management; (v) symbols, schedules, and rules; (vi) rules and methods for 
mental activities; (vii) algorithms per se  and computer programs; (viii) projects and plans of 
buildings and structures, and land development; (ix) proposals concerning solely the outward 
appearance of manufactured goods; and, (x) propos als that were contrary to the public interest, 
humanitarian principles and morality.  Article 11, paragraph 2 of the Patent Law stipulated the requirement that a patented invention be used – "use" was defined as manufacturing, application, 
importation, offer for sale, sale, as well as other means of putting the industrial property into 
circulation, including storage in view of subsequent use.  The provisions of the Patent Law applied 
equally to both foreign and Kazakhstani natural and juridical persons, in accordance with signed 
international agreements or in accordance with the reciprocity principle.   
818.  Some Members expressed concern regarding the exclusion of computer programs from 
patentable subject matter.  They explained that co mputer programs, for example, could be part of 
a patentable process for making or using products.  These Members asked for a clarification of 
whether such computer programs could be patented under Kazakhstan's Patent Law. 
819.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that patent protection in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan could be provided under a full patent and by an innovation patent.  
The degree of protection provided by an innovati on patent was functionally equivalent to that 
provided by a full patent.  The principal differen ce concerned the procedure for issuing the patent 
and the validity period.  Innovation patents could be issued after an examination of the application 
for industrial applicability and local novelty of an invention, and were valid for a period of 
three years.  Full patents were issued after co nducting a substantive examination of the patent 
application, provided that the application for a full patent was filed within three years of filing an 
application for an innovation patent with the Ministry of Justice .  The substantive examination 
included verification of the patentability conditions of the innovation (novelty, originality and 
industrial application).  The full patent was valid fo r a period of 20 years starting from the date of 
initial application.  If, however, the innovation patent holder did not submit an application for an 
extension of the patent or for conducting a full examination within the prescribed period, the 
innovation patent was cancelled as of the date of its expiration (i.e. three years from the date of 
application).  The validity of an innovation pate nt could be extended upon the request of the 
patent holder for up to two years.   
820.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that utility models were granted patent protection 
if they met the patentability requirements, including novelty and industrial applicability.  Utility 
model patents were granted for a period of five years, subject to subsequent renewal at the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 258 - 
 
  request of the patent owner for a period not exceeding three years.  Exclusive rights to use 
protected utility models and what constituted an infringement of such rights were identical to the rights provided to patented inventions and industrial designs , and infringements of such rights . 
821.  A Member noted that Kazakhstan excluded the patentability of "proposals that were 
contrary to the public interest, humanitarian principles and morality".  This Member was concerned 
that this language was broader than the permissi ble exceptions provided in Article 27(2) of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  This Member also expressed concerns regarding the exclusion from 
patentability of "methods of economic organization" and "computer programs". 
822.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in excluding the patentability of 
"proposals that were contrary to the public interest, humanitarian principles and morality", 
Kazakhstan intended to cover only the exclusions for " ordre public " and "morality" provided for in 
Article 27(2) of the TRIPS Agreement.  As for th e exclusion from patentability of "methods of 
economic organization", she said that, according to paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Patent Law, 
only technical solutions were protected as inventions.  Methods of economic organization were not 
recognised as inventions because of their non-technical character.   
823.  A Member continued to have concerns regarding the scope of exceptions permitted under 
Article 6 of the Patent Law and requested that Kazakhstan amend the Law to comply with the 
requirements of Article 27.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. 
824.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at Article 6 of the Patent Law was amended 
to comply with Article 27.2 of the TRIPS Agreem ent, by replacing the term "public interests, 
principles of humanity and morality" with " ordre public " and "morality" in the text of the 
Patent Law.  The representative of Kazakhstan also confirmed that an invention, such as a 
process, that includes a computer program was patentable subject matter under Kazakhstan's 
Patent Law.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
825.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to provide an explanation of how the compulsory licensing 
provisions of the Patent Law complied with the requirements of Article 31(a)-(l) of the 
TRIPS Agreement.  In reply, the representative of  Kazakhstan said that pursuant to Article 11, 
paragraph 1 of the Patent Law, the patent hold er had the exclusive right to use the protected 
invention.  The unauthorised use of a protected invention was deemed to infringe the exclusive 
rights of the patent owner.  Protected inventions could only be used by obtaining the patent 
holder's authorisation under a licensing agreement,  subject to compulsory registration with the 
Ministry of Justice  or under a compulsory licence granted pursuant to Article 11 of the Patent 
Law.  Pursuant to Article 11(4) of the Patent Law, any person could apply in the court for a 
compulsory non-exclusive licence if, prior to the application, efforts to obtain authorization from 
the right holder on reasonable commercial terms an d over a reasonable time period, had failed.  
An interested party could also file an application requesting a compulsory licence if uninterrupted 
non-use had occurred for a period of four consecut ive years, provided that the applicant provided 
evidence of non-use.  The court would issue a co mpulsory licence, specifying the term and scope WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 259 - 
 
  of use, as well as terms, amount and conditions  of payment, unless the patent owner could prove 
that non-use had been due to valid reasons.  Th e compulsory licence would be non-exclusive and 
the amount of payment could not be lower than the market price of the licence.  As for the 
requirements of Article 31(1) of the TRIPS Agreemen t, pursuant to Article 11(5) of the Patent Law, 
the patent holder could apply to the court requesti ng a compulsory licence if the exploitation of 
his/her patent was not possible without infringing another patent, and efforts to obtain 
authorisation from the right holder of this patent had failed.  The courts could issue a compulsory 
licence specifying the term and scope of its use, as well as the terms, amount and conditions of 
payment.  The payment could not be less than the market price of the licence.  A Member raised 
concerns regarding Article 11(5) of Kazakhstan's Patent Law.  In this Member's view, Article 11(5) 
did not include the requirement of the TRIPS Agreement that the second patent be an important technical advance.  This Member also noted that Kazakhstan's Patent Law did not appear to limit 
the purpose for which a compulsory licence for semi-conductor technology could be granted, as 
required under Article 31(c) of the TRIPS Agreement.  This Member asked that Kazakhstan bring 
its compulsory licensing for patents into conformity with Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement. 
826.  Asked specifically how Kazakhstan's Patent La w addressed the issue of "use" or "non-use" 
in terms of imported patented products, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
Article 11(2) of Kazakhstan's Patent Law provides that, in the case of importation of a patented 
product, non-use could not be established under Kazakhstan's Law.  In addition, prior to the date 
of its accession, Article 11 of the Patent Law would be amended to ensure that where use of the subject matter of a patent was authorised to perm it the exploitation of a patent (second patent) 
which could not be exploited without infringing another patent (first patent), the invention claimed 
in the second patent must involve an important technical advance of considerable economic 
significance in relation to the invention claimed in the first patent, as provided for in Article 31(l) of 
the TRIPS Agreement.  Similarly, Article 11 would be amended to limited the purposes for which a 
compulsory licence for patented semi-conductor technology could be granted in order to comply 
with Article 31(c) of the TRIPS Agreement.  Th e Working Party took note of these commitments. 
827.  Pursuant to Article 12 of the Patent Law, the following were not considered to constitute a 
violation of the exclusive right of a patent holder:  (i) application of a patent in foreign 
transportation vehicles, which were present on the territory of Kazakhstan temporarily (or by 
accident), provided the patent was used for the needs of the vehicles; (ii) research or experimentation conducted on an object containing a patent; (iii) application of a patent in 
emergency situations (natural and other disasters, major accidents) with immediate notification of 
the patent holder and subsequent payment of co rresponding compensation to the patent holder; 
(iv) application of a patent for personal needs without a commercial purpose; and, (v) a one-time 
preparation of prescription medicine.  The afor ementioned provisions met, in her view, the 
requirements of Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement.   
828.  Asked specifically how Kazakhstan's law addressed the need to balance acceptable private 
uses with the need to prevent "unreasonable prejudice to the rights of patent owners", WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 260 - 
 
  the representative of Kazakhstan replied that use of protected objects of industrial property was 
not considered as a violation of a patent holder's rights only in exceptional cases when this use was limited to private or personal purpose.  In addition, personal use of protected objects had to 
be non-commercial.  Taking into account that a patent provided a monopoly to a right holder over 
commercial activity, but did not extend so far as to cover non-commercial activity, such use of 
patented inventions did not, in her view, unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the 
right holder.   
829.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to bring Articles 12(2) and 12(4) of the Patent Law into 
compliance with the requirements of Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement, i.e., that these provisions 
would constitute limited exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred by a patent, provided that 
such exceptions did not unreasonably conflict with a normal exploitation of the patent and did not 
unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the patent owner, taking account of the 
legitimate interests of third parties. 
830.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that prior to the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO, Articles 12(2) and 12(4) of  the Patent Law would be amended to bring the 
Patent Law into compliance with the requirements of Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement.  
Specifically, Article 12(2) would be amended to indicate that the following was not an 
infringement of the exclusive rights of a patent holder, "carrying out scientific research or 
experiment on means which contain the protected object of industrial property when such research 
or experiment does not have a commercial purpose".  Article 12(4) would be amended to indicate that utilisation of a patent without the authorisation of the patent-holder for the satisfaction of 
personal, family, home, or other needs not connected with entrepreneurial activity would be 
permitted if the purpose of such utilisation was not financial gain.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment. 
831.  With regard to reversal of the burden of proof in civil proceedings concerning the 
infringement of process patents, she said that the requirements of Article 34 of the 
TRIPS Agreement were not covered by the Patent Law, but were contained in Article 65 of the Civil 
Procedure Code, which stipulated that each party was responsible for providing proof for its own 
claims and statements.  Other parties involved in the process could also provide evidence. 
- Plant Variety Protection 
832.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that ne w kinds of plants and animals were protected 
in accordance with the Law "On Protection of Selection Achievements" of 13 July 1999.  This Law 
was awarded a positive legal opinion by the International Union for the Protection of New Plant 
Varieties (UPOV) for its conformity with the International Convention for the Protection of New 
Plant Varieties (adopted in Paris on 2 December 1961 and revised in 1972, 1978 and 1991).  
She held the view that with the adoption of this Law, Kazakhstan had met the requirement of 
Article 27(3)(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, namely that WTO Members would provide for the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 261 - 
 
  protection of plant varieties either by patents, an effective sui generis  system, or a combination 
thereof. 
833.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that plant variety protection would be 
accorded to natural persons and legal entities of all WTO Members from the date of the accession. 
- Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits 
834.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that legal protection of layout designs of integrated 
micro-circuits was provided by Law No. 217 "On Lega l Protection of Layout Design of Integrated 
Microcircuits" of 29 June 2001, and was implemented through Articles 1013-1016 of the Civil Code 
(Special Part) which, in her view, reflected the provisions of Articles 35-38 of the 
TRIPS Agreement.   
- Requirements on Undisclosed Information,  including Trade Secrets and Test Data 
835.  A Member enquired how Kazakhstan's legal framework met the requirements of 
Article 39(3) of the TRIPS Agreement, noting that, in this Member's view, to protect undisclosed 
information and test data against unfair commercial use, Governments needed to provide an effective period of time during which the person first submitting the data was given a period of 
exclusive use during which a third party (e.g., a second applicant) could not use or rely on such 
data directly or indirectly to seek marketing a pproval/registration, without the permission of the 
person first submitting that data.   
836.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  Kazakhstan was in the process of drafting 
the Law, which would introduce a norm provid ing for the applicant submitting undisclosed 
information and test data to obtain marketing approval/registration for a period of exclusive use 
that would guarantee that no third party would be pe rmitted to rely directly or indirectly upon the 
applicant's data for a period of time during whic h it would be appropriate under the circumstances 
to prevent unfair commercial use.  She added that, with regard to disclosure of such data, 
pursuant to Article 126 of the Civil Code, the civil legislation ensured the protection of information 
of real (actual) or commercial value, provided that this information was unknown to third parties, 
its confidentiality was strictly preserved, and it was not accessible on legal grounds. 
837.  She further added that a person accessing restricted information could be liable to 
Article 158 of the Law "On Administrative Violations".  Moreover, Article 200 of the Criminal Code 
prohibited collection of information that constituted a commercial or banking secret by persons 
who had access to such information in their work capacity, including disclosure or use of such 
information for financial or other personal interest without the consent of the owner.  Employees of 
ministries and other State agencies that disclosed protected information were held administratively 
responsible, together with their employers.  Such  disclosure was punishable by imprisonment of up 
to three years, payment of fines, arrest, or correctional labour.  In her view, undisclosed 
information and test data submitted to obtain ma rketing approval/registration would be protected 
from disclosure under this legislation.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 262 - 
 
  838.  Asked to clarify how a person in control of restricted information could enforce his/her 
rights, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the civil legislation provided a number of judicial means, including the possibility to file a complaint with the court having jurisdiction over the 
alleged rights violation.  The court could orde r reimbursement of damages and all costs incurred 
by the claimant.  
839.  Asked whether the draft Law, which included a provision granting an applicant for 
marketing approval a period of exclusive use of data submitted to obtain that approval, would 
guarantee that no third party would be permitted to rely, directly or indirectly, upon the applicant's 
data without the applicant's permission and whether the draft law had been adopted, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that this draft Law "On Commercial Secrets" had been 
withdrawn from Parliament and that no reconsideration was planned. 
840.  Some Members expressed their concerns that without legal provisions requiring authorities 
to prohibit the unfair commercial use of undisclosed information and test data provided to obtain 
marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan of pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemical 
products, there would be no effective protection against such use granted to the applicant 
providing such data.  A period of at least six years, starting from the date of marketing approval in 
Kazakhstan, should be provided, and during this period no person other than the person who 
submitted such data originally would be permitted,  without the explicit consent of the person who 
submitted the data, to rely directly or indirectly  on such data in support of an application for 
marketing approval/registration.  These Members al so sought confirmation that applicants that 
sought marketing approval/registration for generic versions of pharmaceuticals (reproduced 
medicines) were required to submit pre-clinical and clinical test results and other data that was 
required for marketing approval/registration of "original" medicines and would not be permitted to 
rely on others' data without permission for the six-year period of protection against unfair 
commercial use.  These Members requested that Kazakhstan comply with Article 39.3 of the 
TRIPS Agreement and provide this level of protection.   
841.  Some Members also expressed concerns ab out the transparency of the process for 
granting marketing approval/registration for pharmaceuticals and requested that Kazakhstan 
establish procedures so that an entity submitting undisclosed information and test data to obtain 
marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical in Kazakhstan would be informed if another 
application was filed seeking marketing approval/registration of a pharmaceutical with a similar active ingredient.  These Members sought assurances that those entities that had a marketing 
approval/registration or pending application for a pharmaceutical with the same or similar active 
ingredient had an opportunity to provide information to Kazakhstan's officials on whether other 
applicants had permission to use the first applican t's undisclosed information and test data, and to 
bring to the attention of Kazakhstan's offici als issues regarding a subsequent applicant's 
development and submission of its own undisclosed information and test data.  Members also 
requested information on whether Kazakhstan's officials would deny marketing 
approval/registration for a pharmaceutical if the applicant did not provide its own undisclosed WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 263 - 
 
  information and test data and on the status of pharmaceuticals that were improperly granted 
marketing approval/registration.  In particular, on whether pharmaceuticals that were granted marketing approval/registration based on applications that did not include the applicant's own 
undisclosed information and test data would be removed from the market until such legal 
requirements were satisfied.   
842.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan  confirmed that such undisclosed information 
and test data was protected against disclosure under the Civil Code, Criminal Code, and Code on 
Administrative Offences, and that there was no time limitation on this protection.  She further 
confirmed that Kazakhstan's laws did not permit others to rely, directly or indirectly, on 
undisclosed test data developed or submitted by another to obtain marketing approval/registration 
in Kazakhstan, and that upon its accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan would adopt measures to provide for the protection of undisclosed information and test data, in compliance with Article 39.3 
of the TRIPS Agreement, providing that undisclosed  information and test data submitted to obtain 
marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan, i.e., registration of pharmaceutical products, which 
utilise new chemical entities, would have a period of at least six years of protection against unfair 
commercial use starting from the date of grant of marketing approval in Kazakhstan.  During this 
period of protection against unfair commercial use, no person or entity (public or private), other 
than the person or entity who submitted such undisclosed information and test data, could without 
the explicit consent of the person or entity wh o submitted such undisclosed information and test 
data rely, directly or indirectly, on such data in support of an application for marketing approval/registration in Kazakhstan.  Notice of subsequent applications for marketing 
approval/registration would be provided in accord with established procedures.  During the 
six-year period, any subsequent application for marketing approval/registration would not be 
granted, unless the subsequent applicant submitted his own data (or data used with the 
authorisation of the right holder) meeting the sa me requirements as the first applicant, and 
products registered without submission of such data would be removed from the market until 
requirements were met.  Further, he confirmed that Kazakhstan would protect such data against 
any disclosure, except where necessary to protect the public or unless steps were taken to ensure 
that the data were protected against unfair commercial use.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.  
843.  In response to Member's concerns about ge neric or "reproduced" pharmaceuticals, the 
representative of Kazakhstan explained that the six-year prohibition of unfair commercial use of 
undisclosed information and test data submitted to obtain marketing approval/registration in 
Kazakhstan also applied to generic or reproduced pharmaceuticals, including those 
pharmaceuticals subject to expedited or abbreviated approval procedures. 
844.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all agricultural chemicals, including 
mineral fertilizers, were subject to registration in Kazakhstan.  In accordance with Law No. 302 
"On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007, mineral fertilizers had to be registered not as 
agricultural products but chemical products.  Pe sticides and poisons had to be registered in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 264 - 
 
  accordance with Government Resolution No. 1396 "On Approval of the Rules on Registration and 
Production Testing and State Registration of Pesticides" of 30 November 2011.  Specifically, under Law No. 302 "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007 and Government Resolution 
No. 1396 "On Approval of the Rules on Registration and Production Testing and State Registration 
of Pesticides" of 30 November 2011, registration requirements for chemical products, pesticides 
and poisons were the same for every applicant and did not permit the reliance on undisclosed data 
developed or submitted by another applicant to obtain product registration.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments. 
- ENFORCEMENT 
- Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies 
845.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Civil Code, the Criminal Code, Article 33 
of the Patent Law, and Article 42 of the Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Geographical 
Indications" (Trademark Law) ensured that no  discrimination existed between domestic and 
foreign parties in disputes concerning possible infringement of intellectual property rights.  Foreign and domestic holders of intellectual property rights had the right to settle disputes in court 
related to (i) authorship; (ii) the legality of granting protection; (iii) infringements of exclusive 
rights and other economic rights; (iv) identificati on of the patent owner; (v) the granting of a 
compulsory licence for patents; (vi) conclusion and execution of licence contracts; 
(vii) compensation and damages for infringement of exclusive rights; and, (viii) other disputes 
arising from intellectual property rights.  She added that right holders had the right to seek 
protection of their rights from local authorities or administration, which did not prevent them from 
filing an application in court.   
846.  She noted that, pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 66 of the Civil Procedure Code, the 
court could assist the parties to a dispute in obtaining necessary evidence when evidence relevant 
to the substantiation of one party's claims was in the control of the opposing party.  If necessary, the court could provide the requesting party with an official letter of request for providing the 
evidence by the opposing party.  In addition, Ar ticle 74, paragraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 
stipulated that a party could request a "securing of evidence" when in doubt about the availability 
of the necessary evidence at a later point in time.   
847.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's legislation, the court had the authority to recover from 
the infringer damages that had been incurred by the right holder.  In reply to the specific question, 
the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that Articles 9 and 917 of the Civil Code foresaw a 
complete recovery for damages, including actual damage and lost profit.  Damages included 
expenses that were made or should be made by the person whose right was violated, loss or injury of his property (actual damage) and profit that this person could receive if his right would not be 
violated (lost profit).  In this regard, Articles 9 and 917 of the Civil Code clearly established that 
the calculation of damages would reference the value of the corresponding legitimate good.  
Article 44 of the Trademark Law stipulated that a person illegally using a trademark or a n 
appellation of origin ( geographical indication ) had to discontinue such use and provide WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 265 - 
 
  compensation for the damages incurred by the right holders also including actual profit and lost 
profit.  Pursuant to Article 49 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", the court could oblige a copyright infringer to:  (i) compensate the claimant for damages including lost profit; 
(ii) compensate the profit received by the infringe r; or (iii) pay compensation in the amount of 20 
to 50,000 minimum wages (500 to 50,000 minimum wages for infringement of software or 
database copyright).  Moreover, in accordance with Article 111 of the Civil Procedure Code, the 
court could order the infringer to compensate the successful party for attorney's fees, however the 
sum could not exceed 10% of the amount of the cl aim.  Asked specifically about the authority of 
the courts to order recovery of profits pursuant to Article 45(2) of the TRIPS Agreement, she 
referred to Article 9, paragraph 4 of the Civil Code and Article 111, paragraph 1 of the Civil 
Procedure Code.   
848.  Asked to provide information on Kazakhstan's compliance with the provisions of Article 46 
of the TRIPS Agreement, she said that Article 49 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" 
stipulated that a judge could order the seizure an d withdrawal of all copies of suspected pirated 
works and phonograms, as well as all materials and equipment used in their production or 
reproduction.  Pirated copies of works or phonog rams could be transferred to the rights holders 
upon their request, or be destroyed by a decision of the court.  In addition, Article 129 of the Code 
of Administrative Violations also provided for the seizure and forfeiture of pirated copies of works 
and phonograms.  The disposal of counterfeit goods outside the channels of commerce was 
foreseen in Article 145 of the Code of Administra tive Violations, which had been in force since 
1 January 2008.  Pursuant to Article 44(2) of the Trademark Law, a person illegally using a 
trademark or appellation of origin (geographical indication),  or using a confusingly similar 
designation, had to remove the mark or designation from the product, its packaging, blank forms 
and all other documentation.  If doing so was impossible, the goods were destroyed (liquidated) in 
accordance with the relevant legal procedures.  In reply to the specific comment that the simple 
removal of the trademark unlawfully affixed should  not be sufficient, other than in exceptional 
cases, the representative of Kazakhstan noted th at Kazakhstan was planning to amend Article 44 
of the Trademark Law in order to ensure its compliance with the Article 46 of the TRIPS Agreement 
by the date of WTO accession. 
849.  Some Members enquired whether any training had been provided to judges to enable them 
to consider disputes involving intellectual property rights.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that judges took active part in discussions on intellectual property rights protection 
(workshops, conferences, roundtables).  For instance, in July 2005, the Ministry of Justice , in 
collaboration with the WIPO, the CIPR an d the World Customs Organization (WCO), had held a 
workshop on enforcement practices in the sphere  of intellectual property for judges of the 
Supreme Court and oblast courts.  In 2011, the Ministry of Justice , in collaboration with the 
USAID  had held a conference entitled, "Judicial protection of intellectual property rights in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan".  In addition, the Judici al Academy under the Academy of State Service of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, organized skills improvement trainings for Kazakhstan's judges on 
different issues related to the applicable law of the country. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 266 - 
 
  - Provisional Measures 
850.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that judges and Government bodies had the 
authority to grant provisional measures if any delay was likely to cause irreparable harm to the 
right holder, or if a demonstrable risk of eviden ce being destroyed existed.  She noted that the 
Trademark Law and the Patent Law did not reference provisional remedies, but pointed to 
Chapter 15 of the Civil Procedure Code which prov ided for the imposition of such measures.  
According to Article 159 of this Code, judges – at  the request of the claimant, or at their own 
initiative – had the power to (i) seize the defendant's property; (ii) prohibit a defendant from 
taking certain actions, such as the sale of goods bearing a trademark belonging to the claimant; 
(iii) prohibit other persons from transferring property or performing certain actions in respect to 
the defendant; (iv) suspend the sale of property in cases where a claim was filed to cancel the 
seizure of property; (v) suspend a contested legal act issued by a Government body, organization, 
or an official; and, (vi) suspend a penalty impo sed by an executive document, contested by the 
debtor in court.  The court could order any of the above measures without prior notice to the 
defendant.  The court could also apply other provisional measures for the purposes of Article 158 
of the Civil Procedure Code, which foresaw the adoption of such measures in cases where, in their 
absence, the court would not be able to issue a ruling or its work would be hindered.   
851.  In reply to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the 
Civil Procedure Code provided also for:  (i) the ri ght of the participants in a proceeding to request 
replacement of one type of provisional measure wi th another.  The request was considered by the 
court with notification of participants about ti me and place of the proceedings (Article 162).  
Therefore, a defendant affected by a provisional measure adopted inaudita altera parte 
(i.e. without prior hearing of the other side) had the right to request the review of the measure, 
including the right to be heard; and (ii) the right of the participants or the judge of proceedings to 
request revocation or cessation of effects of the provisional measures (Article 163).  Therefore, if 
proceedings leading to a decision on the merits of the case were not initiated within a reasonable 
period, participants or judge of proceedings co uld initiate revocation or cessation of such 
measures.  In addition, the defendant could requ est compensation from the applicant where there 
was a decision of no infringement or threat of infringement (Article 165). 
852.  In reply to the concern of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that in 
the cases where provisional measures had been adopted inaudita altera parte , parties affected had 
to be given notice, without delay after the execution of the measures at the latest. 
- Administrative Procedures and Remedies 
853.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that , pursuant to Articles 128, 129 and 145 of the 
Code of Administrative Violations, certain actions were considered as an infringement of 
intellectual property rights and entailed administrative responsibility.  These included 
(i) non-criminal, but illegal, use of an invention, industrial design, utility model, selective 
achievement, or micro-circuit layout design prior to its official publication, as well as 
misappropriation of authorship or coercion into joint authorship; (ii) non-criminal, but illegal, use WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 267 - 
 
  of copyright or related rights, as well as the purcha se, storage, hauling or production of counterfeit 
copies of artistic works and/or phonograms for the purpose of sale, misappropriation or coercion into joint authorship; and, (iii) non-criminal, but illegal, use of a trademark, service mark, 
appellation of origin (geographical indication)  or similar designations for goods (services), as 
well as illegal use of a firm name.   
854.  She noted that such infringements were review ed by the courts.  Petitions were permitted 
during meetings, persons participating in the review were given a hearing, and evidence was 
examined.  After consideration of the case, the court terminated the proceedings or imposed 
administrative sanctions.   
855.  For Article 128 violations, fines for natural persons were set at 20-50 Monthly Calculation 
Indices (MCI), for officials at 50-100 MCI, and for juridical persons at 100-400 MCI.  For repeated 
violations under this Article, the corresponding fines were set at 50-100 MCI, 100-150 MCI and 
200-700 MCI respectively.  As for Article 129 violations, fines for natural persons were set at 
10-15 MCI, for officials at 20-30 MCI, and fo r juridical persons at 100-150 MCI – with a 
corresponding confiscation of copies of works and phonograms, as well as the equipment used for 
their production.  For repeated violations under th is Article, the corresponding fines were set at 
15-20 MCI, 30-50 MCI, and 150-200 MCI respecti vely – with a corresponding confiscation of 
copies of works and phonograms and the equipment used for their production.  Finally, in the case 
of Article 145 violations, fines for natural persons were set at 10-30 MCI, for officials at 30-50 MCI, 
and for juridical persons at 50-100 MCI (confiscation of the infringing goods was also provided for).  For repeated violations under this Article,  the corresponding fines were set at 30-50 MCI, 
50-100 MCI and 100-200 MCI respectively.  Any interested party could challenge the decision of 
the court to a higher court.   
856.  Asked about the administrative actions available to owners of intellectual property rights 
for the enforcement of their rights, the agencies responsible for such actions, as well as about the 
channels available to foreign parties to invoke such actions, she replied that the applicant (foreign 
or domestic) had the right to raise objections to the Board of Appeal of the Ministry of Justice  
(Articles 22, 23, and 29 of the Patent Law and Articles 12, 23, 31 and 44 of the Trademark Law).  
If the applicant remained dissatisfied with the de cision of the Board of Appeal, the applicant had 
the right to further appeal that decision in court.  She further noted that while infringements of 
intellectual property rights were considered by the courts, disputes concerning the rights to objects of industrial property, other than those considered in the Administrative Code, were considered 
within the framework of civil legislation.  
857.  Asked to provide more information concerning the procedures followed by the 
administrative commissions in reviewing allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights 
and about the remedies that the commissions could impose, she replied that, in accordance with 
the national legislation, no administrative commissions on infringement of intellectual property 
rights could be established in Kazakhstan.  Under the legislation, all disputes concerning 
intellectual property rights could be settled only in the courts. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 268 - 
 
  - Special Border Measures 
858.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that as of 1 July 2010, border measures in 
Kazakhstan were applied pursuant to Chapter 46 of the Customs Code of the Customs Union 
(Articles 328-334) and Section 53 of the Customs Code of the Republic Kazakhstan 
(Articles 436-445).  Consistent with the procedures set-out in Chapter 46 and Section 53, 
Kazakhstan's customs authorities were authorised to take action to prevent the import and export 
of goods containing objects of intellectual prop erty rights.  Kazakhstan's State Revenue Committee 
maintained a Registry of goods containing intellectual property, which was published periodically.  
Goods were included in the Registry free of char ge, at the request of rights holders.  This 
guaranteed that the rights of applicants would be protected by the customs authorities for the 
duration specified in the application, the maximum period being two years from the date of 
inclusion in the Registry (with a possible extension, which could not exceed the period of validity of 
the right itself).  Although right holders could register their intellectual property with the State 
Revenue Committee, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that customs officials could 
exercise ex officio authority to seize suspect goods even if right holders did not have a 
registration.   
859.  In order to address the concern of a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan gave the 
following examples of use of the ex officio powers:  
- registered trademark "Shemonaikhinskoe" (m ilk):  quantity – 21,000 kg for the value of 
US$12,005; and, 
- registered trademarks "Yaguar", "Diplomaticheskaya", "Senator" (caps for the spirits):  
quantity – 6,022.52 kg (28,012 items) for the value of US$12,045.04.  
860.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that on 21 May 2010, the 
EAEU member States had signed the Customs Union Agreement on Unified Customs Registry of 
Goods Containing Objects of Intellectual Proper ty and the State Revenue Committee maintained 
Kazakhstan's contribution to this Customs Union Unified Register.  According to this Agreement in order to be included in the Unified Customs Register, it was required that the intellectual property 
right be protected in Kazakhstan as well as the other EAEU member States.  In the case of an 
intellectual property right included in the Customs Union Unified Register, the minimum 
security/guarantee was EUR 10,000.  This CU Agreement would  remain in force until it was  
superseded by a new EAEU Customs Code. 
861.  In reply to the concern that security was considerable and could deter right holders from 
participating in the Customs Register, the representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the most 
widespread form of meeting this obligation was an insurance guarantee, i.e., a contract between 
an insurance company and an applicant.  In accordance with the contract, insurance company guaranteed payments to compensate for property damage.  The real expenses of the applicant for 
signing such contract would not be higher than from 4 to 7% of the security sum.  Insurance 
guarantee was required for each application, but the application could cover unlimited trademarks 
and objects of copyright.  No payment was required for submission and examination of the 
application and implementation by the customs authorities of border measures.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 269 - 
 
  862.  The Customs Union Customs Code and the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
authorised the national customs authorities to suspend the customs processing of goods containing intellectual property for up to 10 business days if the right holder applied for such protection and if 
they found that the goods violated the intellectual  property rights of the applicant.  The Customs 
Union Customs Code authorized the enforcement of  intellectual property rights with respect to 
intellectual property not included in the Customs Union Unified Register in accordance with the 
Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
863.  Asked whether the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan provided for any 
measures allowing the customs bodies to suspend the export or transit of counterfeit goods in 
Kazakhstan, she said that Article 440 of the Custom s Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan allowed 
the customs authorities to suspend the release of goods included in the national Customs Registry 
if they discovered any signs of the goods being counterfeit.  Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 436 
of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the customs authorities did not take 
enforcement action for goods in transit.  The pr ocedure for keeping the national Customs Registry 
had been  approved by Order of the Minister of Fina nce of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 356 of 
16 June 2010. 
864.  She further noted that, when such goods were discovered, customs authorities would 
attempt to identify right holders by consulting the Customs Union Unified Registry or Kazakhstan's 
National Registry.  If a right holder had not registered its intellectual property rights on these 
registers, the customs authorities would attempt to identify and contact the right holder by 
consulting the registries of the Ministry of Justice .  After the right holder was identified, the 
customs authorities informed him/her about the goods under investigation and provided the right 
holder, or his/her representative, with the oppo rtunity to inspect samples/specimens from the 
goods under customs supervision at the place of  temporary storage (Article 440 of the Customs 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Customs Union Commission Decision No. 258 on Customs 
Examination under Customs Control of 20 March 2010).  Pursuant to Article 440 of the Customs 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the customs authorities had to provide the right holder with 
the name and address of the declarant, as well as provide the declarant with the name and 
address of the right holder.  This was done within one day of taking a decision to suspend the 
release of the goods – i.e., before the matter was taken to court and before the infringement was 
identified by the right holder.  Pursuant to the Customs Code, the customs authorities were 
entitled to receive compensation to cover expenses incurred in connection with the suspension of 
the goods (e.g., for warehouse storage).  For goods that proved to be counterfeit, such 
compensation would be provided by the declarant, and for goods that proved not to be counterfeit, 
by the applicant.  However, so far, such a situ ation had not occurred.  For goods that proved not 
to be counterfeit, the right holder would compensate the declarant for any damages incurred 
(minimum security/guarantee of €10,000 was a requirement for right holders wishing to include 
goods in the Customs Registry).  The exact amo unt of compensation could be agreed between 
declarant and right holder, or could be determined by the court.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 270 - 
 
  865.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that intellectual property right holders would 
be provided, whether by Kazakhstan or by the competent bodies of the EAEU, with procedures 
related to border measures that complied fully with the relevant provisions of the 
TRIPS Agreement (Articles 51 to 60).  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
866.  Asked whether customs agents were the sole enforcer of IP laws and what was the role of 
police units in proactive and reactive infringement investigations, the representative of Kazakhstan 
said that the court, the office of the Public Prosecutor, internal affairs authorities and the financial 
police were among those who were actively involved in the enforcement of IP laws in Kazakhstan.  
Police units worked in close cooperation with right holders as well as conducted repeated, 
unannounced inspections in order to examine compliance with intellectual property rights 
legislation.  If evidence of unauthorised use of intellectual property rights protection was found, administrative or criminal proceedings were initiated.   
- Criminal Procedures 
867.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Criminal Code provided for legal protection 
against infringement of intellectual property rights and for criminal responsibility.  The provisions 
of the Criminal Code had been strengthened wi th the adoption of the Law "On Amendments and 
Addenda to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellectual Property" of 
22 November 2005.  In particular, these amendments had introduced the concepts of "selection achievements" and "integrated circuit layouts", and had also provided definitions of certain types 
of infringement – namely, illegal acquisition, storage or hauling of counterfeit copies of works and 
phonograms.   
868.  Criminal sanctions for the infringement of authors' rights and related rights were provided 
in Article 184 of the Criminal Code.  Under paragraph 1 of the Articles 184 and 184 -1, fines 
equivalent to 100-500 MCI or equivalent to up to five times the monthly income of the convicted 
p a r t y ,  a s  w e l l  a s  1 0 0  t o  1 8 0  h o u r s  o f  p u b l i c  w o r k  o r  i m p r i s o n m e n t  f o r  u p  t o  t w o  y e a r s  w e r e  
authorised for:  (i) usurpation of authorship or coercion into joint authorship, if such action caused 
considerable damages; and (ii) disclosure with out the consent of the author/applicant of an 
invention, utility model, industrial design, selective achievement or micro-circuit layout design 
prior to its official publication.  Under paragraph 2 of Articles 184 and 184-1, fines equivalent to 
500-700 MCI or 180 to 240 hours of public wo rk or imprisonment for a period of up to one year 
were authorised for:  (i) the illegal use of a copyright and related rights, as well as the purchase, 
storage and production of counterfeit copies of artistic works and/or phonograms for the purpose 
of sale (in significant quantities); and (ii) the illegal use of an invention, utility model, industrial 
design, selective achievement or micro-circuit layout design (in significant quantities).  
Under paragraph 3 of Articles 184 and 184 -1, imprisonment up to one year and from  two to five 
years, with or without confiscation of the proper ty of the convicted party, was authorised for the 
actions identified under paragraphs 2 of Articles 184 and 184 -1 where those actions were 
committed:  (i) on repeated occasions (either by individuals or a group of individuals); (ii) by a group of individuals or an organized group of indi viduals; (iii) on a large-scale or causing large-WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 271 - 
 
  scale damage; or, (iv) with abuse of official position.  She added that criminal cases under 
paragraph 1 of Articles 184 and 184 -1 (in relation to private non-property rights) required a 
complaint by the right holder.  Criminal cases under paragraphs 2 and 3 of Articles 184 and 184 -1 
(large-scale acquisition for the purpose of sale, repeated offences by organized groups, abuse of 
official position) could be opened without a comp laint by the right holder because such offences 
were deemed to be dangerous for the society.   
869.  Pursuant to Article 199 of the Criminal Code, the minimum threshold for bringing criminal 
cases involving unlawful use of a trademark, service mark, firm name, appellation of origin 
(geographical indication) or other designations of goods (services) was 500 MCI.  The court 
could impose a fine of 200-500 MCI.  For repeated violations, or those resulting in large-scale 
damage (i.e. exceeding 500 MCI or approximately US$ 5,000 ), the court could impose fines 
equivalent to 200-500 MCI, or to the amount of income received by the convicted party for a 
period of two to five months; 180 to 240 hours of public work; detention for up to six months; or 
imprisonment for up to two years.  For unlawful use of a trademark or appellation of origin 
(geographical indication)  not registered in Kazakhstan, if the action was performed repeatedly 
and resulted in large-scale damages, the court could impose fines equivalent to 100-200 MCI, or 
to the amount of income received by the convicted party for up to two months; public works for 
120 to 180 hours; detention for up to three mo nths; or imprisonment for up to one year. 
870.  Actions were considered to cause considerable damage if the amount of the damage, the 
value of the rights for the use of intellectual prop erty rights, or the value of the copies of the 
works and phonograms containing an invention, utility model, industrial design, selective 
achievement or microcircuit layout design exceeded 100 MCI, as established at the time of the 
crime.  Actions were considered to cause large-scale damage if that value exceeded 500 MCI. 
871.  A Member asked what was the status and/or likely outcome for determining thresholds for 
application of criminal procedures and penalties with regard to cases of wilful trademark 
counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale and what was the timeline for 
Kazakhstan's decision.  The representative of Kaza khstan replied that the application of thresholds 
was traditionally used in Kazakhstan in order to separate criminal offences punishable by means of 
criminal prosecution from administrative misdemeanours.  This clear and unambiguous criterion 
was an effective, practical tool for enforcement, as it could be implemented easily and contained 
no element of subjective evaluation.  The ti meline for determining a threshold (within a 
preliminary investigation) could not exceed a two-month period which, however, could be 
extended in exceptionally difficult cases. 
872.  Concerning the seizure, forfeiture and destruction of counterfeit goods, as well as 
materials and equipment used in their production, she pointed to Article 121 (part 3) of the 
Criminal Procedure Code and Decree of the Su preme Court No. 19 "On Judicial Sentence" of 
15 August 2002 (see "Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies"). WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 272 - 
 
  873.  According to official statistics, in 2009, 493 legal proceedings had been instituted under 
Articles 184 and 199 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
874.  Some Members noted that there was a criminal penalty for pirated copyright and related 
rights (Article 184 of the Criminal Code), but expr essed concern that there did not appear to be a 
criminal penalty for counterfeit trademarked goods.  They further stated that the administrative 
fine provided by the Administrati ve Code appeared insufficient to  serve as an effective deterrent. 
875.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that criminal penalties to prevent trade in 
counterfeit trademark goods were provided in Article 199 of the Criminal Code (Special Part).  
The representative of Kazakhstan added that th e Law "On Changes and Amendments to Legislative 
Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Intelle ctual Property" of 22 November 2005 had reinforced 
the sanctions available against infringement and repeated infringement of copyright and other rights, and provided for sanctions for administrative infringements.  Recognising Members' 
concerns, the representative of Kazakhstan stated  that in order to improve the effectiveness of 
enforcement measures in the area of intellectual property rights, when determining the existence 
of large scale or considerable damage, the prosecutor/court would take into account that storage 
of pirated copies of works or phonograms for th e purpose of sale was also considered to be a 
crime.  Thus, application of the thresholds to the activity would take into account both the value of 
the pirated copies of works or phonograms that we re sold, and the value of the pirated copies in 
storage.  In accordance with Kazakhstan's Law, the value of pirated copies was calculated by 
reference to the value of the corresponding legiti mate products, and not by reference to the price 
of the pirated product.  This approach of taking into account copies in storage would also apply in 
cases of copyright infringement over the Internet. 
876.  Some Members continued to have concerns that Kazakhstan's threshold for application of 
criminal procedures and penalties precluded action against certain cases of wilful trademark 
counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  These Members requested Kazakhstan to 
ensure that criminal procedures and penalties would be applied to all cases of wilful trademark 
counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  In their view, the value of the products 
that were counterfeited or pirated was not always a good indicator of whether the counterfeiting 
was wilful or if piracy was on a commercial scale.  Other circumstances could establish wilful 
trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy on a commercial scale.  For example, in some cases, 
each individual act of piracy might involve a small amount of money, but given other conditions in the market, e.g., the number of piratical copies, or the existence of copies made before the 
release of the work, the acts were clearly on a commercial scale.  Finding other evidence, such as 
a worn mold for making copies, would be another situation in which commercial scale piracy was 
evident. 
877.  In response to Members' concerns regarding thresholds for application of criminal 
procedures and penalties with regard to cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright 
piracy on a commercial scale, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that thresholds in such 
cases would be set and applied in a manner that reflected the realities of the commercial market WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 273 - 
 
  place in Kazakhstan, including with regard to the Internet market.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment. 
878.  Members sought a commitment that Kazakhstan would be in compliance with the 
TRIPS Agreement, including its enforcement provisions, as of the date of accession, without 
recourse to transitional arrangements.   
879.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that Kazakhstan would apply fully the 
provisions of the TRIPS Agreement from the date of its accession to the WTO, including provisions 
for enforcement, without recourse to any transitional period.  The Working Party took note of 
this commitment. 
VI. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
880.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the services sector was one of the most 
dynamic sectors of the economy, and its role was ex pected to grow in the future.  Since 1990, the 
share of services in GDP had grown steadily to reach a peak of 60% in 1998, while the average 
level for the last decade had been 50%; in 2010 the share had stood at 52.8%.   
881.  Some Members requested information on the legislative base regulating commercial 
services and asked whether the Government was taking measures to ensure non-discrimination 
with regard to foreign service suppliers.  The representative of Kazakhstan, noting the growing 
role of services in the national economy, said that the existing legislative framework governing the services sector was still being developed and generally there was no discrimination against foreign 
services suppliers.   
882.  In response to a question on "natural monopolies" in the telecommunications sector, she 
said that the Telecommunications Sector Development Programme for the period 2006-2008, 
adopted by Government Resolution No. 519 of 7 June 2006, had outlined a plan for a 
stage-by-stage liberalisation of the telecommunications market.  These measures were expected 
to facilitate competition, improve the quality and capacity of telecommunication services, and 
remove barriers to new entrants.  Accordingly, since 1 January 2005, the exclusive right of JSC 
"KazakhTeleCom " to provide international and long-distance communication services had been 
discontinued, and licenses for the provision of these services were now held by more than 
25 operators.  In addition, since 1 January 2006, al l restrictions on the inter-connectivity between 
operators had been removed and customers were given the technical opportunity to choose 
between operators of international and long-dista nce communications.  Pursuant to amendments 
to Article 4 of Law No. 272-II "On Natural Monopolies", the activities of natural monopolies no 
longer pertained to "telecommunication services through local networks", but instead covered 
(i) telecommunication services, when there was no other competing operator due to the fact that it 
might be economically and technically infeasible to enter the market (specifically, these 
telecommunication services included operator connection services to universal connection 
networks and telephone traffic transmission services); and (ii) lease or use of cable channels and 
other basic facilities technologically related to connecting telecommunication networks with WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 274 - 
 
  telecommunications of common use.  She added that pursuant to Law No. 567 
"On Communications" of 5 July 2004 - (i) local te lephone communications services; (ii) area and 
long-distance telephone services; and, (iii) services providing mass Internet access with 
connection speed no less than 256 Kb/sec. - were defined as universal telecommunications 
services which were subject to governmental regulation.   
883.  In accordance with the Law "On National Security", foreign participation in the capital of 
companies providing long distance and/or international telecommunication services using fixed 
communication networks (cable, optical fibre, and radio relay) was limited to 49%.  This limitation 
had been introduced to protect the national security interests of Kazakhstan.  However, this 
limitation did not apply to operators of mobile, satellite and local communications and would be 
removed for all companies other than JSC "KazakhTeleCom" (and its possible successors) within a 
period of 2.5 years starting  Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.   
884.  The representative of Kazakhstan also pointed to a number of other liberalisation initiatives 
in this sector.  To avoid cross-subsidizing and to recover the financial losses of operators rendering 
universal telecommunication services in rural areas, her Government had begun subsidizing these 
operators through the State budget.  In 1997-2010,  371 licenses for local communication services 
and 511 licenses for rendering data transmission se rvices had been issued.  To resolve the "last 
mile" problem of access to customers, 51 operators had received permission to use the 5.2-5.9 
GHz radio spectrum.   
885.  Some Members noted that it was clear that there was no "natural" monopoly in the 
telecommunications services sector, adding that the limited nature of Kazakhstan's offer in the 
negotiation of its services commitments supported the contention that a State monopoly was being 
granted and preserved.  A Member noted that, while KazakhTeleCom no longer had exclusive 
rights for the provision of international and long-distance communication, the company had 
participated in a tender for the acquisition of another telecommunications company – effectively 
creating a State-owned monopoly in the telecommunication sector.   
886.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan said that KazakhTeleCom's actions were in 
compliance with Kazakhstan's antitrust legislation.  She noted that KazakhTeleCom's share in 
Kazakhstan's market did not exceed 30% in all types of telecommunication services. 
887.  A Member requested Kazakhstan to explain the local content requirements relating to 
services25, in particular with regards to foreign invested companies and to identify those 
circumstances in which a foreign investor was required to buy services only from 
Kazakhstan-based companies unless the required service was unavailable in Kazakhstan.   
888.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the local content requirement with regard to 
surface and subsurface use pertained to all services acquired by subsurface users.  This was a 
                                               
25 The term services included both  services and "works" as those te rms were used in the Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use ". WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 275 - 
 
  non-discriminatory requirement, which equally applied to both foreign and domestic investors 
signing investment agreements with the Government of Kazakhstan on use of surface and subsurface resources.  This provision was included in the Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface 
Use".  This Law established a requirement for such investors to procure services from juridical 
persons of Kazakhstan provided that such se rvices met the requirements of the project 
documentation and Kazakhstan's legislation on technical regulation.  If services required were not 
found in Kazakhstan, a subsurface user could attract foreign country-based companies to provide 
those services.  The Law "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" did not stipulate a minimum 
percentage of local content requirements, but provided that a contract had to contain obligations 
in respect to Kazakhstan's goods, services, and personnel, which were determined individually in 
each contract on subsurface use and was dependant on the complexity and specificity of the project.  The winner of the competitive bidding to provide services to the investor was determined 
on the basis of the lowest price, with putati ve discounts granted for service suppliers meeting 
certain minimum thresholds for employment of citizens of Kazakhstan.   
889.  Asked to clarify whether an investor must only use the tender process or if it might find 
service providers through other methods, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan responded that, in 
addition to tenders, subsurface users could also use other procurement methods such as a 
quotation request, from one source and through commodity exchanges.  Tendering was the most 
commonly used procurement method since it was more transparent and gave equal opportunities 
to all suppliers to participate in the bid.  
890.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would not adopt any 
measure pertaining to requirements to use Kazakh stan content that exceeded those provided for 
in the Subsurface Law as was in effect in September 2011.  Upon accession, in establishing the 
terms for conducting a tender for granting subsurface use rights, Kazakhstan would not establish a 
minimum Kazakhstan content for personnel or servic es of more than 50%, as determined pursuant 
to this paragraph:  (a) Kazakhstan content of personnel of an investor that had been granted 
subsurface use rights ("the investor") would be calculated as the proportion, on a per capita basis, 
of executives, managers and specialists, as those terms were defined for purposes of entry and 
temporary stay of intra-corporate transferees in Kazakhstan's WTO schedule of specific 
commitments on services (hereinafter "qualified employees"), who were citizens of Kazakhstan; 
(b) Kazakhstan content in all services, which were  rendered to the investor, was defined as the 
share of the total annual amount of payments (e xpenditures) for services under all contracts, 
which were paid to juridical persons of Kazakhstan
26.  However, the amount paid to juridical 
persons of Kazakhstan would be reduced by any amount paid for services subcontracted at any 
level that were performed by enterprises that were  not juridical persons of Kazakhstan; and, (c) in 
determining the tender winner for purposes of granting subsurface use rights, Kazakhstan would 
not take into account the fact that a potential in vestor might have offere d a level of Kazakhstan 
                                               
26 A contract with a juridical person of Kazakhstan woul d be disregarded, if that person did not actually 
carry out the agreed activity in Kazakhstan.  The term "j uridical person of Kazakhstan" included also individual 
entrepreneurs. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 276 - 
 
  content for personnel or services above 50%.  Within five years from the date of its accession to 
the WTO, Kazakhstan would bring into conformity with above-mentioned terms any contract signed between September 2011 and the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.   
891.  Some Members requested information on the regulation of the banking sector and in 
particular requested information on the conditions under which a foreign bank would be able to 
obtain a licence to establish a branch within Kazakhstan.  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that direct branching would be permitted under a new banking law or 
amendment to the current banking law upon expiration of the five -year period starting from 
the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO .  She reported that the activities of banking 
firms were regulated by the Law of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan No. 2444 "On Banks and Banking 
Activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 31 August 1995.  Under the Law, a juridical person was 
required to have a licence to engage in a banking business.  Article 15 of the Law No. 2444  
provided that banks must be established in the form of a joint-stock company.  The licensing 
criteria to be adopted for branches of foreign ba nks would be prudential in nature.  She clarified 
that Kazakhstan's commitments in banking and other financial services (excluding insurance) 
sector with respect to branches were related only to foreign bank branches.  Also the authorised 
body of Kazakhstan was permitted to impose addi tional requirements providing for the solvency 
and stability of financial organizations.  However, there may be differences between the licensing 
criteria for a joint-stock bank and those for a branch of a foreign bank.  The representative of Kazakhstan added that the National Bank of Kaza khstan would comply with the requirements of 
Articles XVI and XVII of the GATS when considering an application for a new licence subject to the 
limitations set forth in Kazakhstan's Schedu le of Specific Commitments on Services.  
892.  In response to questions from a Member related to the regulatory regime for foreign bank 
branches, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the regime was yet to be developed but it 
would be in line with commonly accepted international practice.  This regime would include, but 
would not be limited to such requirements, as fo r example, capital adequacy, which would depend 
on the parent bank's capital.  The specific capital requirement for a foreign bank branch would 
differ depending on its business plans in Kazakhst an; a branch would be required to maintain a 
deposit with the National Bank of Kazakhstan, the sum of which would be based on obligations 
which would be accepted by the foreign bank branch .  In addition, a branch would be required to 
have at least two resident managers. 
893.  Some Members stated that they expected Kazakhstan to make a commitment to 
guarantee transparency of licensing requirements and procedures, qualification requirements and 
procedures as well as of other authorisation requirements, in particular with respect to obtaining, 
extending, renewing, denying and terminating lice nses and other approvals required to provide 
services in Kazakhstan's market and appeals of such actions.  Kazakhstan's licensing procedures 
and conditions should not in themselves act as a barrier to market access and should not be more 
trade restrictive than necessary.  Kazakhstan should publish a list of authorities responsible for WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 277 - 
 
  authorising, approving or regulating those service sectors in which Kazakhstan had made specific 
commitments and Kazakhstan's licensing procedur es and conditions.  Members also expected 
Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that for those services included in Kazakhstan's 
Schedule of Specific Commitments on Services, relevant regulatory authorities would be separated 
from, and not accountable to, any service suppliers they regulated .  Members further expected 
Kazakhstan to make a commitment to guarantee that foreign service suppliers remained  free to 
choose their partners. 
894.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, upon accession Kazakhstan 
would ensure that all normative legal acts of general application pertaining to or affecting trade in 
services, as well as information on their effective date and scope of application were published27 or 
made otherwise publicly available.  She further confirmed that Kazakhstan would ensure that the 
names of competent authorities that were responsible for certification and issuing licenses for 
service activities were published or made otherw ise publicly available.  The Working Party took 
note of these commitments. 
895.  Without prejudice to the right of Kazakhstan to establish and apply licensing procedures 
and requirements, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed, that in sectors in which 
Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments, Kazakhstan would ensure that its licensing 
procedures would not in themselves constitute a restriction on the supply of the service, and its 
licensing requirements directly related to eligibility to supply a service would not in themselves be 
an unjustified barrier to the supply of the service.   She further confirmed that for those services 
sectors in which specific commitments were undertaken by Kazakhstan in its Schedule of Specific 
Commitments, Kazakhstan would ensure that:  
(a) All licensing procedures and requirements were set-out in normative legal acts and that 
any law establishing or implementing licensing procedures or requirements would be 
published prior to its effective date;  
(b) Relevant authorities would review and make a decision on granting or denying a licence 
within the period specified in official procedures or, if no time period was specified, without 
undue delay;  
(c) Any fees charged in connection with the filing and review of an application for a licence 
would not constitute in themselves a restriction on the supply of the service; 
(d) Once any period established in a normative legal act for review of an application for a 
licence had lapsed, and on the request of an applicant, Kazakhstan's relevant regulatory authority would inform the applicant of the status of its application and whether it was 
considered complete.  If the authority required additional information from the applicant, it 
would notify the applicant without delay and specify the additional information required to complete the application.  Applicants would ha ve the opportunity to provide the additional 
information requested and to make technical corrections in the application.  An application 
would not be considered complete until all information and documents specified in the relevant laws and regulations were received;  
(e) Kazakhstan's relevant regulatory authority would make an administrative decision on a 
completed application for issuance of a licence and authorisation for the supply of a 
financial service, and, if appropriate, approval  of new products and rate changes, within a 
reasonable period of time and would promptly notify the applicant of the decision.  
An application would not be considered complete until all information specified in the 
relevant normative legal acts was received.  Where it was not practicable for a decision to 
                                               
27 Publication would include publication on the Internet.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 278 - 
 
  be made on:   
(i) an application for supply of banking services to receive an authorisation within 
six months, and to receive a licence within two months; and, 
(ii) an application for supply of other financial services to receive an authorisation 
within three months, and to receive a licence within one month. 
 The relevant regulatory authority would notify the applicant without delay; (f) On the written request of an unsuccessful  applicant, a regulatory authority that had 
denied an application would, inform the applicant in writing of the reasons for denial of the 
application.  However, this provision would not be construed to require a regulatory authority to disclose information, the disclosure of which would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the national security interests; 
(g) Where an application had been denied, an applicant may submit a new application that 
attempted  to address any prior problems for licensing; 
(h) Where approval was required, once the application had been approved, the applicant 
would be informed in writing and in the time period provided for by the relevant normative 
legal act or, if no time period was specified, without undue delay; and, 
(i) Where examination was required to licence professionals, such examinations would be 
scheduled at reasonable intervals.  That would not apply to qualifying examinations 
administered or offered by financial service regulators or self-regulatory bodies or organizations. 
 The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
896.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that in those sectors, where 
Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments, relevant regulatory authorities would not be 
accountable to any service suppliers they regulate d.  Further, the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that in sectors in which Kazakhstan had undertaken specific commitments it would 
ensure where practicable, that: 
(a) regulations of general application that it proposed to adopt were published in advance; 
(b) an opportunity to comment on such propos ed regulations was provided to interested 
persons and other Members; and, 
(c) a reasonable time between publication of the final regulation and its effective date was 
allowed.   
 The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
897.  With respect to foreign service suppliers' choice of partner, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that in those sectors, where Kazakhstan had undertaken specific 
commitments, foreign service suppliers, when entering into joint venture or other partnerships with persons of Kazakhstan, were free to choose their partner(s).  This was without prejudice to 
regulations relating to ownership of financial organizations or participation in them.  The Working 
Party took note of these commitments. 
898.  In response to the question of a Member whether existing legislation of Kazakhstan 
provided for possibility to review administrative decisions, such as the denial of a licence, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Article 46 of the Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 214-III "On Licensing" of 11 January 2007, if a licence was not issued within the 
time-frame established by the Law or the applicant contested the denial to issue a licence as WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 279 - 
 
  unreasonable, an applicant had the right to appeal to the court in accordance with the legislation 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan).  Terms and procedures for the review of decisions such as the denial of a licence were established in the Civil 
Procedure Code.  Specifically, in accordance with  Chapter 27 of the Civil Procedure Code, a citizen 
or a juridical person had the right to file an application to the court within three months of the date 
when they became aware of the violation of thei r rights, freedoms and interests guaranteed by the 
law.  The application was reviewed by the court within one month.  If the court found that the 
applicants' rights, freedoms and interests were vi olated, the court obliged an appropriate state 
authority to eliminate the violation.  The relevant state authority had to notify the court and the 
applicant of the enforcement of the court's decision  no later than one month of the date the state 
authority had received the court's decision. 
899.  A Member asked to clarify the scope of EAEU competence in trade in services and 
investments between the EAEU member States, and between the EAEU member States and third 
countries.  The representative of Kazakhstan replie d that trade in services and investments within 
the Single Economic Space had been regulated by the Agreement on Trade in Services and 
Investments signed on 9 December 2010 and enac ted as of 1 January 2012.  The SES Agreement 
was terminated when the EAEU Treaty came into effect on 1 January 2015.  The provisions of the 
SES Agreement were incorporated into Section XV "Trade in Services, Establishment, Activity and 
Investments" and the corresponding Annex 16 "Pro tocol on Trade in Services, Establishment, 
Activities, and Investments" of the EAEU Treaty.  Section XV and Annex No. 16 regulated internal trade in services, establishment, activity and investments between the EAEU member States. 
The basic objective of the Section was to create conditions for free movement of services and 
investments within the Eurasian Economic Union.  In order to create such conditions, the 
EAEU member States aspired to create a Single Services Market in the services sectors, which 
were approved by the Supreme Eurasian Econom ic Council based on the proposals of the EAEU 
Member State.  At the same time, each EAEU member State was entitled to reserve the right to 
maintain the exemptions from national treatment regime and reservations on market access in 
accordance with their individual lists of exemptions, based on its national interests.  Section XV 
and Annex No. 16 of the EAEU Treaty did not apply to  trade in services establishment, activity and 
investments between the EAEU member States and third countries.  External policy in trade in 
services was in the national competences of each EAEU member State. The Republic of Kazakhstan 
undertook market access negotiations in services with Members of the Working Party.  
The commitments of the Republic of Kazakhstan in services were contained in the Schedule of 
Specific Commitments, reproduced in Annex I to the Protocol of Accession. 
VII. TRANSPARENCY 
- Publication of Information on Trade 900.  Some Members requested a description of the measures providing legal authorisation for 
Kazakhstan to implement Article X of the GATT 1994 and the other transparency provisions in the 
WTO Agreements, together with a confirmation that these measures would be applied upon WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 280 - 
 
  accession.  A clarification was particularly sought on where the laws, decrees, resolutions, orders, 
letters and other measures of general application of Kazakhstan would be published to fulfil the requirements of Article X of the GATT 1994, and the transparency provisions in other 
WTO Agreements, including the WTO GATS and TRIPS Agreements.  Because the 
EAEU member States and competent bodies of the EAEU were adopting international treaties, 
decisions and other measures related to trade, Members also requested confirmation that the 
EAEU member States and competent bodies of the EAEU would comply with the transparency 
provisions of the WTO Agreement on matters within EAEU competency.   
901.  Some Members stated that access to customs regulations and decrees was vital for traders 
attempting to import and export.  In this regard, Members also noted that, since 1 July 2010, 
when the Customs Union had entered into force, and now that the EAEU had entered  into force 
on 1 January 2015, agreements, decisions and other legal instruments affecting trade with the 
EAEU as a whole, and with Kazakhstan as an EAEU member State, had become relevant to 
Members and traders.  These Members requested information on when and where these 
agreements, decisions and other legal instruments would be published and made available to 
Members and traders. 
902.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that Article 4 of the Constitution stipulated that 
all laws and international treaties signed by Kazakhstan had to be published.   
903.  The Law "On Regulatory Legal Acts" of 24 March 1998 provided for the official publication 
and subsequent official publication of regulatory legal acts.  Regulatory legal acts - including 
those affecting the rights, freedoms and obligations of citizens (other than acts containing State 
secrets and legally-protected confidential information) - were published in the official periodicals.  
In particular, laws were published in the Bulletin of Parliament; Presidential and Government 
Resolutions were published in the Collection of Acts of the President and the Government; and 
legal acts of the Central Executive and other Central Executive State Bodies were published in the 
Collection of Acts of the Central Executive and Other Central Executive State Bodies.  Regulatory 
legal acts were also officially published in the periodicals "Yegemen Kazakhstan" and 
"Kazakhstanskaya Pravda".  Regulatory Decision s and Resolutions of Maslikhats and Akims were 
published in local periodicals and were distributed within the respective administrative territorial 
entity.  Subsequent publication took place in periodicals after the texts had undergone a 
compliance check with the centralised bank of legal acts of Kazakhstan.  The list of regulatory legal acts was published and regularly updated at the website of the Ministry of Justice - 
www.minjust.kz. 
904.  In accordance with the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Regulatory Legal Acts", 
after the elaboration of a regulatory legal act, its draft had to be sent to the concerned State 
bodies and organizations for approval.  The draft regulatory legal act affecting the interests of 
private entities was subject to mandatory publication (circulation) in the mass media, including 
Internet resources, prior to sending them for the approval of the concerned State bodies.  
Regulatory legal acts affecting private entity interests had to be approved by accredited business WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 281 - 
 
  associations.  The State body, which had elaborated the draft regulatory legal act, would send it to 
the accredited associations.  Accredited business associations considered the draft and submitted their opinion within 10 working days.  In case the formulation of the opinion would require 
additional time, the terms could be extended, upon written request, for another 10 working days.  
If the State  body, which had developed the draft regulatory  legal act, agreed with the opinion, it 
introduced the relevant amendments into the draft regulatory legal act.  In cases where the State  
body disagreed with the expert report, it would send a reply, outlining its reasons, to the 
association.  If needed, the association would request a meeting of the expert council.  Further, 
the draft regulatory legal act, including the opinion or justification of disagreement, would be sent 
to the State  bodies concerned, for approval.  After appr oval of the draft regulatory legal act, the 
State  body, which had elaborated the draft regulatory  legal act, would publish it on its official 
website, including the proposals of the expert coun cils and interested individuals, the replies of 
State bodies, as well as the protocols and expert re ports on each effective regulatory legal act that 
had been tabled for discussion at the experts' coun cil meeting.  The terms of entry into force of 
regulatory legal acts that would affect private enterprise entities' interests were fixed with the 
acceptance of the terms required for entrepreneurs to be in a position to carry out their activities.  
The terms and condition for the entry into force of regulatory legal acts must not cause damage to 
private enterprise entities.  Regulatory legal acts that set qualification requirements, licensing of 
activities, and lists of goods that were subject to export and import licensing did not become 
effective until 21 days after the releva nt act's official publication.   
905.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that  international agreements within the EAEU, 
the EAEU international agreements with third countries and decisions of the EAEU bodies would be 
published in the official website of the EAEU (www .eurasiancomission.org).  Decisions were posted 
on this website within two working days after their adoption.  She noted that the Commission had 
a dedicated website and the date of publication of a measure on the website was considered to be 
the official date for determining the date of entry into force of the measure.  As a general rule, 
decisions of the Commission of a mandatory nature did not enter into force earlier than 
30 calendar days after the date of their publication on the Commission website.  Decisions of the 
Commission taken in exceptional cases that required immediate reaction could have another date 
of entry into force, but no less than 10 calendars days after official publication.  Decisions of the 
Commission that improved the conditions of physical and juridical persons could be applied retroactively and could also have another date of entry into force, but no less than 10 calendars 
days after official publication.  She also stated that EAEU member States were required to publish 
all decisions of the Commission in dedicated national official journals, stating the date of entry into 
force of a decision, the basis for which was the date of publication on the Commission website. 
906.  Some Members expressed concern that the EA EU Treaty and Commission decisions did not 
appear to provide the opportunity for Members to consult with or provide comments to the 
competent EAEU bodies on matters affecting trade,  including where provisions of WTO Agreements 
specifically required Members to provide drafts  of measures, receive comments from Members, 
consult on those comments, and take the comments and discussions into account.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 282 - 
 
  These Members requested a commitment that Kazakhstan would make drafts of laws and other 
normative legal acts, as well as proposals/submissions to EAEU bodies that, if adopted, would have the effect of a normative legal act in Kazakhstan, available for interested persons, including 
Members, to provide comments prior to their adoption and that Kazakhstan and the competent 
bodies of the EAEU would comply with the transp arency requirements of the WTO Agreements on 
matters within their respective competence. 
907.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, in accordance with Section II of Annex 
No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third Countries" of the EAEU Treaty, 
organizations or individual entrepreneurs of the EAEU member States coul d provide comments, as 
provided for under the procedure of the development of draft decision on introduction, 
implementation and abolishment of non-tariff measure, concerning trade in goods with third countries.  Paragraph 6 of Annex No. 7 "Protocol on Non-Tariff Measures Concerning Third 
Countries" of the EAEU Treaty stated that foreign activity participants of an EAEU member State 
could provide comments, as provided for under the procedure of the development of draft decision 
of the Commission on introduction, implementation and termination of non-tariff measure, 
concerning trade in goods with third countries.  The procedure for making proposals on 
introduction or elimination of a measure was defined by the Commission.   In addition, in cases 
where an EAEU member State had concluded an international treaty with a third country that 
provided for consultations, the Government of that country, organizations and entrepreneurs of 
that country could present their views with regard to the measure in compliance with the terms of the relevant treaty.   
908.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, all laws, 
regulations, decrees, decisions and administrative rulings of general application pertaining to or 
affecting trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, whether adopted or issued in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan or by a competent body of the EAEU, would be published promptly in a 
manner that fulfilled  applicable requirements of the WTO Agreement, including those of Article X 
of the GATT 1994, GATS, and the WTO TRIPS Agreem ent.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that, from the date of accession, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the competent bodies 
of the EAEU would update published resources, in cluding websites, containing such measures, on a 
regular basis and make them readily available to  WTO Members, individuals and enterprises.  
Such measures would be available while they were in effect and for a reasonable period after they were no longer in effect.  She added that the Repu blic of Kazakhstan intended to post the contents 
of editions of Bulletin of Parliament, the Collecti on of Acts of the President and the Government, 
and in the Collection of Acts of the Central Executive and Other Central State Bodies.  
Official publication of regulatory legal acts was carried out also by periodicals as "Yegemen 
Kazakhstan", "Kazakhstanskaya Pravda", on websites as well, and would keep them current.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.   
909.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that, except in cases of emergency, 
measures involving national security, specific measures setting monetary policy, measures the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 283 - 
 
  publication of which would impede law enforcement, or otherwise be contrary to the public 
interest, or prejudice the legitimate commercial interest of particular enterprises, public or private, the Republic of Kazakhstan would publish all laws, regulations, decrees, decisions and 
administrative rulings of general application pertaining to or affecting trade in goods, services, or 
intellectual property rights, prior to their adoption and would provide a reasonable period of time, 
normally not less than 30 calendar days, for Members and interested persons to comment to the 
responsible authorities before the relevant measure was finalised or submitted to the competent 
EAEU bodies.  In cases where an EAEU body was responsible for proposing or adopting EAEU legal 
acts, including decisions, or other measures corresponding to those specified in the preceding 
sentence of this paragraph, the competent EAEU body would publish them before their adoption 
and a reasonable period would be provided for Members and interested persons to comment to the competent EAEU body.  Any comments received during the period for commenting, whether 
provided to the Republic of Kazakhstan or a competent body of the EAEU, would be taken into 
account.  The Working Party took note of these commitments. 
910.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, no law, 
regulation, decree, decision or administrative ruling of general application pertaining to or affecting 
trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, whether adopted or issued in the Republic 
of Kazakhstan or by a competent body of the EAEU, would become effective prior to publication, as 
provided for in the applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the GATT 1994, the 
WTO GATS Agreement, and the WTO TRIPS Agreemen t.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment. 
- Notifications 
911.  Some Members noted that all Members of the WT O were obliged to provide notifications to 
the various subsidiary bodies of the WTO, purs uant to the covered Agreements.  These Members 
requested a specific commitment that Kazakhstan would provide, as from the date of accession, 
initial notifications for all WTO Agreements, and that Kazakhstan would also comply with the 
notification requirements of the WTO Agreements  with regard to the EAEU Treaty, the EAEU 
international agreements and Commission decisions, as well as domestic regulations, decrees, 
decisions or administrative rulings of general application, subsequently adopted by Kazakhstan, 
which implemented  any of the WTO Agreements. 
912.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, upon the date of accession, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan would submit all initial notifications required by any Agreement constituting part of 
the WTO Agreement, except for the notifications set-out in Table 4, which would be submitted 
within the time-frame indicated in that Table.  After submitting its initial notifications, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan would submit subsequent notifications in conformity with the relevant provisions 
and procedures of the WTO Agreement.  The Wo rking Party took note of these commitments. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 284 - 
 
  Table 4: - Timeline for the Su bmission of Notifications  
Notification Requirement Type of Measure Deadline 
Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994 - Decision on checklist of issues Responses to the checklist of issues 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (ASCM) - Article 25.1 annual;  - GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 
annual Any subsidy as defined in  ASCM Article 1:1 which 
is specific within the meaning of ASCM Article 2 as well as any other subsidy which causes increased exports or decreased imports within the meaning of the GATT 1994, Article XVI:1 (Format:  G/SC) 120 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures - Article 5.1 Trade-related investment measures (TRIMs) which 
are inconsistent with the pr ovisions of Article III or 
Article XI of the GATT 1994 and not justified under exceptions to the GATT (Format:  G/TRI) 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Im port Licensing 
import licensing Procedures - Article 7.3 Replies to the annual  questionnaire on import 
licensing  procedures 90 days after 
accession 
Agreement on Rules of Origin - Article 5:1; - Annex II, paragraph 4 Existing non-preferential rules of origin:  judicial 
decisions and administrative rulings of general application relating to non-preferential rules of origin 90 days after 
accession 
VIII. TRADE AGREEMENTS 
913.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that Kazakhstan had free trade agreements with 
other CIS countries, Georgia and Serbia, and along with the Republic of Belarus and the 
Russian Federation had created a Customs Union and then the Eurasian Economic Union.  At the 
moment these agreements included:  bilateral Free Trade Agreements with CIS Parties; a bilateral Free Trade Agreement with Georgia; a bilateral Fr ee Trade Agreement with the Republic of Serbia; 
the Agreement on the Creation of Free Trade Area between CIS countries of 15 April 1994 
(hereinafter – CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994) ; the Agreement on Free Trade Area of 
18 October 2011, signed by eight CIS countries
28 (hereinafter – CIS Free Trade Agreement 
2011)  which had replaced the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994 between countries that 
had signed the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011; and the Treaty of the Eurasian 
Economic Union of 29 May 2014 (her einafter – EAEU Treaty); and  the Agreement on the 
Customs Union between the Republic of Kazakhstan , the Russian Federation and the Republic of 
Belarus of 20 January 1995.  Implementation of  the Treaty on the Establishment of Common 
Customs Territory and the Formation of the Customs Union of 6 October 2007 (hereinafter – 
Treaty on the CU) had been initiated on 1 January 2010 among the Republics of Kazakhstan, 
Belarus and the Russian Federation with the establishment of the Common External Tariff (CET), 
adoption of the Customs Union (CU) Customs Code and the establishment of the CU institutions.  
The full list of Kazakhstan's trade agreements is contained in Annex 21 of this Report. 
914.  With regard to the Customs Union between th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, and the Russian Federation, the representative of Kazakhstan said that the first steps 
towards establishing this Customs Union had been  taken with the approval of the Agreement on 
the Customs Union between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus of 6 January 1995 
                                               
28 The Agreement was signed by the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldov a, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan 
and Ukraine. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 285 - 
 
  and the Agreement on the Customs Union between the Russian Federation and the Republics of 
Belarus and Kazakhstan of 20 January 1995.  In addi tion, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic 
of Belarus, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federa tion, and the Republic of Tajikistan had signed 
the Agreement on the Establishment of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space on 
26 February 1999 that was terminated as of 1 January 2015, according to Decision of the 
Interstate Council of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) No.652 “On 
Termination of the Functioning of the Eura sian Economic Community” of 10 October  
2014 (hereinafter – Decision of In terstate Council of EurAsEC No.652).   The Agreement 
had foreseen  the gradual creation of free-trade area and Customs Union that would eventually 
cover not only trade in goods, but also services (national treatment with respect to access to 
services markets, including the gradual elimination of existing restrictions on juridical and natural persons) and the movement of capital.  In particular, the Agreement had set the initial objective 
of the elimination of all customs tariffs and other restrictions related to trade in goods between the 
Parties, except those allowed under the WTO Agreement, and the establishment of a common 
external tariff.  
915.  In order to continue progress towards the establishment of the Customs Union and the 
Single Economic Space, the Agreement on the Es tablishment of the Eurasian Economic Community 
(EurAsEC) had been signed on 10 October 2000 and had entered into force on 30 May 2001.  
On 19 September 2003, the Presidents of the Repub lic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the 
Russian Federation and Ukraine had signed the Agreement on the Establishment of the Single 
Economic Space.  The Parties to the Agreement intended to promote mutual trade and investment 
on the basis of fundamental principles and norms of international law, including WTO rules, and 
also to increase the competitiveness of their economies via, inter alia , the creation of a free trade 
area and, possibly, customs union.  According to the Agreement, the Single Economic Space would 
be created on a stage-by-stage basis, taking a ccount the possibility of different implementation 
speeds and levels of integration among the Parties.   Transition from one stage to another could be 
achieved by those Parties  who had performed all the measures envisaged in the previous stage.  
Each Party  would determine independently which integration measures it would adopt, as well as 
t h e  r a t e  a n d  d e g r e e  o f  s u c h  i n t e g r a t i o n .   H o w e v e r ,  n o  s p e c i f i c  f o l l o w - o n  a g r e e m e n t s  a i m e d  a t  
realisation of this four-party Single Economic Space had been concluded so far, and efforts to 
implement the Agreement had been  suspended. 
916.  To implement the tasks stipulated in the List  of Activities on Creating the Eurasian 
Economic Community for the years 2003-2006, th e Heads of Governments of the EurAsEC had 
authorised implementation of previously adopted decisions, conclusion of new international treaties 
and agreements, and the preparation of new documents.  On 6 October 2007, the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russi an Federation had concluded the Treaty on the 
CU.  According to the Treaty on the CU , the Common Customs Territory had been  established in 
several steps and had been  completed by 1 July 2011 when the customs border between the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation had been  eliminated.  Provisions of the 
agreements concluded earlier by the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 286 - 
 
  the Russian Federation, and resolutions of governing bodies that had not been conflicted  with 
the Treaty   on the Establishment of the EurAsEC of 10 December 2000 (hereinafter – Treaty 
on the EurAsEC) had  continued to be in force.  She further noted that the Treaty on 
EurAsEC was terminated as of 1 January 2 015, according to Decision of Interstate 
Council of EurAsEC No.652.   The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Treaty on the 
CU, agreements, and other acts subsequently agreed by the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic 
of Belarus and the Russian Federation through the end of 2009, had finalized the legal basis for 
the Customs Union within EurAsEC and had laid out a framework for progressively increasing 
economic cooperation between entities of member States , starting with plans for the unification of 
foreign trade, customs policies and trade remedies; and initiating cooperation between the 
financial and banking systems; cooperation in so cial and humanitarian areas; and cooperation in 
the field of legal regulation.  The two members of the EurAsEC not parties to the Treaty on the 
CU (the Republic of Tajikist an and the Kyrgyz Republic) had not been  members of the Customs 
Union established by the Republic of Belarus,  the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian 
Federation.  She added that progress towards a single  economic space had continued and had 
been finalized by the establishment of the EAEU as of 1 January 2015 . 
917.  A Member noted that approximately 62% of the applied import tariffs of the EurAsEC 
members had been harmonized and asked when the rest of the tariff lines would be harmonized.  
This Member also inquired if there was a formal schedule for harmonization of the remaining tariff 
lines.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied th at as of today, tariff harmonization was taking 
place exclusively within the framework of the EAEU .  Almost 100% of import tariffs in the CET had 
been gradually harmonized.  The exemptions granted to Kazakhstan had been  limited to 72 tariff 
lines at 10-digit level out of 11,119 tariff lines at  the applied CET.  By 1 January 2015, the import 
tariffs for those goods were  planned to increase up to the leve ls set by the CET.  The exemptions 
from the CET had been  granted in the form of 0% for medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, 
polyethylene, greenhouses, aluminium foil and railway wagons (the list of tariff lines subject to 
exemptions from the CET, with respective transiti onal periods, is provided in Annex 10 of this 
Report).  As for export tariffs, currently the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, and 
the Republic of Belarus applied separate export duty regimes vis-à-vis  third countries.  
918.  On 27 November 2009, the EurAsEC Interstate Council had also approved the Treaty on 
the Customs Union Customs Code that had entered into force in the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation on 1 July 2010 and in the Republic of Belarus – on 6 July 2010.  
The Agreements, Decisions and national complementary customs regulations related to the 
CU Customs Code had been developed.  The representative of Kazakhstan explained that, as laid 
out in the Treaty on the Establishment of the Common Customs Territory and the Formation of the 
Customs Union of 6 October 2007, the Interstate Council had taken a decision on the 
establishment of the common customs territory and the completion of the formation of the 
Customs Union after the tasks set-out in the Trea ty had been completed.  The Customs Union had 
been implemented in 2010.  On 1 January 2015, the Customs Union was superseded by the 
Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that a detailed WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 287 - 
 
  description of the EAEU trade policies and regulations was provided for in the relevant sections of 
this Report. 
919.  The institutional and legislative set-up of the EAEU was described in the section 
"Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies" to the extent it was relevant for the trade regime of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan and the im plementation of its WTO commitments.  
920.  A Member asked for information on the establishment of the Single Economic Space 
between the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Repub lic of Belarus and the Russian Federation.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that, on 1 January 2012, 17 agreements establishing a 
legal basis for the Single Economic Space (hereina fter – SES) between the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation  had entered into force.  She stated that the 
SES Agreements had provided a legal framework for the harmonization of legislation of the 
SES Parties in the spheres of government support to industrial and agricultural sectors, public 
procurement, access to services rendered by natu ral monopolies, provision of fair competition, 
trade in services, movement of na tural persons, investments, etc. 
921.  She added that the Agreements had been aimed at creating conditions for conducting a 
coordinated trade and economic policy between the SES Parties, with the overall objective to 
provide a level playing field for competition among businesses of the SES member States.  She noted that the Agreements had been incorporated into the EAEU Treaty, which entered into 
force on 1 January 2015.  
922.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  the EAEU was open to the accession of new 
partners, as provided for in the Article 108 of the EAEU Treaty.  Membership was open to any 
State that was ready  to undertake the obligations and fulfil the commitments called for in the 
EAEU Treaty and other EAEU legal instruments 
923.  Concerning the CIS free trade area , the representative of Kazakhstan stated that on 
15 April 1994, the CIS countries  had signed the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994 .  This 
Agreement had provided for gradual elimination of customs duties, taxes and charges and other 
barriers that had impeded the free movement of goods.  The Agreement had not been fully 
implemented and had been further modified by the Protocol on Amending the Agreement on the 
Creation of the  Free Trade Area of 2 April 1999.  The Protocol had established that the Free 
Trade Area had had  to be implemented via existing or future bilateral agreements and protocols 
on exemptions. 
924.  The Republic of Kazakhstan had concluded b ilateral Free Trade Agreements with Georgia 
and all CIS countries (the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, 
the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan, the Republic of Uzbekistan, and Ukraine) with th e exception of Turkmenistan.  These Agreements 
had established a regime of free trade among the Parties that had covered a substantial part of 
trade in goods between them.  Under these bila teral Free Trade Agreements, mutual trade in 
goods originating from these countries and impo rted to, or exported from, the Republic of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 288 - 
 
  Kazakhstan was free from customs duties, except for the goods listed in appropriate schedules of 
exemptions, which were subject to normal customs duties, taxes and charges.  The lists of goods 
subject to restrictions from free trade regime were included in the Protocols on exemptions from 
free trade regime attached to the bilateral FTAs.  According to the relevant Protocols, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan had applied exemptions on import  of alcoholic beverages (HS chapter 22, except 
for codes  2201, 2202 and 2209), and tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes (HS 
chapter 24) from Azerbaijan and Ukraine; specified alcoholic beverages (HS codes  2203, 2205, 
2206 and 2207), tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes (HS chapter 24) and white sugar 
(HS tariff line  1701 99 100) from Georgia.  Currently, the Republic of Kazakhstan applied 
exemption on imports of rice (HS code 1006), alcoholic beverages (HS chapter 22, except for 
codes  2201, 2202 and 2209), and tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes (HS chapter 24) 
originating from the Republic of Uzbekistan.  Accord ing to the respective Protocols, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan had reserved the right to apply duties on goods which were subject to export tariff 
regulation of the Republic of Kazakhstan when th ese goods were exported to the Kyrgyz Republic, 
the Republic of Moldova, and the Republic of Ta jikistan.  The goods, subject to export tariff 
regulation had been exempted from  duty-free regime in trade betw een the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and the Russian Federation (Protocol of 22 Octobe r 1992).  However, those exemptions had never 
been used in practice, as the implementation of the Protocol had been suspended.  The Protocol 
had been revoked by signing on 20 January 1995 the Protocol on Establishment of a Free Trade 
Regime without any exemptions. 
925.  A Member said that the phase-out schedule for the restrictions, such as exemptions from 
free trade regime, had already been planned with the Republic of Uzbekistan and asked if the 
schedule for phasing these restrictions with Georgi a, Ukraine, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and the 
Republic of Moldova was also planned or required further negotiations.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that, until now, there was no phase-out Protocol signed between the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Uzbekistan.  The phase-out Protocol had been signed with 
Georgia on 11 November 2004, based on which the exemptions from the free trade regime applied 
to imports from Georgia had been phased-out on 1 April 2005.  According to the Protocol signed 
with the Republic of Azerbaijan on 24 May 2005,  the exemptions of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
from a free trade regime for imports of alcoholic beverages, tobacco and manufactured tobacco 
substitutes from the Republic of Azerbaijan had been phased-out by 1 January 2012.  The Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Moldova had no t stipulated any import duty exemptions from a 
free trade regime, but had reserved the right to a pply export duties in mutual trade.  She added 
that the Protocol on Exemptions had also been si gned between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Republic of Armenia of 2 September 1994 .  This Protocol had been signed for a one year period 
and had not been extended.  
926.  The representative of Kazakhstan further informed Members that the CIS Free Trade 
Agreement 2011 had been signed on 18 October 2011 by the Republic of Armenia, the Republic 
of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian 
Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan and Ukraine.  The other CIS countries could join the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 289 - 
 
  Agreement later.  Upon its entry into force, the CIS Free Trade Agreement  2011 would replace 
the bilateral FTAs between the CIS countries and the Republic of Kazakhstan, and establish a CIS-
wide preferential trade area.  In accordance with the CIS Free Trade  Agreement 2011 , the 
Republic of Kazakhstan applied  exemptions from a free trade regime for imports of sugar and 
vodka from Ukraine.  The exemption for Ukrainian vodka was in force till 1 January 2015.  The 
exemption from a free trade regime for imports of sugar from Ukraine was also applied by the 
Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus.  In turn, Ukraine also applied import duties for 
sugar originating from the Republic of Kazakhst an, the Russian Federation and the Republic of 
Belarus.  Within the Agreement the Republic of Kazakhstan had also reserved the right to apply 
duties for soybeans, rape or colza seeds and sunflower seeds, crude oil, light, medium and heavy 
oils, bitumen, natural and coal gases, petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons, raw hides and skins of bovine, sheep and lambs, wool and animal hair, ferrous, copper, and aluminum waste 
and scrap, rail, crossing piece, iron/steel, part of railway locomotives, certain aluminum products 
(i.e. powders and flakes, bars and profiles, foil, tubes, pipes, etc.), listed in the Annex to the 
Agreement, when these products were exported to  the other Parties of the Agreement, with the 
exception of the EAEU member States.  The CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 had created  a 
uniform legal structure based on WTO rules.  The Agreement contained provisions stipulating, 
inter alia , substantial reduction with subsequent elimination of import customs duties and 
restrictions in mutual trade, commitments regulati ng the levels and application of export duties, 
application of safeguard measures in mutual trade, competition and subsidies rules, technical barriers to trade, SPS measures, an effective mechanism for dispute settlement, etc.  
927.  A Member asked Kazakhstan to clarify how the establishment of a uniform legal structure 
based on the WTO rules would be accomplished within the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 .  
This Member also asked Kazakhstan to clarify if the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011  was 
considered an extension of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994  and to inform about the status 
of the CIS Free Trade Agreement  1994  in light of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 . 
928.  In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that the CIS Free Trade Agreement 
2011 contained  provisions confirming the obligations of the Parties of the Agreement to comply 
with the WTO rules.  Some provisions containe d citations and references to the GATT and the 
other WTO Agreements related to trade in goods.  For instance, the CIS Free Trade Agreement 
2011  stipulated the following key principles based on WTO rules:  
- provision of national treatment for goods imported from the other Parties; 
- provision of freedom of transit  through the territories of the Parties within the meaning of 
Article V of the GATT 1994;  
- general elimination of quantitative restrictions according to Article XI of the GATT 1994; 
- prohibition of subsidies contingent  upon export performance or the use of domestic over 
imported goods, and, 
- application of trade remedies, SPS and TBT measures in accordance with the WTO rules, 
etc. 
929.  She added that most specifically, Article 5 of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011  
stipulated that the Parties should provide each other national treatment according to Article III of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 290 - 
 
  the GATT 1994.  In accordance with the Article,  the Parties were committed to apply internal 
taxes, laws, regulation and requirements affecting the sale of imported products in a non-discriminatory manner to prevent protection to domestically-produced good.  According to Article 
10 of the Agreement, the Parties should not mainta in or grant subsides prohibited under Article 3 
of SCM Agreement.  The Parties that maintained prohibited subsidies had committed to phase-out 
such measures after expiration of the transitional period, stipulated in the CIS Free Trade 
Agreement 2011 .  She noted that under the Agreement, the Republic of Kazakhstan had 
reserved the right to maintain its local content requirements in:  (i) purchases of subsoil users, 
and enterprises partially or fully controlled by the government, until these measures were phased 
out in accordance with Kazakhstan's commitments upon accession to the WTO; (ii) preferences 
granted under the free warehouse regime and spec ial economic zones till 1 January 2017,  and (iii) 
tariff preferences granted under agreements on industrial assembly concluded in accordance with 
the Order of the Deputy Prime Minist er and Minister of Industry and New Technologies   No. 113 
"On Approval of the Rules on Concluding the Agreement on Industrial Assembly of Motor 
Vehicles”  of 11 June 2010 – till 31 December 2020.  
930.  Concerning the status of the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994  the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011  had been concluded with the view 
to replace the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994 .  The CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994  had 
not been fully implemented, as the establishmen t of a CIS-wide free trade area had not been 
completed.  The CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994  had become an overall framework 
agreement, and the CIS countries  had built free trade areas based on bilateral agreements.  
Therefore, the Agreement had been signed in 18 October 2011 with objective to establish free 
trade area among the CIS countries  signatories to the Agreement, based on the principles and 
provisions of the WTO rules.  She further explaine d that according to Article 23 of the Agreement, 
the CIS Free Trade Agreement 1994  had ceased to apply in relations between Parties to  the 
CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 .  The bilateral agreements on free trade concluded between 
these Parties   were also replaced by the  CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 .  However, the CIS 
Free Trade Agreement 1994  as well as bilateral FTAs remained in force in trade relations 
between the Parties to the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011  and the CIS countries  that had 
not signed the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 , and those CIS countries  that had signed but 
had not yet ratified the CIS Free Trade Agreement 2011 . 
931.  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that in order to unify its trade regime with those 
of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Bela rus, the Republic of Kazakhstan had signed a 
bilateral Agreement on Free Trade with the Republic of Serbia on 7 October 2010 and was engaged 
in free trade negotiations with Montenegro.  In accordance with the Agreement on Free Trade with 
the Republic of Serbia, nearly all goods (including agricultural products) originating from the 
Republic of Serbia or the Republic of Kazakhstan enjoyed   duty free regime when imported to the 
other country. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 291 - 
 
  932.  She added that the Republic of Kazakhstan al so hoped to conclude more agreements on 
trade liberalisation along with the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation.  Currently, 
New Zealand, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA)  and Viet Nam were in the 
process of  negotiations aimed at concluding FTAs with the Republic of Kazakhstan and the other  
EAEU member States. 
933.  A Member requested information on Kazakhstan's participation in the Economic 
Cooperation Organization (ECO) Trade Agreement (ECOTA), and on the plans of the Shanghai 
Cooperation Organization (SCO) to establish a free trade arrangement among its members 
by 2020.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Republic of Kazakhstan had joined the 
ECO in November 1992, but was not a member to the ECO Trade Agreement (ECOTA) and 
provided an MFN-based trade regime to ECO member s.  In addition, four out of ECO's 10 members 
were beneficiaries of the EAEU Generalized System of Tariff Preferences for Developing 
and Least Developed Countries .  The Republic of Kazakhstan had concluded bilateral free trade 
agreements with the remaining four ECO member s – the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Kyrgyz 
Republic, the Republic of Tajikistan and the Repub lic of Uzbekistan.  She added that, at present, 
no plans existed to conclude a free trade agreement within the SCO.  
934.  The representative of Kazakhstan also noted that the MFN regime was granted to all 
countries that had concluded bilateral non-preferential tr ade agreements with the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  Moreover, the Republic of Kazakhstan  applied the MFN regime to all third countries 
regardless of the existence of a bilateral agreement with a particular country.  
935.  A Member enquired whether the Republic of Kazakhstan participated in the Production 
Co-operation Agreement signed by all CIS co untries on 23 December 1993 in Ashkhabad and 
under what terms trade was conducted, and what portion of the Republic of Kazakhstan's trade 
was conducted under this agreement, in case the Republic of Kazakhstan participated in this 
Agreement.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that the Agreement on Common Rules and 
Mechanisms of Support for Production Cooperation Development of Enterprises and Industrial 
Sectors of CIS countries, signed by the Republic of Kazakhstan on 23 December 1993, had entered 
into force on 10 May 1995.  The agreement had been  signed in order to preserve and promote the 
development of existing and newly created technological and cooperative relationships between 
enterprises of all forms of ownership, and industrial complexes of the CIS countries on the basis of 
their direct production linkages occurring during  the period of USSR.  The Agreement envisaged 
non-application of import duties, taxes and quantita tive restrictions with respect to goods, supplied 
from the CIS customs territories within the cooperation29 and within the framework of the customs 
regimes of processing30 and services rendered31.  The Agreement foresaw the conclusion of related 
inter-governmental, sectoral and inter-ministerial agreements.  Goods supplied within contracts 
                                               
29 Supplies within the cooperation means supplies of raw materials, components, intermediate product 
and other articles used in technologicall y dependent productions of final goods. 
30 Supplies within the frameworks of customs regimes of processing means supplies of goods in 
accordance with the customs legislation of the Parties to the Agreement. 
31 Services rendered means projects, repair and maintenance services and technological operations. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 292 - 
 
  concluded under the agreements could receive th e aforementioned preferences.  However, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan had not concluded such inter-governmental, sectoral and inter-ministerial agreements, and therefore had not implemented the Production Co-operation Agreement in 
practice. 
936.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at from the date of accession to the WTO 
Kazakhstan would observe relevant WTO provisions, including but not limited to Article XXIV of the 
GATT 1994 and Article V of the GATS, in its partic ipation in preferential trade Agreements, and 
would ensure that the provisions of the WTO Agreements for notification, consultation and other 
requirements concerning free trade areas and customs unions were met from the date of 
accession.  She confirmed that Kazakhstan would, upon accession, submit notifications and copies 
of its Free Trade Agreements, the EAEU Treaty  and its sub-agreements to the Committee on 
Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA).  The Work ing Party took note of this commitment. 
CONCLUSIONS 
[to be completed]  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 293 - 
 
  ANNEX 1 
Laws, regulations and other information provided to the Working Party 
Legislation of the Customs Union - The Treaty on the  Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009 ; 
- The Treaty on the Functioning of the Customs Union in the Framework of the 
Multilateral Trading System of 19 May 2011 ; 
- The Treaty on the Creation of the Common Customs Territory and Establishment of the 
Customs Union of 6 December 2007 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- The List of International Treaties which Form ed Contractual and Legal Base of the 
Customs Union, approved  by Decision of the EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 14 of 
27 November 2009;  
- The Treaty on Judicial Recourse to the EurAsEC Court of the Economic Operators on 
Disputes within the Framework of the C ustoms  Union and Peculiarities of the Judicial 
Procedure on them, approved by Decision of the EurAsEC  Interstate Council No. 534 of 
9 December 2010;  
- The Agreement on the Procedure for the Movement of Cash Monetary Funds and /or 
Monetary Instruments by Natural Persons  across the Customs Border of the Customs 
Union of 5 July 2010;  
- Agreement on the Specificities  of Customs Transit of Goods Transported by Rail within 
the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of 21 May 2010; 
- The Agreement on Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade of 9 June  2009 
(repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- The Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Concerning  Foreign 
Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of  Third Countries of 9 
June 2009 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- The Agreement on Common Rules for Determining the Country of Origin of Goods of 
25 January 2008; 
- 
The Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of  
Third Countries of 25 January 2008 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- The Agreement on Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of 25 January 2008 (repealed 
as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- The Agreement on the Determination of Customs Value of Goods , Transferred Across  
the Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008; 
- The Agreement on the Principles of Indirect Tax Collection at Export and Import of Goods, 
Performing Work and Rendering Services in the Customs Union of 25 January 2008 
(repealed  as of 1 January 2015) ;  
- The Agreement on Regime and Impl ementation of Tariff Quota of 12 December 2008 
(repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- The Agreement on Rules of the Origin of Goods, Originating from Developing and 
Least-Developed Countries of 12 December 2008; 
- The CU Agreement on Common Rules of State Support of Agriculture of 9 December  
2010 (repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- The Protocol on the  Procedure of Levyin g Indirect Taxes upon Performing Works 
and Rendering Services in the Customs Union of  11 December 2009 (repealed as 
of 1 January 2015);  
- The Protocol on the Procedure of Colle ction of Indirect Taxes and on the 
Mechanism of Carrying out the Control over their Payment while 
Exporting/Importing Goods from/to th e Customs Union of 11 December 2009 
(repealed as of 1 January 2015);  
- The Protocol on Amending the Agreement on the Principles of Collection  of 
Indirect Taxes on Exports and Import s of Goods, Performing Works and 
Rendering Services in the Custom Union of 11 December 2009 (repealed as of 1 
January 2015);  
- The Protocol on Amendments and Addenda  to the Agreement on the Determination of 
Customs Value of Goods, Transferr ed Across Customs Border of the Customs Union of 
25 January 2008, of 23 April 2012 ; 
- The Protocol on Conditions and Procedure for Use in Exceptional Cases of the Rates of 
Import Customs Duties other than Common Customs Tariff Rates of 12 December 2008 
(repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 294 - 
 
  - The Protocol on the Rules  of Entry into Force of International Treaties Comprising the 
Legal Basis of the Customs Union of  6 October 2007 (repealed as of 1 January 
2015) ; 
- Decision No. 18 "On Common Customs and Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the 
Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 
27 November 2009;  
- Decision of the EurAsEC Intergovernmental Council No. 15 " On the Issues of the 
Organization of Functioning of the Commission of the Customs Union" of 
27 November 2009; 
- Statute of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Community approved by Decision  of the 
EurAsEC Interstate Council No. 122 of 27 April 2003; 
- Decision of the Customs Union Commission  No. 130 "On Common Customs and  Tariff 
Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan 
and the Russian Federation" of 27 November 2009; 
- Decision of the Customs Union Commission  No. 865 "On the List of Goods in Respect of 
which from 1 January 2012, Tariff Rate Quotas as well as Volumes of Tariff Rate Quotas are Established for Imports into the Territory of the Customs Union Member Countries" of 
18 November 2011;  
- Decision of the Customs Union Commission No. 308 " On Regulation on Introduction of 
Changes on Control Measures of Foreign Trade in the Customs Union Commission (as in force on the Customs Union Commission No. 553 of 2 March 2011)" of 18 June 2010; 
- The Agreement on the Basics of Harmonization of Technical Regulations of the Eurasian 
Economic Community Members of 24 March 2005; 
- The Procedure for Development of Technical Regulations of the Eurasian Economic 
Community, approved by Decision of the Integration Committee of the Eurasian Economic 
Community No. 1175 of 17 August 2010; 
- Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Council No. 48 "On Regulation on 
Development, Adoption, Amendment and Cancellation of Technical Regulation of the 
Customs Union" of 20 June 2012; 
- The Agreement on Uniform  Principles and Rules of Technical Regulation in the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 18 November 2010 
(repealed as of 1 January 2015) ; 
- Decision of the Customs Union Commission No. 620 "On the New Version of the  Unified 
List with Regard to Products Subject to Mandatory Conformity Assessment (Confirmation) 
within the Framework of the C ustoms  Union with Issuance of Single Documents, 
Approved by CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010" of 7 April 2011; 
- Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Council "On Amendments to Decision of the 
Customs Union Commission No. 810 'On Exceptio n in Application of Veterinary Measures 
with regard to Goods Included into the Co mmon List of Goods Subject to Veterinary 
Control (Supervision)' of 23 September 2011" of 2012; 
- Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Collegium "On Amendments to Decision of 
the Customs Union Commission No. 810 'On Exception in Application of Veterinary 
M e a s u r e s  w i t h  R e g a r d  t o  G o o d s  I n c l u d e d  i n t o  t h e  C o m m o n  L i s t  o f  G o o d s  S u b j e c t  t o  Veterinary Control (Supervision)' of 23 September 2011" of 2012; 
- Draft Decision of the Eurasian Economic Commission Collegium "On Amendments to the 
Common Veterinary (Veterinary and Sanitary) Requirements for Goods Subject to Veterinary Control (Supervision)"; and, 
- The Schedule of Development of Priority Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, 
approved by Decision of the Customs Unio n Commission No. 492 of 8 December 2010. 
Economic Policies - Law No. 57 -III "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" of 13 June 2005; 
- Law No. 237 -I "On Payments and Money Transfers" of 29 June 1998; 
- Law No. 54  "On Currency Regulations" of 24 December 1996 (repealed by Law 
No. 57-1 of 30 June 2005) ; 
- Law "On Currency Regulation" of 14 April 1993 (repealed by Law No. 55-1 
of 24 December 1996) ; 
- Resolution of the Board of the National Ba nk No. 134 "On Approval of Rules of Currency 
Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 29 October 2005 (repealed by Resolution 
of the Board of the National Bank No. 129 of 11 December 2006) ; 
- Law No. 2155 " On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 30 March 1995; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 295 - 
 
  - Decree of the President  No. 2196 "On the National Bank of Kazakhstan" of 2 August 
1995; 
- Law No. 2227 " On Securities and Stock Exchange" of 21 April 1995 (repealed by Law 
No. 79-1 of 5 March 1997) ; 
- Regulations of the Board of the National Bank " On the Settlements with Cheques" 
of 15 November 1994 (Meeting minutes No. 22); 
- Instruction No. 127 "On Settlement, Current and Budget Accounts Opened in the Bank 
Institutions of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 23 June 1993 approved by the Board of the 
National Bank on 23 June 1993 (Protocol No. 16); 
- Instructions of the Board of the National Bank No. 188 "Rules for Conducting Currency 
Transactions in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 24 November 1994; 
- Temporary Regulation on Clearing; 
- Law No. 266-XIII " On Foreign Investments" of 27 December 1994 (repealed by Law 
No. 373-II of 8 March 2003) ; 
- Law No. 373 -II "On Investments" of 8 January 2003; 
- Law No. 136 " On Pension Support in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 June 1997 
(repealed by Law No. 105-V of 21 June 2013) ; 
- Law No. 527-IV "On National Security of th e Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 January 2012; 
- Law No. 178-II "On the Development Bank of Kazakhstan" of 25 April 2001; 
- Government  Resolution No. 1219 "On Approval of the Plan of Activities on Development 
of Stock Market and Increasing Investment Activeness of the Population on Stock Market 
for the year 2008" of 11 December 2007; 
- Government  Resolution No. 483 "On Some Issues of Republican State Ownership" 
of 11 June 2007; 
- Decree of the President No. 1096 "On Strategy for Industrial and Innovation Development 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2003-2015" of 17 May 2003 (repealed by Decree of 
the President No. 958 of 19 March 2010) ; 
- Decree of the President  No. 1815 "On Establishment of the State Export-Import Bank of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 16 July 1994 (repealed by Decree of the President No. 
1696 of 9 January 2006);  
- Law No. 2717 " On Land" of 22 December 1995 (repealed by Law No. 153-II 
of 24 January 2001) ;  
- Government  Resolution No. 1587 "On the Schedule of Non-Privatisable State Property" 
of 24 October 2000 (amended as of 18 December 2003); 
- Law No. 156-XIII " On Transport" of 21 September 1994; 
- Law No. 9-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain  Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on the Activity of Subjects of Natural Monopolies" of 9 December 2004; 
- Law " On Development of Competition and Restriction of Monopoly Activities" of 11 June  
1991 (repealed by Law No. 184 of 3 May 2001) ; 
- Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies" of 9 July 1998 (also submitted as Law No. 272 
"Concerning Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets"); 
- Law No. 232-1 "On Unfair Competition" of 9 June 1998 (repealed by Law No. 112-IV 
of 25 December 2008) ; 
- Resolution No. 1171 "On Price Regulation for Products of Business Entities, Recognized as 
Natural Monopolists" of 19 October 1994 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 
258 of 17 March 2003) ; 
- Order No. 375-OD of the Chairman of the Agen cy "On Regulation of Natural Monopolies" of 
8 September 2004;  
- Law No. 2255 " On Business Partnerships" of 2 May 1995; 
- Law " On the Protection of the Natural Environment" of 18 June 1991 (repealed by Law 
No. 160-I of 15 July 1997) ; 
- Resolution No. 637 "On Approval of the Provisions on the State Ecological Expertise 
in Kazakhstan" of 25 October 1991 (repealed by Government Resolution No.637 
of 27 July 2005) ; 
- Draft Law "On Joint -Stock Companies" of 4 June 1997; and, 
- Draft Law "On Limited Liability Partnerships" of 25 March 1997. 
Sub-surface Use 
- Law No. 291-IV " Subsurface and Subsurface Use " of 24 June 2010; 
- Law No. 68 "On Production Sharing Agreements in Offshore Oil Operations" of 8 July 2005 
(repealed by Law No. 100-IV of 10 February 2008) ; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 296 - 
 
  - Law No. 2350 "On Oil" of 28 June 1995 (repealed by Law No. 291-IV of 24 June 
2010) ; 
- Law No. 2828 "On Subsurface and Subsurface Use" of 27 January 1996 (repealed by Law 
No. 291-IV of 24 June 2010) ; 
- Government  Resolution No. 969 "On the Draft  Law of the R epublic of Kazakhstan 'On 
Production Sharing Agreements in Offshore Oil Operations'" of 16 September 2004; and, 
- Regulation "On Approval of Rules of Purcha sing of Goods, Services and Works for Oil 
Operations" approved by Resolution No. 1034 of 8 December 1992 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 779 of 4 August 2003) . 
Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies - The Constitution of the Republic of  Kazakhstan of 5 September 1995;  
- Law No. 23-III "On International Commercial Arbitration" of 28 December 2004; and, 
- Code " On Administrative Offences " of 22 March 1984 (as amended on 1 April 1995) 
(repealed by Code No. 155-II "On Admini strative Offences" of 30 January 2001) . 
Taxation 
- Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99 -IV "On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments 
to the Budget (Tax Code)" of 10 December 2008; 
- Tax Code of 12 June 2001 (repealed by Law No. 100-IV of 10 December 2008) ; 
- Tax Code Articles 3 and 4 (repealed by Law No. 100-IV of 10 December 2008) ; 
- Tax Code Section VI. Taxation of Subsurface Users (repealed by Law No. 100-IV of 10 
December 2008) ; 
- Law No. 11-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain  Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on Issues of  Taxation" of 13 December 2004 (repealed by Law No. 100-
IV of 10 December 2008) ; 
- Government  Resolution No. 1075 "On Approval of the List of Taxpayers who Benefit ed 
from VAT Exemptions on Import of Goods within the Framework of Contract for Subsoil Use on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 11 November 2006 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No.1326 of 31 December 2008) ; 
- Decree of the President  No. 2703 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments to 
Certain Legislative Acts and Edicts" of 21 December 1995; 
- Decree of the President  No. 2827 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments to Edict 
"Concerning Taxes and Other Compulsory Payments to the Budget"" of 26 January 1996; 
- "Concerning the introduction of addition to Edict 'Concerning Taxes and Other Obligatory 
Payments to the Budget'"; 
- Order of the Customs Committee No. 131 "Con cerning the Procedure for Application of 
Value Added Tax and Excise Duties to Goods which are Imported into the Customs Territory of Kazakhstan" of 29 September 1995 (repealed by Joint Order of the Tax 
Committee No. 82 of 27 August 1999 an d Customs Committee No. 153 of 1 
September 1999);  
- Government  Resolution No. 1035 "On Amendments to Resolution of the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 137 of 28 January 2000 'On Excise Rates on Excised Goods 
Produced in the Republic of Kazakhstan an d Imported to the Customs Territory of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan, Sold on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and on Gambling Industry'" of 15 October 2005 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 
1332 of 31 December 2008); 
- Decree No. 1439 "
On the Rates of Excise Duties on Certain Types of Excisable Goods 
Imported to the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 2 November 1995 (repealed by Resolution 
No. 1748 of 31 December 1996, which was repealed by Resolution No. 907 of 30 
May 1997, which was repealed by Re solution No. 272 of 25 March 2011); 
- Government  Resolution No. 960 " On the Rates of Excise Duties on Imported Excisable 
Goods and the Quotas of Transfer by Natu ral Persons through the Customs Boundary of 
Kazakhstan of Excisable Goods which Are not Subject to Excise Duties" of 13 July 1995; 
(repealed by Government Resolution No. 1747 of 31 December 1996) ; 
- Decree No. 1397 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments and Additions to Resolution 
No. 960 of 13 July 1995" of 30 October 1995 (repealed by Resolution No. 1748 of 31 
December 1996, which was repealed by  Resolution No. 907 of 30 May 1997, 
which was repealed by Resolut ion No. 272 of 25 March 2011); WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 297 - 
 
  - Government  Resolution No. 974 "Concerning the Ra tes of Excise Duties on Excisable 
Goods Manufactured in Kazakhstan and the Gambling Business" of 14 July 1995 (repealed by Resolution No. 1747 of 31 December 1996); 
- Decree No. 1487 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments and Additions to Resolution 
No. 974 of 14 July 1995" of 8 November 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution 
No. 1747 of 31 December 1996); 
- Government  Resolution No. 341 "On Introduction of Changes and Amendments to some 
Decisions of the Government" of 25 March 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution 
No. 1747 of 31 December 1996); and 
- Government  Resolution No. 608 (Appendix 1) "Excise Taxes for the Excisable Goods 
Imported to the Customs Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 26 June 1998 
(repealed by Resolution No. 217 of 9 March 2005). 
Customs Regulations - Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 296-IV " On Customs Issues  in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 30 June 2010; 
- Customs Code of 5 April 2003 (repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010);   
- Customs Code (Law No. 2368) as amended by 1 January 2001 (repealed by Law No. 
401 of 5 April 2003); 
- Customs Code Articles 115, 116, 122-133 (repealed by Law No. 401 of 5 April 2003); 
- Customs Code Chapter 7: Determinatio n of Country of Origin of Goods  (repealed by Law 
No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010);  
- Customs Code Chapter 12 (repealed by Law No. 401 of 5 April 2003); 
- Customs Code Chapter 23 "Temporary Impo rt of Goods and means of Transport" 
(repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010);  
- Customs Code Chapter 31 (On Free Warehouse) (repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 
June 2010);  
- Customs Code Chapter 36 "Conveyance of Goods by Individual Categories of foreign 
Persons" (repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010);  
- Customs Code Chapter 39: Determination of the Customs Value of Goods (repealed by 
Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010);  
- Law No. 221 "On Order of Review of Requests of Natural and Juridical Persons" 
of 12 January 2007; 
- Law No. 211 "On Amendments and Addenda  to the Customs Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 8 January 2007 (repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010);  
- Law No. 62-III "On Amendments and Addenda to the Customs Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 20 June 2005 (repealed by Law No. 298-IV of 30 June 2010);  
- Government  Resolution  No. 810 " On the Introduction of Amendment to Decree No. 299 
of 12 March 1996" of 28 June 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 124 of 9 
February 2005) ;  
- Decree of the President  No. 2369 " On the Implementation of Edict Concerning the 
Customs Business in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 20 July 1995 (repealed by President 
Decree No. 829 of 18 June 2009) ;  
- Decree of the President No. 2370 " On
 the Introduction of Amendments to Certain 
Legislative Acts and Edicts Concerning Customs Issues" of 20 July 1995;  
- Government  Resolution No. 24 " On Adoption of Rates of Customs Fees Levied by 
Customs Bodies " of 21 January 2011; 
- Government  Resolution No. 355 "On Approval of the List of Kazakh Commodities 
Determined in accordance with Customs Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
Produced on the Territory, with "Free Warehous e" Regime, and Selling on other Part of the 
Customs Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan , Sale Turnover of which is Free from VAT" 
of 14 April 2005 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 133 of 19 January 2012) ;  
- Government  Resolution No. 202 "On Amendments to Resolution No. 669 of 8 July 2003 
'On Adoption of Rates of Customs Fees, Charges and Payments Levied by Customs Bodies'" of 24 March 2006 (repealed by Government Resolution No.171 of 20 February 
2008) ; 
- Government  Resolution No. 669 "On Adoption of the Customs Charges, Fees and 
Payments Levied by Customs Bodies" of 8 July 2003 (repealed by Government 
Resolution No. 24 of 21 January 2011);   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 298 - 
 
  - Government Resolution No. 1009 " On the Approval of the List of Countries which are 
Users of the Preference Schedule  of Kazakhstan" of 20 July 1995 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 1389 of 14 November 1996);  
- Government  Resolution No. 1125 " On the Rates of Customs Duties on Imported Goods" 
of 15 August 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No.1389 of 14 November 
1996);   
- Government  Resolution No. 1479 "On Rates of Customs Payments" of 7 November 1995 
(repealed by Government Resolution No. 669 of 8 July 2003);   
- Government  Resolution No. 891 "On Rates of Customs Duties on Imported Goods" 
of 29 June 2001 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 765 of 14 August 2006) ; 
- Commodity Nomenclature and Customs Import Tariffs;  
- (i) Section 5:  Preliminary Operations, Customs Operations and Procedures Relating to 
 the Conveyance of Goods and Means of Transport; 
- (ii) Chapter 10:  Conveyance of Goods and Means of Transport across the Customs 
  Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and, 
- Draft Customs Code. 
Import/Export Regulations 
- Law No. 45-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain  Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on Issues of  Licensing" of 15 April 2005;  
- Law No. 9 "On Export Control of Armaments, Military Technology and Production of Double 
Application" of 18 June 1996 (repealed by Law No. 300 of 21 July 2007) ;  
- Law No. 2198 "On State Registration of Juridical Persons and Statistical Registration of 
Branches and Representative Offices" of 17 April 1995; 
- Government Resolution of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 269 "On Certain Issues of 
Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat" 
of 24 March 2011; 
- Government  Resolution of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 336 "On Certain Issues of 
Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat among 
Participants of Foreign Trade Activity for 2012" of 15 March 2012; 
- Government  Resolution No. 1334 "On Amendments to Resolution of the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 100 'On Approv al of Licensing Fee Rates for the Right to 
Perform Certain Types of Activities' of  24 January 2002" of 31 December 2005 (repealed 
by Government Resolution No. 610 of 9 August 2007) ;  
- Government  Resolution No. 524 "On Approval of th e List of Goods Transported Through 
the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan with Obligatory Securing of Payment of 
Customs Duties and Taxes" of 4 June 2003 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 
272 of 25 March 2011) ;  
 - Government  Resolution No. 1324 "On Amendments into Resolution of the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1660 'On Approv al of Fee Rates for State Registration of 
Juridical Persons of 19 December 2001'" of 30 December 2005 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 1332 of 31 December 2008) ;  
- Government  Resolution No. 298 "On the Procedure for Export and Import of Public Goods 
(Works, Services) in Kazakhstan" of 12 March 1996 (repealed by Government 
Resolution No. 1037 of 30 June 1997) ;  
- Government  Resolution No. 342 "List of Goods Allowed and not Allowed to the Regime of 
Temporary Import and Export" of 25 March 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution 
No. 668 of 8 July 2003) ;  
- Resolution No. 1035 " On the Approval of the List of Exchange Commodities" of 28 July 
1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1492 of 5 December 1996) ;  
- Government  Resolution No. 304 "On Introduction of Amendments and Addenda  to 
Resolution No. 1035 of 28 July 1995" of 13 March 1996 (repealed by Government 
Resolution No. 1253 of 12 August 2000) ;  
- Government Resolution No. 984 "On Prohibition of Export and Import Barter Operations" 
of 17 July 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 483 of 27 May 1998) ;  
- Government Resolution No. 1200 "On Introduction of Amendments  to Resolution 
No. 984 "On Prohibition of Export and Import Barter Operations"" of 29 August 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 483 of 27 May 1998) ; 
- Law No. 2200 " On Licensing" of 17 April 1995 (repealed by Law No. 214 of 
11 January 2007) ;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 299 - 
 
  - Government Resolution   No. 1894 " On the Implementation of Decree of the President 
No. 2201 of 17 April 1995" of 29 December 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution 
No. 753 of 7 June 2012) ;  
- Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan  No. 2720 "Concerning the 
Introduction of Amendments to Certain Decrees " of 23 December 1995;  
- Decree of the President No. 2198 "On State Registration of Juridical Persons" of 
17 April 1995; 
- List of Goods Subject to Non-Tariff Measures (submitted in August 2004); 
- Order No. 24-OD of the Chairman of the Ag ency on Regulation of Natural Monopolies, 
Protection of Competition and Support of Small Businesses "On Adoption of the Rules for Introduction and Discontinuation of Decreasing  Coefficients for Tariffs on Regulated Rail 
Freight" of 12 December 1999; and, 
- Draft Law "On Licensing". 
Trade Remedies 
- Law No. 114-III "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain  Legislative Acts of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on Subsidies, Countervailing and Antidumping Measures" of 9 January 2006; 
- Law No. 337-I "On Safeguard Measures for Domestic Market upon  Importation of Goods  
(of 28 December 1998)" as amended by Law No. 59-III of 16 June 2005;   
- Law No. 421-I  "On Antidumping" of 13 July 1999  (submitted in November 1999);  
- Law No. 4414 -I "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures" of 16 July 1999; 
- Government  Resolution No. 1374 "On Approval of the Rules for Conducting Investigation 
prior to Introduction  of Safeguard, Countervailing or Anti -dumping Measures" 
of 9 September 2000; 
- Draft Law "On Antidumping"; 
- Draft Law "On Subsidies and Countervailing Measures"; and, - Draft Law "On Safeguard Measures".  
Standards, Certification, Technical Regulations 
- Law No. 603-II "On Technical Regulation" of 9 November 2004; 
- Law No. 306 "On Toys Safety" of 21 July 2007; - Law No. 302 "On Safety of Chemical Products" of 21 July 2007; 
- Law No. 305 "On Safety of Machinery and Equipment" of 21 July 2007; 
- Law No. 209 "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Issues of Technical Regulation" of 29 December 2006;  
- Law "On Amendments and Addenda to Certain  Legislative Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on Separation of Authorities between the Levels of State Governance and Budget Relations (in connection with amendments made in Laws "On Plants Quarantine" 
and "On Veterinary")"; 
- Government  Resolution  No. 367 " On Mandatory Conformity Assessment of 
Products in the Republic of Kazakhstan  " of 20 April 2005; 
- Law No. 433-1 "On Standardisation" of 16 July 1999 (repealed by Law 603-II 
of 9 November 2004) ; 
- Law No. 434-1 "On Certification" of 16 July 1999 (repealed by Law 603-II 
of 9 November 2004) ; 
- Law "On Standardization and Certification" of 18 January 1993 (repealed by Law 603-II 
of 9 November 2004) ; 
- Law " On the Protection of Consumer Rights" of 5 June 1991 (repealed by Law No. 274-
IV of 4 May 2010 ; 
- Government  Resolution No. 718 " On Approval of the Rules of Creation and 
Functioning   
of the Enquiry Point on TBT/SPS " of 11 July 2005; 
- Decree of the Prime Minister No. 64-p  "On Implementation Measures of the Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan 'On Technical Regulati on'" of 25 March 2005; 
- Government Resolution  No. 225 " On the Committee for Standardization, Metrology and 
Certification" of 21 February 1996 (repealed by Government Resolution No 851 
of 20 May 1997) ; 
- Order of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 136  "On Approval of the Regulations on Conducting 
Works with Participation of the State Authorities, Technical Committees on Standardization WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 300 - 
 
  and the Conformity Verification Agencies in the field of Conformity Verification and 
Accreditation" of 13 May 2005 (repealed by Order No 172 of 29 March 2007) ; 
- Order of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 135  "On Approval of the Regulations of Registration 
and Implementation of the International, Regional, National Standards, Classifiers of 
Technical and Economic Information, Regulations and Recommendations of the Foreign States in the Field of Standardization, Conformity Verification and Accreditation Within the 
Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 13 May 2005 (repealed by Order No 39 of 
23 April 2010) ; 
- Order No. 119 approved by the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulation and 
Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of 22 April 2005: 
(a) "On Rules of Suspension or Cancellation of the Validity of Issued Certificates of 
Conformity or the Validity of Regist ration of Conformity Declarations"; 
(b) "On Rules of Conducting Inspections by the Accredited Conformity Assessment 
Body"; and,  
(c) "On Rules of Recognition of Certificates of Conformity of Foreign Countries , Test 
Protocols, conformity Marks and Ot her Documents Issued in Foreign 
Systems  of Conformity Assessment"; 
- Order of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 118  "On Approval of the Regulations of Training and 
Attestation of the Experts-auditors on Standardization, Conformity Verification and 
Accreditation" of 22 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 305 of 20 July 2006) ; 
- Order of the acting Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of 
the Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 107  "On approval of the Regulations on Publication 
and Providing of Users with the Standards and Normative Instruments in the Field of 
Standardization, Metrology, Certification, Accreditation, Catalogues and Directories of Standards and Information About Them" of 15 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 318 
of 14 September 2012) ; 
- Order of the acting Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of 
the Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 106  "On approval of the Regulations of Elaboration 
and Approval of Plans and Programs of th e State Standardization" of 15 April 2005 2005 
(repealed by Order No. 41 of 23 April 2010 ); 
- Order of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 98  "On Approval of the Regulations of Elaboration, 
Co-ordination, Registration, Approval, Examination, Alteration, Annulment and 
Implementation of the State Standards an d Classifiers of Technical and Economic 
Information" of 4 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 172 of 29 March 2007) ; 
- Order of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 99  "On Approval of the Regulations of Establishment, 
Operation and Liquidation of the Technical Comm ittees on Standardization" of 4 April 2005 
(repealed by Order No. 42 of 23 April 2010) ; 
- Order  of the Chairman of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade No. 94  "On Approval of the Form, Regulations of Filling in 
and Submission of Notifications of the Informational Centre on Technical Barriers to Trade, 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures" of 1 April 2005 (repealed by Order No. 319 
of 14 September 2012) ; 
- Order "Of Customs Control Over Production of  Compulsory Certification" of January 1994; 
- Government  Resolution No. 411 "On Stage-by-Stage Introduction of Compulsory 
Certification of Products (Works, Services) in Kazakhstan" of 20 May 1993 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 1112 of 15 September 1997) ; 
- Government Regulation No. 1112 "On Approval of List of Goods (Works, Services) Subject 
to Mandatory Certification for Conformity to Obligatory Requirements of Standards or 
Other Documents for Guarantee of Safety of Life and Health of Citizens, Property of Citizens, and Environment" of 15 July 1997 (Excerpt) (repealed by Government 
Resolution No. 1787 of 29 November 2000);  
- National Certification System No. ST RK 3.10-97 "The Order of the Examination of 
Appeals" of 1 July 1999; 
- Statute of the Committee on Technical Regulati on and Metrology of the Ministry of 
Industry and Trade approved by Resolu tion No. 1237 of 26 November 2004;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 301 - 
 
  - Gosstandart Ordinance No. 156 "State Standard of the Republic of Kazakhstan National, 
Certification System; Procedure for Processing of Appeals ST RK 3.10-97" of 1 July 1999; 
- The List of Organs for Certification of Similar Products and Accredited Testing Laboratories 
(centres), registered at the State Register of the State Certification System of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, 1 January 1998; 
- The List of Products (Works, Services) that are Subject to Mandatory Certification as to the 
Conformity with Requirements of Standards or Other Codes that Ensure the Safety for Life, 
Health of People, Property of Citizens, and Environment; 
- Draft Law "On Electromagnetic Compatibility"; - Draft Law "On Toys Safety"; - Draft Law "On Certification"; and, 
- Draft Law "On Standardisation". 
SPS Measures - Government  Resolution No. 132 "On Approval of Rules for Issuance of Permit for 
Exportation, Importation and Transit of Tran sferred (Transported) Objects Taking into 
Account the Assessment of Epizootic Situation of the Relevant Territory" of 19 January 2012;  
- Government  Resolution No. 1295 "On Approval of th e List of Quarantine Objects, Alien 
Species and Extremely Dangerous Pests" of 10 December 2002; 
- The List of Highly Contagious  Animal Diseases when Compulsory Seizure  and 
Destruction of Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin which Constitute 
High Danger to animal and Human Health are to be Held , approved by Resolution of 
the Government of the Republic of Kazakhst an No. 407 "On Approval of Regulatory Legal 
Acts in the Field of Veterinary" of 28 April 2003; 
- Law No. 361 "On Sanitary-Epidemiological We lfare of Population" of 4 December 2002 
(repealed by Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On People's Health 
and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009) ;  
- Law No. 301 "On Food Safety " of 21 July 2007; 
- Law No. 334- I "On Plant Quarantine" of 11 February 1999 as amended on 
20 December 2004; 
- Law No. 422 - I "On Legal Protection of Selective Breeding Achievements" of 13 July 1999; 
- Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002; 
- Law No. 430-II "On Health Care System" of 4 June 2003 (repealed by Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On People's Health and Healthcare System" 
of 18 September 2009) ; 
- Law No. 361 "On Sanitary and Epidemiological Well-Being of the Population" of 
4 December 2002 (repealed by Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV 
"On People's Health and Healthcare System" of 18 September 2009) ; 
- Law No. 331-II "On Plants Protection" of 3 July 2002; 
- Law No. 111- I "On Protection of the Health of Citizens in the Republic of Kazakhstan" 
of 19 May 1997 (repealed by Law No. 170 of 7 July 2006) ; 
- Law No. 8-III "On Amendments and Addenda to the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan 'On 
Environment Protection' on Industrial an d Consumption Waste" of 1 January 2005 
(repealed by Code of the Republic of  Kazakhstan No. 212 "On Environmental 
Code of the Republic of Ka zakhstan" of 9 January 2007) ; 
- Law No. 160- I "On Environment Protection" of 15 July 1997 (repealed by Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 212 "On Environmental Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 9 January 2007) ; 
- Government  Resolution No. 1891 "On Approval of the Order of Destruction or Further 
Reprocessing Products in the Case of their Recognition as not Suitable for Sale and 
Consumption" of 29 December 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 1411 
of 19 September 2009) ; 
- Order of the Minister of Agriculture  No. 166 "On Approval of the Nomenclature of the 
Basic Quarantine Products, subject to Phytosanitary Control under Plants Quarantine" of 
30 May 2002 (repealed by Order of the Minist er of Agriculture No. 10-1/52 
of 13 February 2012) ; and, 
- Draft Law "On Legal Protection of Selective Breeding Achievements". WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 302 - 
 
  Trade-Related Investment Measures 
- Order No. 113 of the deputy Prime Minister an d Minister of Industry and New Technologies 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Certain Issues on Concluding, Conditions and Model Form of the Agreement on Industrial Assemb ly of Motor Vehicles with Legal Entities 
Residents of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 11 June 2010.  
Special Economic Zones - Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Areas in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007; 
(repealed by Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011);  
- Law No. 2823 "On Special Economic Zones" of 26 January 1996 (repealed by Law No. 
274 "On Special Economic Areas in the Repu blic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007) ; 
and, 
- Edict No. 2824 "Concerning the Introduction of Amendments to Certain Laws and Edicts" of 
26 January 1996 (repealed by Law No. 274 "On Special Economic Areas in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 6 July 2007) . 
Government Procurement - Government  Resolution No. 586 "On Public Procurement of Goods (works, services)  in 
the Republic of Kazakhstan " of 13 May 1996 (repealed by Resolution No. 141 of 25 
February 1998, which was repealed by Resolution No. 1268 of 10 December 1998, which was repealed by Resolution No. 1158 of 31 October 2002, which was 
repealed by Resolution No. 1301 of 27 December 2007 ); and, 
- Law No. 303-III " On Government Procurement" of 21 July 2007. 
Agriculture 
- Law No. 66 "On State Regulation of Agricultural and Industrial Complex and Rural 
Territories Development" of 8 July 2005. 
Intellectual Property Protection - Civil Code (Table of Contents); 
- Articles 184, 199 and 200 of Criminal Code No. 167-I of 16 July 1997 , concerning 
intellectual property (sub mitted in September 1997); 
- Law No. 6-I  "On Copyright and Related Rights" of 10 June 1996; 
- Law No. 1888-XII  "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellations of Origin of Goods" of 
18 January 1993 (repealed by Law No. 457-I "On Trademarks, Service Marks and 
Appellations of Origin of 26 July 1999) ; 
- Law No.456- I "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places of Origin" 
of 26 July 1999; 
- Law No. 1422-XII " Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan " of 24 June 1992 
(repealed by Law No. 427-I of 16 July 1999) ; 
- Law No. 421-I  "Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan"  of 16 July 1999; 
- Law No. 217 -II "On Legal Protection of Layout Design of Integrated Microcircuits" 
of 29 June 2001 ; 
- Government Resolution No. 508 "On the Establishmen t of State Agency for Copyright and 
Related Rights" of 8 July 1992 (repealed by Decree of the President of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan No. 3377 of 4 March 1997) ; 
- Decree No. 622 "Concerning the National Patent  Department Attached to the Cabinet of 
Ministers" of 21 July 1992; 
- Decree of the President No. 806 "On National Patent Office" of 23 June 1992 (repealed by 
Decree of the President No. 1696 of 9 January 2006) ; 
- Decree No. 949 "Concerning the Approval of Procedure for Issuing the Protection 
Documents on Inventions, Industrial Samples, Trademarks and Service Marks" of 11 November 1992; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 303 - 
 
  - Order No. 201 "Rules on Keeping Register of Intellectual Property , Related Products, and 
Sharing Experience  with Customs Bodies and Applicants" of 13 May 2003 (repealed by 
Order of the Ministry of Fi nance No. 356 of 16 July 2010);  
- Government Resolution No. 926 "On Rules of Public Demonstration of Cine-video 
Production" of 5 July 1995 (repealed by Resolution No. 1494 of 6 December 1494) ; 
- Government Resolution No. 266 "On Procedure of Payments and Amounts of Duties for 
Foreign Applicants for Legal Actions Connected with Protection of Industrial Property 
Objects within the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 6 April 1993 (repealed by Resolution No. 
1139 of 3 November 2004) ; 
- Government Resolution No. 889 "On the Procedure of Payment and Amounts of Duties for 
Patenting of Inventions, Industrial Samples an d Utility Models, Registration of Trademarks 
and Service Marks, Registration and Submitting  the Right of Using the Name of the Place 
of Goods' Origin" of 20 October 1992 (repealed by Resolution No. 1139 of 3 
November 2004) ; 
- Government  Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 896 "On Approval of the 
Regulation on Employee's Inventions, Utility Mo dels and Industrial Designs Created in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" of 11 August 1994; 
- Regulation on the National Patent Office under the Cabinet of Ministers (with amendments 
in accordance with Resolution No. 1369 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 5 December 1994) approved by Resolution No. 877 of the Ca binet of Ministers of 16 October 1992 (repealed 
by Resolution No. 284 of 6 March 1996) ; 
- Order No. 296  "Rules for Filing and Submission of Application for Registration of a 
Trademark" of 30 April 1997 (repealed by Order No. 55 of 24 April 2007) ; 
- Declaration of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the International Treaties in the Field of the 
Protection of Industrial Property of 5 February 1993; 
- Draft Patent Law (submitted April 1999); and, - Draft Law "On Amendments and Addenda  to Certain Legislative  Acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan Concerning Intellectual Property issues". 
Services Regulations - Law No. 2446-XII "On Auditing Activity" of  18 October 1993 (repealed by Law 
No. 304-I of 20 November 1998);  
- Law No. 567 -II "On Communications" of 5 July 2004; 
- Government Resolution No. 1064 "On Approval of Nomenclature of Telecommunication 
Services and Telecommunication Technologically Related Services with Governmentally 
Regulated Prices" of 15 October 2004 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 155 
of 14 March 2006) ; 
- Decree of the President  No. 2329 " On Medical Insurance of Citizens" of 15 June 1995 
(repealed by Law No. 324-I of 12 December 1998) ; 
- Law No. 2330 "On Measures for Implementation of the Decree  'On Medical Insurance of 
Citizens'" of 15 June 1995 ( repealed by Decree of the President of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 829 of 18 June 2009) ; 
- Law No. 2444 " On Banks and Banking Activity" of 31 August 1995; 
- Decree of the President  No. 2445 " On the Efforts for the Implementation of Decree  
'On Banks and Banking Activity'" of 31 August 1995; 
- Law No. 2475 " On Insurance" of 3 October 1995 (repealed by Law No. 127-II 
of 18 December 2000) ; 
- Law No. 2697 " On the Utilization of Airspace and Activities of Aviation" of 20 December 
1995 (repealed by Law No. 339-IV of 15 July 2010) ; 
- Government  Resolution  No. 1803 "Issues of the State Insurance Monitoring" 
of 19 December 1995 (repealed by Government Resolution No. 851 of 20 May 
1997) ; and, 
- Government  Resolution No. 478 "On the Approval of the Regulation on Licensing of 
Insurance Activities on the Territory of Kazakhstan" of 19 April 1996 (repealed by 
Government Resolution No. 709 of 24 May 2001) . WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 304 - 
 
  Trade Agreements 
- Decree No. 2461 of the President "On Ratifi cation of the Agreement 'Concerning the 
Customs Union' between the Government of th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 15 September 1995; 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus 
and the Republic of Kazakhstan of 20 January 1995; 
- Agreement between the Government of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Government of 
the Russian Federation on the Uniform Procedure for Regulating Foreign Economic 
Activities of 20 January 1995; 
- Resolution of the Intergovernmental Belarus - Kazakh - Russian Commission "Terms of 
Formation of the Customs Union" of 22 November 1995; 
- Protocol "On Introduction of Free Trade Regime Without Exceptions and Restrictions 
Between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" of 20 January 1995; 
- Protocol between the Government of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Government of 
the Kyrgyz Republic and the Government of Uz bekistan Concerning Discussion of Issues of 
Participation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the Customs Union between Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia of July 1995; 
- Protocol between the Government of the Republic of Belarus, the Government of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Russian Federation Concerning Completion of the First Stage of Enforcement of the Treaty on the Customs Union of 22 November 1995; 
- Agreement on Free Trade between the Gove rnment of the Kyrgyz Republic and the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 22 June 1995; and, 
- Agreement between the Government of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and the Government of 
the Republic of Moldova on Free Trade of 26 May 1995. 
Miscellaneous - Kazakhstan Economic Trends - First Quarter 1996; 
- Kazakhstan Economic Trends - February 1996; and, 
- Kazakhstan Economic Trends - Monthly update. 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 305 - 
 
  ANNEX 2 
List of Priority Activities, on the Level of th e Classifier of Sub-types of Activity, for which 
Investment Preferences Are Granted  
No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
01 Plant cultivation and 
livestock farming, hunting and provision of services in these fields 01.1 Growing of seasonal 
culture 01.11 Growing of cereals crops (except for 
rice), leguminous plants and oil seed  
01.12  Cultivation of rice 
01.13 Cultivation of vegetables and 
gourds, root crops and tuber crops 
01.14 Growing of sugarcane 
01.16 Growing of fibrillose fibre crops 
01.19 Growing of other seasonal culture, 
except for growing of flowers, production of flowers and cultivation of flowers seed 
01.2 Growing of perennial 
crops 01.21 Growing of grapes 
01.22 Cultivation of tropical and 
subtropical fruits 
01.23 Cultivation of citrus fruits 
01.24 Cultivation of large fruits  
01.25 Cultivation of other types of fruit 
tree  
01.26 Growing of oily fruits 
01.27 Growing of croppers for drinks 
production  
01.29 Growing of other perennial crops 
01.3 Manufacturing of farm 
production 01.30 Manufacturing of farm production 
01.4 Animal breeding  01.41 Breedin g of livestock dairy breed   
01.42 Breeding of other breeds of 
livestock and buffalos  
01.43 Breeding of horses and other hoofed 
breeds 
01.44 Breeding of camels and camelids 
01.45 Breeding of sheep and goats  
01.46 Breeding of pigs and piglet 
01.47 Poultry breeding 
01.49 Breeding of other types of animals 
01.6 Additional types of 
activities of growing of agricultural cultures  01.64 Processing and preparation of seeds 
for  breeding 
03 Fishery and 
aquaculture  03.2 Aquaculture 03.21 Marine aquaculture 
03.22 Fresh water aquaculture  
10.1 Processing and 
canning of meat and production of meat products 10.11 Processing and preservation of meat 
10.12 Processing and preservation of meat 
of poultry   
10.13 Production of products made by 
meat and meat of poultry   
10.2 Processing and 
preservation of fish, shellfish and scallops 10.20 Processing and preservation of fish, 
shellfish and scallops 
10.3 Processing and 
canning of fruit and vegetables 10.31 Processing and canning of potatoes 
 
10.32 Production of fruit and vegetable 
juices  
10.39 Processing and canning of fruit and 
vegetables, not included in other groups 
10.4 Production of fat and 
oil 10.41 Production of fat and oil 
10.42 Production of margarine and butter WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 306 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  10.5 Production of dairy 
products 10.51 Processing of milk and cheese 
production 
10.52 Ice-cream production 
10.6 Production of flour-
and-cereals industry 10.61 Production of flour-and-
cereals industry 
10.62 Production of starch and starch 
products  
10.7 Production of other 
products 10.71 Production of bread; production of 
fresh confectionery products, cakes 
and pastry 
10.72 Production of dried bread and 
cookies; production confectionery products, cakes, pastry and biscuits intended for long-term storage  
10.73 Production of macaroni foods 
10.81 Production of sugar 
10.83 Manufacture of tea and coffee 
10.84 Manufacture of spices and 
seasonings 
10.85 Manufacture of prepared food and 
in-process foods 
10.86 Manufacture of baby food and 
dietetic foodstuffs 
10.89 Manufacture of other foodstuffs not 
entered in other groups  
10.91 Manufacture of prepared foodstuff 
for animals that keeping in farms 
10.92 Manufacture of ready-made 
foodstuff for animals 
11.06 Manufacture of malt 
11.07 Manufacture of mineral water and 
other non-alcoholic beverages 
13 Manufacture of 
textile articles 13.1 Spinning, weaving 
and finishing industry 13.10 Spinning, weaving and finishing 
industry 
13.20 Manufacture textile articles 
13.2 Manufacture of textile 
fabric 13.30 Manufacture ready-made textile 
articles 
13.9 Manufacture of  other 
textile fabric 13.91 Manufacture of textile fabric 
13.92 Manufacture ready-made textile 
articles, except for clothes 
13.93 Manufacture of carpets and carpet 
articles 
13.94 Manufacture of cordage, ropes, 
binder and nets 
13.95 Manufacture of non-woven textile 
materials, except  for clothes  
13.96 Manufacture of  other engineering 
and manufacturing textile articles 
13.99 Manufacture of ot her textile articles 
not entered in other groups   
14 Manufacture of 
clothes,  14.1 Manufacture of 
clothes, except made from leather 14.11 Manufacture of clothes of leather  
14.12 Manufacture of working clothes 
14.13 Manufacture of outerwear  
14.14 Manufacture of underwear  
14.19 Manufacture of other clothes and 
accessories  
14.2 Manufacture of fur 
articles 14.20 Manufacture of fur articles 
14.3 Manufacture of 
knitted hosiery and 
other knitted goods 14.31 Manufacture of knitted hosiery 
goods 
14.39 Manufacture of other knitted goods 
15 Manufacture of 
leather, articles of leather  15.1 Hardening and 
currying of leather; manufacture paper 15.11 Hardening and currying of leather; 
dressing and dyeing of fur  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 307 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  15.12 Manufacture paper bags and ladies 
bags, harness articles  
15.2 Manufacture of 
footwear 15.20 Manufacture of footwear 
16 Manufacture of wood 
and cork articles, other  than furniture; manufacture articles made from straws and articles for platting    16.1 Manufacture wood-
sawing and joiner blade of articles for platting 16.10 Manufacture wood-sawing and 
joiner blade 
16.2 Manufacture of scale 
wood, plywood, slab and board  16.21 Manufacture of scale wood, 
plywood, slab and board 
16.22 Manufacture of ready-cut parquet 
coverage 
16.23 Manufacture of other wood building 
constructions and millwork  
17 Manufacture of pulp, 
paper, cardboard and 
articles of it 17.1 Manufacture of wood 
pulp and cellulose and 
cardboard 17.11 Manufacture of wood pulp and 
cellulose 
17.12 Manufacture of paper and cardboard 
17.2 Manufacture of 
articles of paper and cardboard 17.21 Manufacture of corrugated 
cardboard, paper and cardboard tare 
17.22 Manufacture of paper articles of 
household and sanitary-hygienic designation 
17.23 Manufacture of writing paper articles
17.24 Manufacture of wallpaper 
17.29 Manufacture of other articles of 
paper and cardboard 
19 Manufacture of 
charred cool and products of  oil refining 19.1 Manufacture of 
products of coke oven 19.10 Manufacture of products of coke 
oven 
19.2 Manufacture of 
products of oil refining  19.20 Manufacture of products of oil 
refining  
20   Chemical industry 
 20.1 Manufacture of main 
chemicals, fertilisers and nitrogen compounds, plastics and synthetic caoutchouc in primary forms 20.11 Manufacture of industrial gas 
20.12 Manufacture of colours and 
pigments 
20.13  Manufacture of other general 
inorganic (chemical) matters 
20.14 Manufacture of other general 
organic (chemical) matters,  
20.15 Manufacture of fertilisers and 
nitrogen compounds 
20.16 Manufacture of plastics in primary 
forms 
20.17 Manufacture of synthetic caoutchouc 
in primary forms 
20.2 Manufacture of 
pesticides  and other agricultural chemical products 20.20 Manufacture of pe sticides  and other 
agricultural chemical products 
20.3 Manufacture of 
paints, lacquers and analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 20.30 Manufacture of paints, lacquers and 
analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 
20.4 Manufacture of soap 
and washing, cleansing and polishing matters, perfume and cosmetic matters 20.41 Manufacture of soap and washing, 
cleansing and polishing matters 
20.42 Manufacture of perfume and 
cosmetic matters 
20.5 Manufacture of 
chemical products 20.51 Manufacture of explosive materials 
20.52 Manufacture of glues  
20.53 Manufacture of essences WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 308 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  20.59 Manufacture of other chemical 
products not included in other categories 
20.6 Manufacture of 
artificial fibres 20.60 Manufacture of artificial fibres 
21 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.1 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.10 Manufacture of general 
pharmaceutical products 
21.2 21.20 Manufacture of pharmaceutical 
products 
22 Manufacture of 
rubber and plastic articles 22.1 Manufacture of 
rubber articles 22.11 Manufacture of rubber tires and 
automobile inner tube; retreading of rubber tires     
22.19 Manufacture of ot her rubber articles 
22.2 Manufacture of plastic 
articles 22.21 Manufacture of  plastic sheets, 
automobile inner tube and profile  
22.22 Manufacture of plastic packages for 
goods 
22.23 Manufacture of constructional plastic 
articles 
22.29 Manufacture of other plastic articles  
23 Manufacture of other 
non-metal mineral products 23.1 Manufacture of glass 
and other glass articles 23.11 Manufacture of plate glasses  
23.12 Forming and handling of plate 
glasses 
23.13 Manufacture of hollow glass articles  
23.14 Manufacture of glass fibre  
23.19 Manufacture and processing of other 
glass articles  
23.2 Manufacture of 
refractory products 23.20 Manufacture of refractory products 
23.3 Manufacture of 
building articles of 
burnt clay 23.31 Manufacture of building articles of 
clay 
23.32 Manufacture of bricks, tiles and 
other building articles of burnt clay 
23.4 Manufacture of other 
porcelain and ceramic articles 23.41 Manufacture of household and 
decorative ceramic articles  
23.42 Manufacture of ceramic 
sanitary-technical articles   
23.43 Manufacture of ceramic electric 
insulators and insulating accessories 
23.44 Manufacture of  other technical 
ceramic articles 
23.5 Manufacture of 
cement, linden and plaster 23.51 Manufacture of  cement including 
clinker 
23.52 Manufacture of gypsum articles for 
use in construction 
23.6 Manufacture of beton 
articles, cement and gypsum articles for use in construction 23.61 Manufacture of construction articles 
of concrete 
23.62 Manufacture of gypsum articles for 
construction purposes 
23.63 Manufacture of concrete ready for 
use  
23.64 Manufacture of dry concrete 
mixtures 
23.65 Manufacture of articles of asbestos 
cement and fibrous cement 
23.69 Manufacture of  other  concrete 
articles construction gypsum and cement 
23.7 Cutting, treatment 
and finishing of 
decoration of stone 23.70 Cutting, treatment and finishing of 
decoration of  stone WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 309 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  23.9 Manufacture of 
abrasive articles and other non-metal mineral products not entered in other groups 23.91 Manufacture of abrasive articles  
23.99 Manufacture of other non-metal 
mineral products not entered in other groups 
24 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles 24.1 Manufacture of iron, 
steel and ferrous alloys  24.10 Manufacture of iron, steel and 
ferrous alloys  
24.2 Manufacture of tubes, 
pipeline, section 
material, fittings made by steel 24.20 Manufacture of tubes, pipeline, 
section material, fittings made by steel 
24.3 Manufacture of other 
steel articles by primary operation 24.31 Manufacture of cold drawing 
24.32 Cold rolling of ribbons and ridges 
24.33 Cold moulding and folding 
24.34 Manufacture of wires made by cold 
extension  
24.4 Production of main 
precious metals and other ferrous metals 24.41 Production of precious metals  
24.42 Manufacture of aluminium  
24.43 Manufacture of lead, zinc and tin 
24.44 Manufacture of copper 
24.45 Manufacture of other ferrous metals 
24.46 Nuclear-fuel reprocessing 
24.5 Casting of metals 24.51  Casting of pig-iron  
24.52 Casting of steel 
24.53 Casting of light metals 
24.54 Casting of othe r non-ferrous metals 
25 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles, except for machinery and equipment 25.2 Manufacture of 
metallic cisterns, basin and containers 25.11 Manufacture of cisterns, basin and 
containers 
25.12 Manufacture of metallic doors and 
windows 
25.21 Manufacture of radiators and boilers 
for central heating 
25.29 Manufacture of metallic cisterns, 
basin and containers 
25.3 Manufacture of steam 
boilers 25.30 Manufacture of steam boilers 
25.4 Manufacture of 
weapons and ammunition 25.40 Manufacture of weapons and 
ammunition 
24.5 Hammering, pressing, 
stamping and shaping of metal sheet made by rolling manner  24.50 Hammering, pres sing, stamping and 
shaping of metal sheet made by rolling manner  
25.6  25.61 Metal working  and applying coat on 
metals 
25.62 Automatic development; processing 
and covering of metals  
25.7  25.71 Manufacture of other metallic 
articles 
25.72 Manufacture of key locks, loop and 
hinges 
25.73 Manufacture of instruments 
25.9  25.91 Manufacture of other metallic drums 
and similar container 
25.92 Manufacture of packing materials of 
light metals  
25.93 Manufacture of articles of wire 
25.94 Manufacture of fastening articles 
25.99 Manufacture of  other ready-made 
metal articles not included to this 
category WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 310 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
26 Manufacture of 
computers, electronic and optical products 26.1 Manufacture of 
electronic details 26.11 Manufacture of electronic details 
26.12 Manufacture of electronic panel 
feeds 
26.2 Manufacture of 
computers and off-line equipment  26.20 Manufacture of computers and 
off-line equipment  
26.3 Manufacture of 
communication equipment 26.30 Manufacture of communication 
equipment 
26.4 Manufacture electric 
appliances  26.40 Manufacture electric appliances for 
users 
26.5 Manufacture of 
instruments and equipment for measuring, testing and navigation; watches 26.51 Manufacture of instruments and 
equipment for measuring, testing and navigation 
26.6 Manufacture of 
illuminating, electro-medical and electrotherapy equipment 26.60 Manufacture of illuminating, 
electro-medical and electrotherapy equipment 
26.7 Manufacture of optical  
and photographic equipment 26.70 Manufacture of optical  and 
photographic equipment    
26.8 Manufacture of 
magnetic and optical transmission facility 26.80 Manufacture of magnetic and optical 
transmission facility    
27 Manufacture of 
electric equipment 27.1 Manufacture of 
electric motors, generators and transformers and electric distributing and controlling equipment 27.11 Manufacture of electric motors, 
generators and transformers 
27.12 Manufacture of electric distributing 
and controlling equipment 
27.2 Manufacture of 
radiators and accumulators 27.20 Manufacture of radiators and 
accumulators 
27.3 Manufacture of 
electric line and electric line articles 27.31 Manufacture of fibre-optic cable 
27.32 Manufacture of other types of 
electric line and cable  
27.33 Manufacture of electric appliances 
27.4 Manufacture of 
electric lighting equipment 27.40 Manufacture of electric lighting 
equipment 
27.5 Manufacture of  
household appliances 27.51 Manufacture of electric household 
appliances  
27.52 Manufacture of no electric 
household appliances 
27.9 Manufacture of  other 
electric equipment 27.90 Manufacture of other electric 
equipment  
28 Manufacture of 
machines and equipments, not included to other categories 28.1 Manufacture of 
engines of general use 28.11 Manufacture of engines and 
turbines, except for aviation, machinery and  motorcycle engines 
28.12 Manufacture of hydraulic equipment 
28.13 Manufacture of other pumps, 
compressors, thimbles and valves 
28.14 Manufacture of other valves and 
vents WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 311 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
    28.15 Manufacture of bearings, gears, 
elements of tooth gear and gear-drive 
28.2 Manufacture of other 
equipments of general use 28.21 Manufacture of slabs, stoves and 
kiln burner 
28.22 Manufacture of elevating and 
shipping equipment 
28.23 Manufacture of office equipment, 
office appliances (except for computers and peripheral equipment) 
28.24 Manufacture of manual electric tools 
28.25 Manufacture of industrial cooling 
and ventilating equipment 
28.29 Manufacture of other machines and 
general-purpose equipment, not 
included to other categories 
28.3 Manufacture of 
agricultural and forestry-based machines 28.30 Manufacture of agricultural and 
forestry-based machines 
28.4 Manufacture of metal 
fabrication machinery and metal machines 28.41 Manufacture of metal fabrication 
machinery  
28.49 Manufacture of other metal-working 
machine 
28.9 Manufacture of other 
machines and equipment of special purposes 28.91 Manufacture of machinery and 
equipment for metallurgy 
28.92 Manufacture of machinery for 
mining industry, underground operations and construction  
28.93 Manufacture of facilities for 
production, processing of foodstuff, beverages and tobacco 
28.94 Manufacture of fa cilities for textile, 
needle, fur and leather articles 
28.95 Manufacture of machines for paper 
and paperboard 
28.96 Manufacture of equipment for 
processing rubber, plastics and 
other polymeric materials 
28.99 Manufacture of other machines and 
equipment of special purposes, not included to other categories 
29 Manufacture of cars, 
trailers and semi-trailers 29.1 Manufacture of 
transportations 29.10 Manufacture of transportations 
29.2 Manufacture of bodies 
for transportations, trailers and semi-trailers 29.20 Manufacture of bodies for 
transportations, trailers and semi-trailers 
29.3 Manufacture of parts 
and equipments of transportations and their engines 29.31 Manufacture of electric and 
electronic equipment for transportations 
29.32 Manufacture of parts and materials 
for transportations and their engines 
30 Manufacture of other 
transportations 30.1 Building  marine ships 
and boats 30.11 Building of ships and floating 
structures 
30.12 Building of pleasure and sporting 
boats 
30.2 Manufacture of 
railway locomotives and rolling stocks 30.20 Manufacture of railway locomotives 
and rolling stocks 
30.3 Manufacture of air 
and space and etc. equipment 30.30 Manufacture of air and space and 
etc. equipment WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 312 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  30.4 Manufacture of 
military transportation facilities 30.40 Manufacture of military 
transportation facilities 
30.9 Manufacture of 
transportation facilities not included to other categories 30.91 Manufacture of motorcycles 
30.92 Manufacture of bicycle and invalid's 
wheel chair/armchairs 
31 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.1 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.01 Manufacture of office and studio 
furniture 
31.02 Manufacture of kitchen furniture 
31.03 Manufacture of mattress 
31.09 Manufacture of other furniture 
32 Manufacture of other 
ready-made articles 32.5 Manufacture of other 
ready-made articles 32.50 Manufacture of medical and dental 
facilities and articles 
33 Mending and 
assembling of machinery and equipment 33.1 Mending ready-made 
metallic materials and machinery and equipment-  33.11 Mending ready-made metallic 
materials 
33.12 Mending of machinery and 
equipment 
33.13 Mending of electronic and optical 
equipment 
33.14 Mending of electric equipment 
33.15 Mending, servicing of vessels and 
ships 
33.16 Mending, servicing of aerial vehicles 
and spacecrafts  
33.17 Mending, servicing of other types of 
transportation facilities 
33.19 Mending of other types of 
transportation facilities 
33.2  Assembling of 
industrial engineering and equipment 33.20 Assembling of in dustrial engineering 
and equipment 
35  Electricity and gas 
supply, air-conditioning  35.1 Production, supply of 
electrical energy 35.11 Production electrical energy 
35.12 Supply of el ectrical energy 
35.13 Distribution of electrical energy 
35.14 Sales of electrical energy to 
consumer 
35.2 Production and 
distribution of gaseous fuel 35.21 Production of gaseous fuel 
35.22 Distribution of gaseous fuel via 
pipelines 
35.23 Sales of gaseous fuel via pipelines 
35.3 System for delivering 
pair and conditioned air 35.30 System for delivering pair and 
conditioned air 
36 Collection, 
processing and distribution of water 36.0 Collection, processing 
and distribution of water 36.00 Collection, processing and 
distribution of water 
38 Collection, 
processing, elimination and recycling of wastes 38.1 Collection of 
hazardous wastes 38.12 Collection of hazardous wastes 
38.2 Processing and 
elimination of non-hazardous waste 38.21 Processing and elimination of 
non-hazardous waste 
38.3 Recycling of materials 38.32 Recycling of sorted materials 
42  Civil engineering 
 42.1 
 Construction of auto 
roads and railways roads  42.11 Construction of roads and highway 
42.12 Construction of railways and metro 
42.13 Construction of  bridges and tunnels 
42.2 Construction of 
engineering structures 42.21 Construction of distributive 
engineering project 
42.22 Construction of distributive 
engineering project for electric-light 
and telecommunication services WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 313 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
    42.91 Construction of water facilities 
42.99 Construction of other civil 
engineering projects, not entered in other groups 
49 Land transport and 
transportation by pipelines 49.1 Railway transport for 
passengers 49.10 Railway transport for passengers 
49.2 Railway transport for 
cargo-carrying 49.20 Railway transport for cargo-carrying 
49.3 Other ground 
transport for 
passengers 49.31 Urban and suburban ground 
passengers transport 
49.39 Other ground transport for 
passengers, not entered in other categories 
49.4 Freight traffic by 
highway transportation and 
services for pick up of 
wastes 49.41 Freight traffic by highway 
transportation 
49.5 Transportation by 
pipelines 49.50 Transportati on by pipelines 
50 Water transport  50.1 Marine and riverside 
passenger's transport 50.10 Marine and riverside passenger's 
transport 
50.2 Marine and riverside 
cargo's transport 50.20 Marine and riverside cargo's 
transport 
50.3 River transport for 
passengers 50.30 River transport for passengers 
50.4 River transport for 
cargo  50.40 River transport for cargo  
51 
 Air transport  51.1 Air passenger 
transport 51.10 Air passenger transport 
51.2 Air cargo transport 
and transport of 
space system 51.21 Air cargo transport 
51.22 Transport of space system 
52 Warehousing and 
auxiliary and additional transport activity   52.1 Warehousing and 
storage of cargo 52.10 Warehousing and storage of cargo 
52.2 Other ancillary 
activities in transportation  52.21 Services in the area of land 
transport 
52.22 Services rendered in a water 
transport 
52.23 Services rendered in air transport 
52.24 Handling services  
55 Rendering of services 
by hotels 55.1 Rendering of services 
by hotels 55.10 Rendering of services by hotels 
55.10 Rendering of services by hotels 
55.3 Tourist camps, parks 
and entertainments 55.30 Tourist camps, parks and 
entertainments 
61  Telecommunication 61.2 Wireless 
communications 61.20 Wireless communications 
61.3 Activities in the 
sphere of satellite telecommunications 61.30 Activities in the sphere of satellite 
telecommunications 
68 Real estate 
operations 68.1 Renting and using of 
personal or rental real estate 68.20 Renting and usin g of personal or 
rental real estate WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 314 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of 
activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
85  Education 
 85.1 Preschool education 85.10 Preschool education 
85.2 Primary education  
(first level) 85.20 Primary education  
(first level) 
85.3 Fundamental and 
general secondary level education (second and third levels) 85.31 Fundamental and general secondary 
level education  
85.32 Technical and professional 
secondary level education 
85.4 Higher education 85.41 After secondary-level education 
85.42 Higher education 
86 Activity in the field of 
health care 86.1 Activity of medical 
institutions 86.10 Activity of medical institutions 
93 Activity for 
organization of leisure and entertainment, 
culture and sport 93.1 Sport activities 93.11 Activity of sporting institutions 
93.2 Other types of 
activities for organization of leisure and entertainment 93.29 Other types of activities for 
organization of leisure and entertainment 
Note: Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 is not applied for customs duties exemptions for 
spare parts of the technological equipment, raw materials and inputs. 
Customs duties exemptions for spar e parts of the technological equipm ent, raw materials and inputs are 
granted for the list of priority activities, on the level of the classifier of sub-types of activities, for which 
customs duties exemptions for imported spare parts of the technological equipment,  raw materials and inputs 
are granted, approved by the Government  Resolution No. 416 of 8 August 2012.  
Source: Government Resolution No. 436 of 8 May 2003 as amended by Government Resolution No. 809 of 
6 August 2010  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 315 - 
 
  SUPPLEMENT TO ANNEX 2 
List of Priority Activities, on the Level of th e Classifier of Sub-types of Activity, for which 
Customs Duties Exemptions for Imported Sp are Parts of the Technological equipment, 
raw Materials and Inputs Are Granted 
No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
01 Plant cultivation 
and livestock farming, hunting and provision of services in these fields 01.1 Growing of 
seasonal culture 01.11 Growing of cereals crops (except for rice), 
leguminous plants and oil seed  
01.12  Cultivation of rice 
01.13 Cultivation of vegeta bles and gourds, root 
crops and tuber crops 
01.14 Growing of sugarcane 
01.16 Growing of fibrillose fibre crops 
01.19 Growing of other season al culture, except for 
growing of flowers, production of flowers and cultivation of flowers seed 
01.2 Growing of 
perennial crops 01.21 Growing of grapes 
01.22 Cultivation of tropical and subtropical fruits 
01.23 Cultivation of citrus fruits 
01.24 Cultivation of large fruits  
01.25 Cultivation of other types of fruit tree  
01.26 Growing of oily fruits 
01.27 Growing of croppers for drinks production  
01.29 Growing of other perennial crops 
01.3 Manufacturing of 
farm production 01.30 Manufacturing of farm production 
01.4 Animal breeding  01.41 Breeding of livestock dairy breed   
01.42 Breeding of other breeds of livestock and 
buffalos  
01.43 Breeding of horses and other hoofed breeds 
01.44 Breeding of camels and camelids 
01.45 Breeding of sheep and goats  
01.46 Breeding of pigs and piglet 
01.47 Poultry breeding 
01.49 Breeding of other types of animals 
01.6 Additional types 
of activities of growing of agricultural cultures  01.64 Processing and preparation of seeds for  
breeding 
03 Fishery and 
aquaculture  03.2 Aquaculture 03.21 Marine aquaculture 
03.22 Fresh water aquaculture  
10.1 Processing and 
canning of meat and production of meat products 10.11 Processing and preservation of meat  
10.12 Processing and preservation of meat of 
poultry   
10.13 Production of products made by meat and 
meat of poultry   
10.2 Processing and 
preservation of 
fish, shellfish and 
scallops 10.20 Processing and preservation of fish, shellfish 
and scallops 
10.3 Processing and 
canning of fruit and vegetables 10.31 Processing and canning of potatoes 
10.32 Production of fruit and vegetable juices  
10.39 Processing and canning of fruit and 
vegetables, not included in other groups 
10.4 Production of fat 
and oil 10.41 Production of fat and oil 
10.42 Production of margarine and butter 
 
10.5 Production of 
dairy products 10.51 Processing of milk and cheese production 
10.52 Ice-cream production 
10.6 Production of 
flour-and-cereals industry 10.61 Production of flou r-and-cereals industry 
10.62 Production of starch and starch products  
10.7 Production of 
other products 10.71 Production of bread; production of fresh 
confectionery products, cakes and pastry WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 316 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
10.72 Production of dried bread and cookies; 
production confectionery products, cakes, pastry and biscuits intended for long-term storage  
10.73 Production of macaroni foods 
10.81 Production of sugar 
10.83 Manufacture of tea and coffee 
10.84 Manufacture of spices and seasonings 
10.85 Manufacture of prepared food and in-process 
foods 
10.86 Manufacture of baby food and dietetic 
foodstuffs 
10.89 Manufacture of other foodstuffs not entered 
in other groups  
10.91 Manufacture of prepared foodstuff for 
animals that keeping in farms 
10.92 Manufacture of read y-made foodstuff for 
animals 
11.06 Manufacture of malt 
11.07 Manufacture of mi neral water and other 
non-alcoholic beverages 
13 Manufacture of 
textile articles 13.1 Spinning, 
weaving and finishing industry 13.10 Spinning, weaving and finishing industry 
13.20 Manufacture textile articles 
13.2 Manufacture of 
textile fabric 13.30 Manufacture ready-made textile articles 
13.9 Manufacture of  
other textile fabric 13.91 Manufacture of textile fabric 
13.92 Manufacture ready-made textile articles, 
except for clothes 
13.93 Manufacture of carpets and carpet articles 
13.94 Manufacture of cordage, ropes, binder and 
nets 
13.95 Manufacture of non-wo ven textile materials, 
except for clothes  
13.96 Manufacture of other engineering and 
manufacturing textile articles 
13.99 Manufacture of othe r textile articles not 
entered in other groups  
14 Manufacture of 
clothes,  14.1 Manufacture of 
clothes, except 
made from 
leather 14.11 Manufacture of clothes of leather  
14.12 Manufacture of working clothes 
14.13 Manufacture of outerwear  
14.14 Manufacture of underwear  
14.19 Manufacture of other clothes and accessories 
14.2 Manufacture of 
fur articles 14.20 Manufacture of fur articles 
14.3 Manufacture of 
knitted hosiery and other knitted goods 14.31 Manufacture of knitted hosiery goods 
14.39 Manufacture of other knitted goods 
15 Manufacture of 
leather, articles of leather  15.1 Hardening and 
currying of leather; manufacture paper bags and ladies bags, 
harness articles; 
dressing and dyeing of fur 15.11 Hardening and currying of leather; dressing 
and dyeing of fur  
15.12 Manufacture paper bags and ladies bags, 
harness articles  
15.2 Manufacture of 
footwear 15.20 Manufacture of footwear 
16 Manufacture of 
wood and cork 
articles, other  
than furniture; manufacture 16.1 Manufacture 
wood-sawing and 
joiner blade of 
articles for platting 16.10 Manufacture wood-sawing and joiner blade WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 317 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
16.2 Manufacture of 
scale wood, plywood, slab and board  16.21 Manufacture of scale wood, plywood, slab 
and board 
16.22 Manufacture of ready-cut parquet coverage 
16.23 Manufacture of other wood building 
constructions and millwork  
17 Manufacture of 
pulp, paper, cardboard and articles of it 17.1 Manufacture of 
wood pulp and cellulose and cardboard 17.11 Manufacture of wood  pulp and cellulose 
17.12 Manufacture of paper and cardboard 
17.2 Manufacture of 
articles of paper 
and cardboard 17.21 Manufacture of corrugated cardboard, paper 
and cardboard tare 
17.22 Manufacture of paper articles of household 
and sanitary-hygienic designation 
17.23 Manufacture of writing paper articles 
17.24 Manufacture of wallpaper 
17.29 Manufacture of other articles of paper and 
cardboard 
19 Manufacture of 
charred cool and products of oil refining 19.1 Manufacture of 
products of coke oven 19.10 Manufacture of products of coke oven 
19.2 Manufacture of 
products of oil refining  19.20 Manufacture of produc ts of oil refining  
20 
 
 Chemical 
industry 
 20.1 Manufacture of 
main chemicals, 
fertilisers and 
nitrogen compounds, plastics and synthetic caoutchouc in primary forms 20.11 Manufacture of industrial gas 
20.12 Manufacture of colours and pigments 
20.13 
 Manufacture of other general inorganic 
(chemical) matters 
20.14 Manufacture of other general organic 
(chemical) matters,  
20.15 Manufacture of fertilisers and nitrogen 
compounds 
20.16 Manufacture of plastics in primary forms 
20.17 Manufacture of synthetic caoutchouc in 
primary forms 
20.2 Manufacture of 
pesticides  and other agricultural chemical products 20.20 Manufacture of pe sticides  and other 
agricultural chemical products  
  20.3 Manufacture of 
paints, lacquers and analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 20.30 Manufacture of paints, lacquers and 
analogous coatings, typographic paints and mastics 
20.4 Manufacture of 
soap and 
washing, cleansing and polishing matters, perfume and cosmetic matters 20.41 Manufacture of soap and washing, cleansing 
and polishing matters 
20.42 Manufacture of pe rfume and cosmetic 
matters 
20.5 Manufacture of 
chemical products 20.51 Manufacture of explosive materials 
20.52 Manufacture of glues  
20.53 Manufacture of essences 
20.59 Manufacture of other chemical products not 
included in other categories 
20.6 Manufacture of 
artificial fibres 20.60 Manufacture of artificial fibres 
21 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.1 Manufacture of 
general pharmaceutical products 21.10 Manufacture of general pharmaceutical 
products 
21.2 21.20 Manufacture of pharmaceutical products WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 318 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
22 Manufacture of 
rubber and plastic articles 22.1 Manufacture of 
rubber articles 22.11 Manufacture of rubber tires and automobile 
inner tube; retreading of rubber tires  
22.19 Manufacture of othe r rubber articles  
22.2 Manufacture of 
plastic articles 22.21 Manufacture of plastic sheets, automobile 
inner tube and profile  
22.22 Manufacture of plastic packages for goods 
22.23 Manufacture of constructional plastic articles 
22.29 Manufacture of other plastic articles  
23 Manufacture of 
other non-metal mineral products 23.1 Manufacture of 
glass and other glass articles 23.11 Manufacture of plate glasses  
23.12 Forming and handli ng of plate glasses 
23.13 Manufacture of hollow glass articles  
23.14 Manufacture of glass fibre  
23.19 Manufacture and processing of other glass 
articles  
23.2 Manufacture of 
refractory products 23.20 Manufacture of refractory products 
23.3 Manufacture of 
building articles of burnt clay 23.31 Manufacture of building articles of clay 
23.32 Manufacture of bricks, tiles and other 
building articles  of burnt clay 
23.4 Manufacture of 
other porcelain and ceramic articles 23.41 Manufacture of household and decorative 
ceramic articles  
23.42 Manufacture of cera mic sanitary-technical 
articles  
23.43 Manufacture of ceramic electric insulators 
and insulating accessories 
23.44 Manufacture of ot her technical ceramic 
articles 
23.5 Manufacture of 
cement, linden and plaster 23.51 Manufacture of cement including clinker 
23.52 Manufacture of gypsum articles for use in 
construction 
23.62 Manufacture of gypsum articles for 
construction purposes 
23.63 Manufacture of concrete ready for use  
23.64 Manufacture of dry concrete mixtures 
23.65 Manufacture of articl es of asbestos cement 
and fibrous cement 
23.69 Manufacture of othe r  concrete articles 
construction gypsum and cement 
23.7 Cutting, 
treatment and finishing of decoration of  stone 23.70 Cutting, treatment and finishing of 
decoration of stone 
23.9 Manufacture of 
abrasive articles and other non-
metal mineral 
products not entered in other groups 23.91 Manufacture of abrasive articles  
23.99 Manufacture of other non-metal mineral 
products not entered in other groups 
24 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles 24.1 Manufacture of 
iron, steel and ferrous alloys  24.10 Manufacture of iron, st eel and ferrous alloys  
24.2 Manufacture of 
tubes, pipeline, 
section material, fittings made by steel 24.20 Manufacture of tubes, pipeline, section 
material, fittings made by steel 
24.3 Manufacture of 
other steel articles by primary operation 24.31 Manufacture of cold drawing 
24.32 Cold rolling of ribbons and ridges 
24.33 Cold moulding and folding 
24.34 Manufacture of wires made by cold extension WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 319 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  24.4 Production of 
main precious metals and other ferrous metals 24.41 Production of precious metals  
24.42 Manufacture of aluminium  
24.43 Manufacture of lead, zinc and tin 
24.44 Manufacture of copper 
24.45 Manufacture of ot her ferrous metals 
24.46 Nuclear-fuel reprocessing 
24.5 Casting of metals 24.51 Casting of pig-iron  
24.52 Casting of steel 
24.53 Casting of light metals 
24.54 Casting of other non-ferrous metals 
25 Manufacture of 
ready-made metal articles, except for machinery and equipment 25.2 Manufacture of 
metallic cisterns, basin and containers 25.11 Manufacture of cisterns, basin and containers
25.12 Manufacture of metallic doors and windows 
25.21 Manufacture of radiators and boilers for 
central heating 
25.29 Manufacture of metallic cisterns, basin and 
containers 
25.3 Manufacture of 
steam boilers 25.30 Manufacture of steam boilers 
25.4 Manufacture of 
weapons and ammunition 25.40 Manufacture of weapons and ammunition 
  24.5 Hammering, 
pressing, stamping and shaping of metal sheet made by rolling manner  24.50 Hammering, pressing , stamping and shaping 
of metal sheet made by rolling manner  
25.6  25.61 Metal working and applying coat on metals 
25.62 Automatic development; processing and 
covering of metals  
25.7  25.71 Manufacture of other metallic articles 
25.72 Manufacture of key locks, loop and hinges 
25.73 Manufacture of instruments 
25.9  25.91 Manufacture of other metallic drums and 
similar container 
25.92 Manufacture of packing materials of light 
metals  
25.93 Manufacture of articles of wire 
25.94 Manufacture of fastening articles 
25.99 Manufacture of ot her ready-made metal 
articles not included to this category 
26 Manufacture of 
computers, electronic and optical products 26.1 Manufacture of 
electronic details 26.11 Manufacture of electronic details 
26.12 Manufacture of el ectronic panel feeds 
26.2 Manufacture of 
computers and off-line equipment  26.20 Manufacture of computers and off-line 
equipment  
26.3 Manufacture of 
communication equipment 26.30 Manufacture of communication equipment 
26.4 Manufacture 
electric appliances  26.40 Manufacture electric appliances for users 
26.5 Manufacture of 
instruments and equipment for measuring, testing and navigation; watches 26.51 Manufacture of instruments and equipment 
for measuring, testing and navigation 
26.6 Manufacture of 
illuminating, 
electro-medical 
and electrotherapy equipment 26.60 Manufacture of illumi nating, electro-medical 
and electrotherapy equipment WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 320 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
26.7 Manufacture of 
optical  and photographic equipment 26.70 Manufacture of optical  and photographic 
equipment 
26.8 Manufacture of 
magnetic and optical transmission facility 26.80 Manufacture of magnetic and optical 
transmission facility 
27 Manufacture of 
electric equipment 27.1 Manufacture of 
electric motors, generators and transformers and electric distributing and controlling equipment 27.11 Manufacture of electric motors, generators 
and transformers 
27.12 Manufacture of electric distributing and 
controlling equipment 
27.2 Manufacture of 
radiators and accumulators 27.20 Manufacture of radiators and accumulators 
27.3 Manufacture of 
electric line and electric line articles 27.31 Manufacture of fibre-optic cable 
27.32 Manufacture of other types of electric line 
and cable  
27.33 Manufacture of electric appliances 
27.4 Manufacture of 
electric lighting equipment 27.40 Manufacture of electric lighting equipment 
27.5 Manufacture of  
household appliances 27.51 Manufacture of electric household appliances 
27.52 Manufacture of no electric household 
appliances 
27.9 Manufacture of  
other electric 
equipment 27.90 Manufacture of other electric equipment  
28 Manufacture of 
machines and equipments, not included to other categories 28.1 Manufacture of 
engines of general use 28.11 Manufacture of engines and turbines, except 
for aviation, machinery and  motorcycle engines 
28.12 Manufacture of hydraulic equipment 
28.13 Manufacture of other pumps, compressors, 
thimbles and valves 
28.14 Manufacture of ot her valves and vents 
28.15 Manufacture of bearings, gears, elements of 
tooth gear and gear-drive 
28.2 Manufacture of 
other equipments of general use 28.21 Manufacture of slabs, stoves and kiln burner 
28.22 Manufacture of elevating and shipping 
equipment 
28.23 Manufacture of office equipment, office 
appliances (except for computers and peripheral equipment) 
28.24 Manufacture of manual electric tools 
28.25 Manufacture of industrial cooling and 
ventilating equipment 
28.29 Manufacture of othe r machines and general-
purpose equipment, not included to other categories 
28.3 Manufacture of 
agricultural and 
forestry-based machines 28.30 Manufacture of agricultural and forestry-
based machines 
28.4 Manufacture of 
metal fabrication machinery and metal machines 28.41 Manufacture of metal fabrication machinery  
28.49 Manufacture of other metal-working machine WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 321 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
  28.9 Manufacture of 
other machines and equipment of special purposes 28.91 Manufacture of machinery and equipment for 
metallurgy 
28.92 Manufacture of machinery for mining 
industry, underground operations and construction  
28.93 Manufacture of facilities for production, 
processing of foodstuff, beverages and tobacco  
28.94 Manufacture of facilit ies for textile, needle, 
fur and leather articles 
28.95 Manufacture of machines for paper and 
paperboard 
28.96 Manufacture of equipment for processing 
rubber, plastics and other polymeric materials  
28.99 Manufacture of other machines and 
equipment of special purposes, not included to other categories 
29 Manufacture of 
cars, trailers and semi-trailers 29.1 Manufacture of 
transportations 29.10 Manufacture of transportations 
29.2 Manufacture of 
bodies for transportations, 
trailers and 
semi-trailers 29.20 Manufacture of bodies for transportations, 
trailers and semi-trailers 
29.3 Manufacture of 
parts and equipments of transportations and their engines 29.31 Manufacture of electric and electronic 
equipment for transportations 
29.32 Manufacture of parts and materials for 
transportations and their engines  
30 Manufacture of 
other transportations 30.1 Building  marine 
ships and boats 30.11 Building of ships and floating structures 
30.12 Building of pleasure and sporting boats 
30.2 Manufacture of 
railway locomotives and rolling stocks 30.20 Manufacture of railway locomotives and 
rolling stocks 
30.3 Manufacture of 
air and space and etc. equipment 30.30 Manufacture of air and space and etc. 
equipment 
30.4 Manufacture of 
military transportation facilities 30.40 Manufacture of military transportation 
facilities 
30.9 Manufacture of 
transportation facilities not included to other categories 30.91 Manufacture of motorcycles 
30.92 Manufacture of bicycle and invalid's wheel 
chair/armchairs 
31 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.1 Manufacture of 
furniture 31.01 Manufacture of office and studio furniture 
31.02 Manufacture of kitchen furniture 
31.03 Manufacture of mattress 
31.09 Manufacture of  other furniture 
32 Manufacture of 
other ready-made articles 32.5 Manufacture of 
other ready-made articles 32.50 Manufacture of medica l and dental facilities 
and articles 
33 Mending and 
assembling of machinery and equipment 33.1 Mending ready-
made metallic materials and machinery and equipment   33.11 Mending ready-made metallic materials 
33.12 Mending of machinery and equipment 
33.13 Mending of electronic and optical equipment 
33.14 Mending of electric equipment 
33.15 Mending, servicing of vessels and ships 
33.16 Mending, servicing of aerial vehicles and 
spacecrafts  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 322 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
   33.17 Mending, servicing of other types of 
transportation facilities 
33.19 Mending of other types of transportation 
facilities 
  33.2 Assembling of 
industrial engineering and equipment 33.20 Assembling of indu strial engineering and 
equipment 
35  Electricity and 
gas supply, air-conditioning  35.1 Production, 
supply of electrical energy 35.11 Production electrical energy 
35.12 Supply of electrical energy 
35.13 Distribution of electrical energy 
35.14 Sales of electrical energy to consumer 
35.2 Production and 
distribution of gaseous fuel 35.21 Production of gaseous fuel 
35.22 Distribution of gase ous fuel via pipelines 
35.23 Sales of gaseous fuel via pipelines 
35.3 System for 
delivering pair and conditioned air 35.30 System for delivering  pair and conditioned 
air 
36 Collection, 
processing and distribution of water 36.0 Collection, 
processing and distribution of water 36.00 Collection, processing  and distribution of 
water 
38 Collection, 
processing, elimination and recycling of wastes 38.1 Collection of 
hazardous wastes 38.12 Collection of hazardous wastes 
38.2 Processing and 
elimination of non-hazardous waste 38.21 Processing an d elimination of non-hazardous 
waste 
38.3 Recycling of 
materials 38.32 Recycling of sorted materials 
42 
 Civil engineering 
 42.1 
 Construction of 
auto roads and railways roads  42.11 Construction of roads and highway 
42.12 Construction of railways and metro 
42.13 Construction of bridges and tunnels 
42.2 Construction of 
engineering structures 42.21 Construction of di stributive engineering 
project 
42.22 Construction of di stributive engineering 
project for electric-light and telecommunication services 
42.91 Construction of water facilities 
42.99 Construction of other civil engineering 
projects, not entered in other groups 
49 Land transport 
and transportation by pipelines 49.1 Railway transport 
for passengers 49.10 Railway transport for passengers 
49.2 Railway transport 
for cargo-carrying 49.20 Railway transport for cargo-carrying 
49.3 Other ground 
transport for passengers 49.31 Urban and suburban ground passengers 
transport 
49.39 Other ground transport for passengers, not 
entered in other categories 
49.4 Freight traffic by 
highway transportation and services for pick up of wastes 49.41 Freight traffic by highway transportation 
49.5 Transportation by 
pipelines 49.50 Transportation by pipelines WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 323 - 
 
  No. Name of section Group Name of group Code Name of type and sub-type of activity 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
50 Water transport  50.1 Marine and 
riverside passenger's transport 50.10 Marine and riverside passenger's transport 
50.2 Marine and 
riverside cargo's transport 50.20 Marine and riverside cargo's transport 
50.3 River transport 
for passengers 50.30 River transport for passengers 
50.4 River transport 
for cargo  50.40 River transport for cargo  
51 
 Air transport  51.1 Air passenger 
transport 51.10 Air passenger transport 
51.2 Air cargo 
transport and transport of space system 51.21 Air cargo transport 
51.22 Transport of space system 
52 Warehousing 
and auxiliary and additional transport activity   52.1 Warehousing and 
storage of cargo 52.10 Warehousing and storage of cargo 
52.2 Other ancillary 
activities in transportation  52.21 Services in the area of land transport 
52.22 Services rendered in a water transport 
52.23 Services rendered in air transport 
52.24 Handling services  
Source: Government Resolution No. 1416 of 8 August 2012. 
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 324 - ANNEX 3(A) 
Progress in Privatization of State Property in 1991-2012  
(in entities ) 
Year 1991-1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 
Number of 
privatized entities 
of State ownership 4,771 154 2,646 3,630 4,442 7,004 3,240 2,624 1,859 2,205 1,823 2,106 2,094 1,239 654 945 846 1,241 651 658 799 
Privatized State 
shares in JSCs and 
LLPs - - - 385 889 1,315 513 162 93 146 67 65 58 16 1 - - 3 3 1 5 
Privatized 
individual projects - 1 1  6  2 7 4 8 1 1 -----  --- - -- - - -  
Privatized property 
complexes, immovable 
property objects, 
incomplete construction, transportation and other objects 4,771 153 2,645 3,239 3,526 5,641 2,716 2,462 1,766 2,059 1,756 2,041 2,036 1,223 653 945 846 1,238 648 657 794 
Source:  Adapted from the data provided by the State Property and Priv atization Committee, Mi nistry of Finance. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 325 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(B) 
Progress in Privatization of State Property in 2000-2012 
(in entities ) 
Area of activity 2000-2012 
1. Privatized State shares in JSC s and LLP s, total  458
Including: 
- Industry 136
- Construction 26
- Agriculture 50
- Transportation and communication 54
- Trade in and repair of household goods 28
- Finance 8
- Health care 27
- Education 15
- Other objects 114
2. Privatized property complexes, immovable property objects, 
incomplete construction, transportation and other objects  16,662
Total 17,120
Source: Adapted from the data provided by the State Property and Privatization Committee, Ministry of 
Finance.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 326 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(C) 
The Number of State Enterprises by Type of Economic Activity in 2009-2013 
Type of economic activity 01.01.2009 01.01.2010 01.01.2011 01.01.2012 01.01.2013 
 RSEs* CSEs** RSEs CSEs RSEs CSEs RSEs CSEs RSEs CSEs 
Total 707 5,808 719 6,098 636 6218 584 6,376 479 6,348
Agriculture, forestry and 
fishing 49 96 49 101 35 80 21 74 20 74
Mining and quarrying 2 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
Manufacturing 24 44 23 41 21 36 19 37 19 28
Electricity, gas, steam 
and air conditioning supply 7 137 7 135 7 136 6 135 6 124
Water supply, sewerage, 
waste management and remediation activities 18 322 18 330 16 328 8 324 6 283
Construction 34 83 32 88 26 88 21 78 21 63
Wholesale and retail 
trade; repair of motor 
vehicles and motorcycles 30 66 29 64 23 55 22 48 18 43
Transportation and 
storage 38 52 39 52 30 55 26 57 23 46
Accommodation and food 
service activities 9 18 8 19 7 21 6 22 6 22
Information and 
communication 43 205 44 209 41 190 39 183 21 62
Financial and insurance 
activities 4 8 8 16 3 8 3 8 3 7
Real estate activities 37 81 36 82 34 74 33 67 28 50
Administrative and 
support service activities 9 200 8 194 8 164 8 160 7 132
Public administration and 
defence, compulsory social security 30 65 29 74 17 52 15 44 13 38
Education 75 2,255 79 2,401 78 2,768 75 3,005 72 3,184
Human health and social 
work activities 39 1,181 44 1,320 39 1,187 41 1,120 37 1,054
Arts, entertainment and 
recreation 44 752 44 773 42 781 42 807 42 815
Other service activities 2 22 2 22 1 19 0 19 0 15
* RSEs - Republican State Enterprises, proper ty of which is in republican ownership. 
** CSEs – Communal State Enterprises, proper ty of which is in municipal ownership. 
Data is classified in accordance with the State General Classifier of Types of Economic Activity 03-2007.  Source: Statistics Agency.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 327 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(D) 
The Number of Joint Stock Companies with State Participation by Type of Economic 
Activity in 2008-2013 
Types of economic 
activity 01.01.2008 01.01.2009 01.01.2010 01.01.2011 01.01.2012 01.01.2013
Total 468 457 379 370   367 364 
Agriculture, forestry 
and fishing 25 22 19 15   15 14 
Mining and quarrying 2 2 1 2 2 2 
Manufacturing 62 59 43 42   37 32 
Electricity, gas, steam 
and air conditioning supply 33 31 28 25   24 20 
Water supply, 
sewerage, waste management and remediation activities 11 11 10 12   11 9 
Construction 38 37 28 28   27 28 
Wholesale and retail 
trade; repair of motor vehicles and 
motorcycles 46 42 31 23   21 18 
Transportation and 
storage 66 63 52 45   37 36 
Accommodation and 
food service activities 4 4 2 1   1 2 
Information and 
communication 23 23 18 18   19 23 
Financial and 
insurance activities 37 40 33 33   35 35 
Real estate activities 14 14 13 16   17 16 
Professional, scientific 
and technical activities 51 51 49 51   54 62 
Administrative and 
support service activities 9 9 11 11   15 15 
Public administration 
and defence, compulsory social security 1 1 1 1 2 3 
Education 18 19 17 18   20 19 
Human health and 
social work activities 15 16 11 13   14 14 
Arts, entertainment 
and recreation 9 9 10 13   13 13 
Other service activities 4 4 2 3   3 3 
Data is classified in accordance with the State General Classifier of Types of Economic Activity 03-2007.  
Source: Statistics Agency.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 328 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(E) 
The Allotment of State Share Holding in Joint-Stock Companies 
Share of State 
participation Number of Joint-Stock Companies 
01.01.2008* 01.01.2009 01.01.2010** 01.01.2011 01.01.2012 01.01.2013 
100% 94 94 212  223  230   236  
50% to 100% 17 14 64  75  71   67  
25% to 50% 13 14 23  29  25   22  
less than 25% 7 7 80  43  41   39  
Total 131 129 379  370  367   364  
Source: * - Data for 2008 and 2009 is adapted from the data provided by the State Property and 
Privatization Committee under  Ministry of Finance; 
 ** - Data for 2010 – 2013 is provided by the Statistics Agency. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 329 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(F) 
Share of State Enterprises in Gross Value Added by Economy Sectors in 2005-2012 
General Classifier of Types of  Economic Activities 
(03-2003) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 
Gross Value Added, total 9.0 8.0 8.4 7.6 8.9
Agriculture, forestry and fishery 7.0 7.0 7.1 6.7 5.9
Industry 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.7
Construction 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.3
Trading, auto services and repair of household and 
personal appliances 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Hotels and restaurants 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.6
Transport and telecommunication 3.0 5.0 3.9 3.4 4.0
Financial activities 7.0 6.0 6.1 6.0 7.6
Real estate operations, leasing and consumer services 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.5 4.1
Public administration 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Education 73.0 78.0 78.0 81.4 82.8
Healthcare and social services 66.0 65.0 66.1 70.3 71.1
Utility services, personal services 26.0 26.0 26.9 30.6 31.0
 
General Classifier of Types of Economic Activities 
(03-2007) 2010 2011 2012 
Gross Value Added, Total  9.3 9.6 9.1
Agriculture, forestry and fishing 6.1 6.8 5.1
Industry 0.7 0.8 0.9
Mining and quarrying 0.0 0.0 0.0
Manufacturing 0.4 0.3 0.5
Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 6.1 7.4 7.4
Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activities 23.4 25.7 27.9
Construction 1.9 2.2 2.3
Wholesale and retail trade; repair of mo tor vehicles and motorcycles 0.1 0.1 0.0
Transportation and storage 6.6 8.0 8.0
Accommodation and food service activities 1.4 1.3 1.3
Information and communication 5.8 5.4 5.5
Financial and insurance activities 8.4 7.6 7.3
Real estate activities 3.8 0.8 1.5
Professional, scientific and technical activities 10.1 14.7 14.3
Administrative and support service activities 4.8 4.7 4.6
Public administration and defence, compulsory social security 100.0 100.0 100.0
Education 78.5 80.1 76.9
Human health and social work activities 86.1 88.5 72.9
Arts, entertainment and recreation 63.6 62.1 64.5
Other service activities 0.3 0.2 0.2
Source: Statistics Agency 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 330 - 
 
  ANNEX 3(G) 
Share of State Property in Gross Value Added in Specific Areas in 2005-2012 
 Share of State Property in Gross Value Added, by Sectors of Economy (%) 
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 
Total 8.7 8.2 8.4 7.6 8.9 9.3 9.6 9.1
Agriculture, forestry and 
fishery  7.3 6.8 7.1 6.7 5.9 6.1 6.8 5.1
Industry 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9
Services* 12.7 12.0 11.9 11.4 13.2 14.3 14.8 13.6
Source: the Statistics Agency 
* Services include all sectors of services and construction. 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 331 - 
 
  ANNEX 4 
List of Goods and Services for Internal Consumption for which Prices 
are regulated by the Government 
 
 
 I.  List of Services Provided by Natural Monopolies1 
No. Types of activities referred to the sphere of 
natural monopoly in a ccordance with the Law 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 272-II  "On 
Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" 
of 9 July 1998  Regulated types of services 
1. Transportation of oil and/or oil products by 
main pipelines   (1)  Operating of centra lized routing;  
 (2)  Transportation of oil via main pipeline 
system;  
 (3)  Unloading of oil from railway tanks;  
 (4)  Loading of oil into railway tanks;  
 (5)  Loading of oil into tankers;   (6)  Unloading of oil from vehicle tankers;   (7)  Loading of oil into vehicle tankers;   (8)  Storage of oil;   (9)  Transshipment (conveyance) of oil; and,  (10)  Mixture of oil. 
  Storage and transportation of commercial gas  
via connecting, main pipelines and/or distribution facilities ; operati on of group 
reservoir units  and transportation of crude gas via connecting gas di stribution pipelines  - Transportation of commercial gas via connecting 
pipelines; - 
Transportation of commercial gas via main  
pipelines; - Transportation of commercial gas via distribution pipelines for consumers of th e Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- Transportation of liquefied gas via gas pipelines from group reservoirs to consumers; 
- Storage of commercial gas; and, 
- Transportation of crude gas via connecting pipelines. 
3. Delivery and/or distribution of  electric power  Delivery and/or distribution of electric power. 
4. Production, delivery, di stribution and/or supply 
of heating energy   - Production of heating energy; 
- Delivery and/or distribu tion of heating energy; 
- Supply of heating energy; - Production, delivery and distribution of heating 
energy; and, 
- Production, delivery, dist ribution and/or supply of 
heating energy.  
5. 6. Technical dispatching of delivery into the 
network and consumption of electric power  Management of balancing of production and consumption of electric power. Technical dispatching of delivery into the network and 
consumption of electric power; and, Management of balancing of production and consumption of electric power.  
7. 8. Services of main railway network 
Services of railways equipped with railway transportation facilities in accordance with concession agreements - Providing for use of mainline railway network;  
- Management of passage of rolling equipment by 
main railway network; - Providing for use of mainline railway network and management of passage of rolling equipment by mainline railway network; and, - Use of railways equipped with railway transportation facilities in accordance wi th concession agreements. 
9. Approaching railway services   - Providing approaching  railway services for rolling 
equipment on condition that  there was no competing 
approaching railway; - Providing approaching  railway services for 
maneuvering  operations, loading and unloading, 
other technological operations of transportation process as well as for lay-over of rolling equipment not provided in technological operations of transportation process on condition that  there was no competing 
approaching railway. 
                                               
1 Source:  Government Resolution No. 155 of 14 March 2006. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 332 - 
 
  10. Aero-navigation services 
 - Aero-navigation servicing of aircrafts  within airspace 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan except for aero-navigation servicing of aircrafts operating international flights; - Aero-navigation servicing of aircrafts in the area of aerodrome, except for aero -navigation services of 
aircrafts  operating international flights. 
11. 
12. Maritime port services 
Airport services - Loading and unloading conducted by facilities of 
maritime ports; 
- Services for vessel  calls for loading and /or others 
purposes. - Services in take-off and landing of aircraft, except 
for servicing air carriage performing transit flights  through air space of Kazakhstan  with non -
commercial technical landing in the airports of 
Kazakhstan ; 
- Services in providing aviation safety except for servicing air carriage performing transit flights  
through air-space of Kazakhstan  with non-
commercial technical landing in the airports of 
Kazakhstan ; 
- Providing parking space for aircraft (i) for passenger planes for longer than three  hours after landing and 
(ii) for cargo certified aircrafts having cargo (mail) subject to loading/unloading in the airport of landing - for longer than six hours, except for servicing air 
carriage performing transit flights through air-space of Kazakhstan with non-commercial technical landing in the airports of Kazakhstan ; 
- Providing parking space for aircraft in the base airdrome; and 
- Providing work ing place  (area) to passenger 
registration. 
13. Telecommunication services under conditions 
of absence of competing operators for the reason of technological infeasibility or commercial inexpediency   (1)  Connection to public landline network of facilities 
(access points) of IP-operators (Internet Telephony) at the intercity level ; and,  
(2)  Traffic transmission  by connecting 
telecommunication operators from/to facilities (access points) of IP-operators (I nternet Telephony) being 
connected.   
14. Leasing or providing for use of cable channels 
and other basic facilities technologically related to connection of  telecommunication networks 
to  telecommunications of common use:  Providing for use of telephone channels (underground 
conduits). 
15. Water management and sewerage system 
services   Water management sewera ge system services:  
- Supply of water by main pipelines; - Supply of water by di stribution networks; 
- Supply of water by channels.  Sewerage syst em services: 
- Drainage of sewage water; - Cleaning of sewage water. 
16. Public mail services  
  - Mailing of ordinary letters; 
- Mailing of post cards; - Mailing of postal wrappers. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 333 - 
 
  II. List of spheres of regulated markets2 
Spheres of regulated markets Re gulated market participants 
Railway transport Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Electric and heat energy Market partic ipants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Production of petroleum products Market pa rticipants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Oil transportation Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Civil aviation Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Harbour activities Market participan ts with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Telecommunications Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Postal Services Market participants  with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
Gas (retail prices) Market participants with dominant or monopolistic 
position 
III.  List of goods for which prices are regulated by the Government 
Types of goods Legislative act 
Vodka, special vodka and other hard liquors   Law No. 429-I "On State Regulation of Production and 
Turnover of Ethyl Spirits  and Alcohol P roducts " of 
16 July 1999; Government Resolution No. 1592 "On Establishing Minimum Pr ices for Alcohol Products" 
of 23 October 1999, as amended in February 2011 
Filter cigarettes of le ngth between 45mm and 85 
mm, and of length between 87.1mm and 160 mm Law No. 439 "On State Regulation of Production and 
Turnover of Tobacco Products" of 12 June 2003; Government Resolution No. 260 "On Establishing Minimum Retail Prices of Filter Cigarettes" of 4 April 2007 
Petroleum products Law No. 463-IV "On State Regulation of Production 
and Turnover of Certain Ty pes of Petroleum Products" 
of 20 July 2011 
Gas (wholesale prices) Law No. 532-IV of 9 January 2012 "On Gas and Gas 
Supply", and Government Resolution No. 1272 "On 
Establishing Maximum Wholesale Price of Liquefied Petroleum Gas on the Internal Market" of 8 October 2012 
 
 
                                               
2 Source:  Law No. 272-I "On Natural Monopolies and Regulated Markets" of 9 July 1998. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 334 - 
 
  ANNEX 5(A)  
Requirements, Terms and Fees Applied for Registration of Various Legal Forms of 
Juridical Persons 
Legal forms List of documents 
to submit for State 
registration State 
registration 
terms Registration fee 
amount in 2014 
Limited Liability Partne rship is a partnership 
founded by one or several individuals, registered 
capital of which is separated into shares in the amounts determined by the founding documents.  
The participants of LLP take none of the 
company's liabilities and share its risks only within the limits of the contribu tions made, except for 
the cases provided by the legislation.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Receipt or a 
copy of 
remittance 
order on payment of the registration fee.  1 business 
day 12,038 tenge 
For small businesses:  3,704 tenge  
Joint Stock Company - juridical person, issuing 
shares with the purpose to attract funding for 
performance of their activity.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Founding 
charter if a JSC does not operate on the basis of the Model Charter; 
3. Protocol of the 
meeting of founders; 
4. Receipt or a 
copy of remittance order on 
payment of the 
registration fee. 10 working 
days 12,038 tenge 
 
Production Cooperative – a voluntary association 
of individuals on the basis of a membership for 
joint entrepreneurial activity, based on their personal working participation and unification of the participants' contributions.  1. Application for 
registration; 
2. Receipt or a 
copy of remittance order on payment of the registration fee. 1 business 
day 12,038  tenge 
For small businesses:3,704 tenge   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 335 - 
 
  ANNEX 5(B) 
Calculation Methodology for Import/Export Licensing Fees and for Registration of 
Juridical Persons 
1. General Provisions 
 Rates of fees for licensing of goods exportation and importation and for registration of 
juridical persons are calculated in accordance wi th Article VIII of the GATT 1994.  The fee rates 
shall be fixed and their amounts shall equal to the amount of actual costs incurred by the 
governmental bodies during registering the juridi cal person and issuing the licence.  The fee rates 
shall be quoted in the national currency. 
2. Main Costs to be Included into Rates Calculation 1. For licensing of export/import of goods and State registration of juridical persons:  
 - utilities cost;  
 - communication services cost;  - transport services cost; 
 - electric power cost; 
 - heating cost; 
- maintenance, servicing and repair of buildings, premises, equipment and other 
capital assets; 
 - rent of offices;  - other services and works directly related to the process of rendering services;  - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services; 
- other current costs (data traffic, seasons, and international standards) the process 
of rendering services. 
2. For issuing duplicates and re-registering of  export and import of goods and the duplicate 
for of the certificate on State registration (re-registration) of juridical persons, and 
branches and representatives thereof: 
 - rent of offices; 
 - electric power cost; 
 - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services. 
3. For State (statistical) re-registration and ceasing of the activity of juridical persons and 
branches and representatives thereof: 
 - utilities cost; 
 - communication services cost;  - transport services cost; 
 - electric power cost; 
 - heating cost; 
- maintenance, servicing and repair of buildings, premises, equipment and other 
capital assets; 
 - rent of offices;  - other services and works directly related to the process of rendering services;  - purchase of other goods directly related to the process of rendering services; 
- other current costs (data traffic, seasons, and international standards) the process 
of rendering services. 
3. Fee Rates Calculation Algorithm 
All actually incurred (or due) expenses under paragraph 2 herein shall be calculated per one State 
employee.  The amount of these expenses sha ll be the basis for the fee rates calculation. 
Depending on the inflation the fee rates may be adjusted. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 336 - 
 
  4. Conclusion 
Governmental bodies use the methodology to calculate the fee rates for the licensing of goods 
exportation and importation and for the State registration of juridical persons within their authority. 
Source: Order No. 105 of the Ministry of Econ omy and Budget Planning of 27 August 2005. 
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 337 - 
 
  ANNEX 6 
List of Sensitive Products, where Decision on  the Level of Import Duties shall be Taken 
by CU Commission Parties Consensus1 
CET Code  Description of products  
0201 Meat of bovine animal s, fresh or chilled.
0202 Meat of bovine animals, frozen.
0203 Meat of swine, fresh, chilled, or frozen. 
0207 Meat and edible offal, of the poultry of Heading N° 0105, fresh, chilled, or frozen.  
0301 Live fish.  
0302 Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fill ets and other fish me at of Heading 0304.  
0303 Fish, frozen, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat of Heading 0304. 
0304 Fish fillets and other fish meat (whether or not minced), fresh, chilled or frozen.  
0401 Milk and cream, not concentrated nor containi ng added sugar or other sweetening matter.  
0402 Milk and cream, concentrated or containing  added sugar or othe r sweetening matter.  
0403 Buttermilk, curdled milk and cream, yogurt, kephir and other fermented or acidified milk and 
cream, whether or not concentrated or containi ng added sugar or other sweetening matter or 
flavoured or containing added fruit, nuts or cocoa.
0405 Butter and other fats and oils derived from milk; dairy spreads.
0406 Cheese and curd. 
0407 00  Birds eggs, in shell, fre sh, preserved or boiled
0408 Birds' eggs, not in shell and egg yolks, fresh, dried, cooked by  steaming or by boiling in water, 
moulded, frozen, or ot herwise preserved, whether or not containing added sugar or other 
sweetening matter.  
0602 Other live plants (including their roots), cuttings and slips; mushroom spawn.  
0701 Potatoes, fresh or chilled.  
0703 Onions, shallots, garlic, leeks and other alliaceous vegetables, fresh or chilled.  
0704 Cabbages, cauliflowers, kohlrabi, kale and si milar edible brassicas, fresh or chilled.  
0706 Carrots, turnips, salad beetroot, sals ify, celeriac, radishes and simila r edible roots, fresh or chilled.
0707 00  Cucumbers and gherkins, fresh or chilled.
0808 Apples, pears and quinces, fresh.
0810 Other fruit, fresh.  
1002 
00 000 0  Rye. 
1003 00  Barley.  
1006 Rice. 
1101 00  Wheat or wheat-rye flour.  
1102 Cereal flours other than of wheat or meslin.
1103 Cereal groats, meal and pellets. 
1104 Cereal grain otherwise worked (for example, hull ed, rolled, flaked, pearled, sliced or kibbled), 
except rice of Heading 1006; germ of cereals, whole, rolled, flaked or ground.  
1107 Malt, whether or not roasted.  
1108 Starches; inulin.  
1507 Soya-bean oil and its fractions, whether or not refined but not chemically modified.  
1511 Palm oil and its fractions, whether or no t refined, but not ch emically modified.  
1512 Sunflower-seed, safflower or cotton-seed oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or not refined but not 
chemically modified.  
1513 Coconut (copra), palmkernel or babassu oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or not refined but not 
chemically modified.  
1514 Rape, colza or mustard oil and fra ctions thereof, whether or no t refined, but not chemically 
modified.  
1517 Margarine; edible mixtures or preparations of anim al or vegetable fats or oils or of fractions of 
different fats or oils of this Ch apter, other than edible fats or oils or their fractions of Heading 
1516. 
1601 00  Sausages and similar products from meat, meat su b-products or blood; finished food products, 
made on the basis thereof.  
1701 Cane or beet sugar and chemically  pure sucrose, in solid form.
1704 Sugar confectionery (including white chocolate), not containing cocoa.
1806 Chocolate and other food preparations containing cocoa.
                                               
1 Not all 10 digit HS codes within a 4 digit HS subgroup may be included in the list. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 338 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
1901 Malt extract; food preparations of flour, meal, starch or malt extract, not containing cocoa or 
containing less than 40% by weight of cocoa calc ulated on a totally defatted basis, not elsewhere 
specified or included; food preparations of goods of Headings 0401 to 0404, not containing cocoa or containing less than 5% by weight of coco a calculated on a totally defatted basis, not 
elsewhere specified of included.
1905 Bread, pastry, cakes, biscuits and other bake rs' wares, whether or not containing cocoa; 
communion wafers, empty cachets of a kind suitable  for pharmaceutical use,  sealing wafers, rice 
paper, and similar products.  
2001 Vegetables, fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, prepared  or preserved by vinegar or acetic 
acid. 
2005 Other vegetables prepared or preserved otherwis e than by vinegar or acetic acid, not frozen, 
other than products of Heading 2006.
2007 Jams, fruit jellies, marmalades, fruit or nut puree, and fruit or nut  pastes, being cooked 
preparations, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter.  
2008 Fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, ot herwise prepared or preserved, whether or not 
containing added sugar or other sweetening matter  or spirit, not elsewhere specified or included.
2009 Fruit juices (including grape must) and vegetabl e juices, unfermented and not containing added 
spirit, whether or not containing adde d sugar or other sweetening matter.  
2102 Yeasts (active or inactive); other single-cell micro-organisms, dead (but not including vaccines of 
Heading 3002); prepared baking powders.
2207 Undenatured ethyl alcohol of an alcoholic strength  by volume of 80% or higher; ethyl alcohol and 
other spirits, denature d, of any strength.
2208 Undenatured ethyl alcohol of an alcoholic strength  by volume of less than 80%; spirits, liqueurs 
and other spirituous beverages.
2304 00 000
 Millcake and other solid wastes from extracts of soy oil, milled or not milled, granulated or not granulated.
 
2522 Quicklime, slaked lime and hydraulic lime, other than calcium oxide and hydroxide of Heading 
2825. 
2523 Portland cement, aluminous cement, slag cement , super-sulphate cement and similar hydraulic 
cements, whether or not coloured  or in the form of clinkers.
2615 Niobium, tantalum, vanadium or zirconium ores and concentrates.
2620 Ash and residues (other than from the manufacture of  iron or steel), containing arsenic, metals or 
metal compounds.  
2707 Oils and other products of the distillation of high  temperature coal tar; similar products in which 
the weight of the aromatic constituents exceeds that of the non-aromatic constituents.  
2708 Pitch and pitch coke, obtained from co al tar or from other mineral tars.
2710 Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous  minerals, other than crude; preparations not 
elsewhere specified or included, containing by weig ht 70% or more of petroleum oils or of oils 
obtained from bituminous minerals, these oils be ing the basic constituents of the preparations; 
used oils.  
2711 Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons.
2712 Petroleum jelly; paraffin wax, microcrystalline pe troleum wax, slack wax, ozokerite, lignite wax, 
peat wax, other mineral waxes, an d similar products obtained by sy nthesis or by other processes, 
whether or not coloured.  
2713 Petroleum coke, petroleum bitumen and other residues  of petroleum oils or of oils obtained from 
bituminous minerals.  
2801 Fluorine, chlorine, bromine and iodine.
2802 00 000 0
 Sublimed or precipitated sulphur; colloidal sulphur. 
2803 00  Carbon.  
2804 Hydrogen, rare gases and other non-metals.
2805 Alkali or alkaline-earth metals; rare-earth metals, scandium and yttrium, whether or not intermixed or interalloyed; mercury.
2806 Hydrogen chloride (hydrochloric acid); chlorosulphuric acid.
2807 00  Sulphuric acid, oleum.  
2808 00 000 0
 Hydrogen nitrate; sulpho-nitrogen acids.
2809 Diphosphorus pentaoxide; phosphor ic acid and polyphosphoric acids, whether or not chemically 
defined.  
2810 00  Boric oxides, boric acids.  
2811 Other inorganic acids and other inorganic oxygen compounds of non-metals.  
2812 Halides and halide oxides of non-metals.
2813 Sulphides of non-metals; commercial phosphorus trisulphide.
2814 Ammonia, anhydrous or in aqueous solution.
2815 Sodium hydroxide (caustic soda); potassium hydrox ide (caustic potash); peroxides of sodium or 
potassium.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 339 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
2816 Hydroxide and peroxide of magnes ium; oxides, hydroxides and peroxides, of strontium or barium.
2817 
00 000 0  Zinc oxide; zinc peroxide.  
2818 Artificial corundum, whether or not chemically defined; aluminium oxide; aluminium hydroxide.
2819 Chromium oxides and hydroxides.
2820 Manganese oxides.  
2821 Iron oxides and hydroxides; eart h colours containing 70% or more  by weight of combined iron 
evaluated as Fe 2O3. 
2822 00 000 0
 Cobalt oxides and hydroxides; technical cobalt oxides.
2823 00 000 0
 Titanium oxides.  
2824 Lead oxides; red lead and orange lead.
2825 Hydrazine and hydroxylamine and their inorganic sa lts; other inorganic base s; other metal oxides, 
hydroxides and peroxides.  
2826 Fluorides; fluorosilicates, fluoroamin ates and other complex fluorine salts.  
2827 Chlorides, chloride oxides and chloride hydrox ides; bromides and bromide oxides; iodides and 
iodide oxides.
2828 Hypochlorites; commercial calcium hy pochlorite; chlorite s; hypobromites.  
2829 Chlorates and perchlorates; bromates an d perbromates; iodates and periodates.  
2830 Sulphides; polysulphides whether or not chemically defined.
2831 Dithionites and sulphoxylates.  
2832 Sulphites; thiosulphates.  
2833 Sulphates; alums; peroxosulpohates (persulphates). 
2834 Nitrites; nitrates.  
2835 Phosphinates (hypophosphites), phosphonates (phosphites), phosphates and polyphosphates 
whether or not chemically defined.
2836 Carbonates; peroxocarbonates (percarbonates);  commercial ammonium carbonate containing 
ammonium carbamate.  
2837 Cyanides, cyanide oxides, and complex cyanides.
2839 Silicates; commercial alkali metal silicates.
2840 Borates; peroxoborates (perborates).
2841 Salts of oxometallic or peroxometallic acids.
2842 Other salts of inorganic acids or peroxacids (including aluminosilicates whether or not chemically 
defined), other than azides.  
2843 Colloidal precious metals; inorganic or organic compounds of precious metals, whether or not 
chemically defined; amalgams of precious metals.
2844 Radioactive chemical elements and radioactive isotopes (including the fissile or fertile chemical elements and isotopes) and their compounds; mixtures and residues containing these products.
2845 Isotopes other than those of Heading 2844; compounds, inorganic or organic, of such isotopes, whether or not chemically defined.
2846 Compounds, inorganic or organic, of rare-earth meta ls, of yttrium or of scandium or of mixtures of 
these metals.
2847 00 000 0
 Urea hydrogen peroxide or non-urea hydrogen peroxide 
2848 00 000 0
 Phosphides of defined or undefined chemical  composition, except for ferrophosphorus.  
2849 Carbides, whether or not chemically defined.
2850 00  Hydrides, nitrides, azides, silicides, borides, of defined or undefined chemical composition, except 
for chemical compounds which are carbides under HS code 2849.
2852 00 000
 Mercuric compounds, inorganic or orga nic compounds, except for amalgams.  
2853 00  Other inorganic compounds (including distilled or conductivity water and water of the same 
cleanness); liquid air with or without inactive gas); compressed air; amalgams, except for precious metals amalgams.
 
2901 Acyclic hydrocarbons.  
2902 Cyclic hydrocarbons.  
2903 Halogenated derivatives of hydrocarbons.
2904 Sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivative s of hydrocarbons, whether or not halogenated.
2905 Acyclic alcohols and their halogented, sulpho nated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2906 Cyclic alcohols and their halogenated, sulpho nated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2907 Phenols; phenol-alcohols.  
2908 Halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosat ed derivatives of phenols or phenol-alcohols.
2909 Ethers, ether-alcohols, ether phenols, ether-alcoho l-phenols, alcohol peroxi des, ether peroxides, 
ketone peroxides (whether or not chemically defined), and their halo genated, sulphonated, 
nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 340 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
2910 Epoxides, epoxyalcohols, epoxyphenols, and epoxy ethers, with a three-member ring and their 
halogented, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
2911 00 000 0
 Acetals and semiacetals containing  or not containing other acid-containing functional group and 
their halogenated, sulfonated, nitrated or nitrozated derivatives.
2912 Aldehydes, whether or not with other oxygen  function; cyclic polymers of aldehydes; 
paraformaldehyde.  
2913 00 000 0
 Halogented, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives of compounds under HS code 2912.
2914 Ketones and quinones, whether or not with other oxygen function, and their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
2915 Saturated acyclic monocarboxylic acids and their anhydrides, halides, peroxides and peroxyacids; 
their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
2916 Unsaturated acyclic monocarboxylic acids, cyclic  monocarbolic acids, their anhydrides, halides, 
peroxides, and peroxyacids; their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
2917 Polycarboxylic acids, their anhydrides, halides,  peroxides and peroxyacids; their halogenated, 
sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
2918 Carboxylic acids with additional  oxygen function and their a nhydrides, halides , peroxides and 
peoxyacids; their halogenated, sulphonate d, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.  
2919 Phosphoric esters and their salts, including lactophosphates; their halogenated, sulphonated, 
nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
2920 Esters of other inorganic acids (excluding este rs of hydrogen halides) and their salts; their 
halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives.
2921 Amine-function compounds.  
2922 Oxygen-function amino-compounds. 
2923 Quaternary ammonium salts and hydroxides ; lecithins and other phosphoaminolipids.  
2924 Carboxyamide-function compounds; amide- function compounds of carbonic acid.  
2925 Carboxyimide-function compounds (including sa ccharin and its salts) and imine-function 
compounds. 
2926 Nitrile-function compounds.  
2927 00 000 0
 Diazo-, azo- or azoxy compounds.
2928 00  Organic hydrazine or hydroxylamine derivatives.
2929 Compounds with other nitrogen function.
2930 Organo-sulphur compounds.  
2931 00  Other organic-inorganic compounds.
2932 Heterocyclic compounds with oxygen hetero-atom(s) only. 
2933 Heterocyclic compounds with nitrogen hetero-atom(s) only. 
2934 Nucleic acids and their salts whether or not chemically defined; other heterocyclic compounds.
2935 00  Sulfonamides.
2936 Provitamins and vitamins, natural or reproduced by synthesis (including natural concentrates), 
derivatives thereof used primarily as vitamins, an d intermixtures of the fo regoing, whether or not 
in any solvent.  
2937 Hormones, prostaglandins, thromboxanes and leukot rienes, natural or repr oduced by synthesis; 
derivatives and structural analogues thereof, incl uding chain modified polypeptides, used primarily 
as hormones. 
2938 Glycosides, natural or reproduced by synthesi s and their salts, ethe rs, esters and other 
derivatives.  
2939 Vegetable alkaloids, natural or reproduced by sy nthesis and their salts, ethers, esters and other 
derivatives.  
2940 00 000 0
 Chemically clean sugars, except for saccharose, la ctose, maltose, glucose,  fructose; su gar ethers, 
sugar acetals, sugar esters, their salts, except for products under HS codes 2937, 2938 or 2939.
2941 Antibiotics.  
2942 00 000 0
 Other organic compounds.  
3001 Glands and other organs for organo-therapeutic us es, dried, whether or not powdered; extracts of 
glands or other organs or of their secretions fo r organo-therapeutic uses; heparin and its salts; 
other human or animal substances  prepared for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not elsewhere 
specified or included.  
3002 Human blood; animal blood prepared for therapeuti c, prophylactic or diagnostic uses; antisera 
and other blood fractions and modified immunolo gical products, whether or not obtained by 
means of biotechnological processes; vaccines, to xins, cultures of micro organisms (excluding 
yeasts) and similar products.  
3003 Medicaments (excluding goods of Headings 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of two or more constituents which have been mixed together for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not put up in measures doses or in forms or packings for retail sale.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 341 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
3004 Medicaments (excluding goods of Heading 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of mixed or unmixed 
products for therapeutic or prophy lactic uses, put up in measured doses (including those in the 
form of transdermal administration systems)  or in forms or packings for retail sale.  
3005 Wadding, gauze, bandages and similar articles (for example, dressings, adhesive plasters, 
poultices),impregnated or coated with pharmaceutical substances or put up in forms or packings 
for retail trade for medical, surgic al, dental or veterinary purposes.
3006 Pharmaceutical goods specified in Note 4 to this Chapter.
3202 Synthetic organic tanning substances; inorgani c tanning substances; tanning preparations, 
whether or not containing natural tanning subs tances; enzymatic preparations for pre-tanning.
3204 Synthetic organic colouring matter, whether or not chemically defined; preparations as specified 
in Note 3 to this Chapter based on synthetic or ganic colouring matter; sy nthetic organic products 
of a kind used as fluorescent brightening agents  or as luminophores, wh ether or not chemically 
defined. –synthetic organic colouring matter an d preparations based thereon as specified in 
Note 3 to this Chapter.  
3209 Paints and varnishes (including enamels and lacquers) based on synthetic polymers or chemically modified natural polymers, dispersed or dissolved in an aqueous medium.
 
3215 Printing ink, writing or drawing ink, and other inks, whether or not concentrated or solid.  
3302 Mixtures of odoriferous substances and mixtures (i ncluding alcoholic solutions) with a basis of one 
or more of these substances, of a kind used as  raw materials in industry; other preparations 
based on odoriferous substances, of a kind  used for the manufacture of beverages.  
3307 Pre-shave, shaving or after-shave preparatio ns, personal deodorants, bath preparations, 
depilatories and other perfumery,  cosmetic or toilet preparatio ns, not elsewhere specified or 
included; prepared room deodorizers, whether or not perfumed or having disinfectant properties.
3401 Soap, organic surface-active products and preparat ions for use as soap, in the form of bars, 
cakes, moulded pieces or shapes, whether or no t containing soap; organic surface-active agents 
and washing preparations for leather in the form of liquid or cream, in packings for retail sale, 
whether or not containing soap; paper, wadding,  felt and nonwovens, impregnated, coated or 
covered with soap or detergent.
3402 Organic surface-active agents (other than soap); surface-active preparations, washing 
preparations (including auxiliary washing preparat ions) and cleaning preparations, whether or not 
containing soap, other than those of Heading 3401.
3507 Enzymes; prepared enzymes not el sewhere specified or included.
3602 00 
000 0 Finished explosives, except for gunpowder.
3603 00  Safety fuses, detonating cords, percussion or detonating caps, igniters, detonators.  
3805 Gum, wood or sulphate turpentine  and other terpenic oils produced by the distillation or other 
treatment of coniferous woods; crude dipenten e; sulphite turpentine  and other crude para-
cymene; pine oil containing alpha-terpineol as the main constituent.
3806 Rosin and resin acids, and de rivatives thereof; rosin spir it and rosin oils; run gums.  
3808 Insecticides, rodenticides, fungicides, herbicides, anti-sprouting products and plant-growth 
regulators, disinf ectants and similar products, put up in fo rms or packings for retail sale or as 
preparations or articles (for ex ample, sulphur-treated bands, wi cks and candles, and fly-papers).
3901 Polymers of ethylene, in primary forms.
3902 Polymers of propylene or of ot her olefins, in primary forms.
3903 Polymers of styrene, in primary forms.
3904 Polymers of vinyl chloride or of othe r halogenated olefins, in primary forms.  
3905 Polymers of vinyl acetate or of other vinyl este rs, in primary forms; other vinyl polymers in 
primary forms.  
3906 Acrylic polymers in primary forms.
3907 Polyacetals, other polyet hers and epoxide resins, in primary forms; polycarbonates, alkyd resins, 
polyallyl esters and other po lyesters, in primary forms.
3908 Polyamides in primary forms.  
3909 Amino-resins, phenolic resins, and polyurethanes, in primary forms.
3911 Petroleum resins, coumarone-indene resins, polyte rpenes, polysulphides, polysulphones and other 
products specified in Note 3 to this Chapter, not elsewhere specified or included, in primary forms.
3912 Cellulose and its chemical derivatives, not elsewhere specified or included, in primary forms.
3913 Natural polymers (for example, alginic acid) and modified natural po lymers (for example, 
hardened proteins, chemical derivatives of natural rubber), not elsewhere specified or included, in 
primary forms.  
3914 00 000 0
 Ion-exchange resins, extracted from polymers under HS code 3901-3913, in primary forms.
3915 Waste, parings and scrap, of plastics.
3916 Monofilament of which any cross-sectional dime nsion exceeds 1 mm, rods, sticks and profile 
shapes, whether or not surface-worked bu t not otherwise worked, of plastics.  
3917 Tubes, pipes, and hoses, and fittings therefore (for example, joints, elbows, flanges), of plastics.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 342 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
3918 Floor coverings of polymer materials, whether or not self-adhesive, in rolls or in the form of tiles; 
wall or ceiling coverings of polymers, as defined in Note 9 to this Chapter.  
3919 Self-adhesive plates, sheets, film, foil, tape, stri p and other flat shapes, of polymer materials, 
whether or not in rolls.  
3920 Other plates, sheets, film, foil an d strip, of polymer materials, non-cellular and not reinforced, 
laminated, supported or similarl y combined with other materials.
3921 Other plates, sheets, film, foil an d strip, of polymer materials. 
3922 Baths, shower-baths, wash-basins, bidets, lavatory pans, seats and covers, flushing cisterns and 
similar sanitary wa re, of plastics.
3923 Articles for the conveyance or packing of good s, of plastics; stoppers , lids, caps and other 
closures, of plastics.  
3924 Tableware, kitchenware, other household ar ticles and toilet articles, of plastics.  
3925 Builders' ware of plastics, not elsewhere specified or included.
3926 Other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of Headings 3901 to 3914.  
4001 Natural rubber, balata, gutta-percha, guayule, ch icle and similar natural gums, in primary forms 
or in plates, sheets or strip.  
4011 New pneumatic tyres, of rubber.
4104 Leather or leather crust of bovine (including buffa lo), or equine animals, without hair on, whether 
or not split, but not further prepared.
4202 Trunks, suit-cases, vanity-cases, executive-cases, brief-cases, school satchels, spectacle cases, 
binocular cases, camera cases, musical instrument cases, gun cases, holsters and similar containers; travelling-bags, toilet  bags, rucksacks, handbags, sh opping-bags, wallets, purses, 
map-cases, cigarette-cases, tobacco-pouches, to ol bags, sports bags, bottle-cases, jewellery 
boxes, powder-boxes, cutlery cases and similar contai ners, of leather or of composition leather, of 
sheeting of polymer or textile mate rials, of vulcanized fibre or of paperboard, or wholly or mainly 
covered with such materials or with paper.
4303 Articles of apparel, clothing accesso ries and other articles of fur skin.
4410 Particle board, oriented strand board (OSB) and similar board (for example, waferboard) of wood 
or other ligneous materials, whether or not aggl omerated with resins or other organic binding 
substances.  
4411 Fibreboard of wood or other ligneous materials,  whether or not bonded with resins or other 
organic substances.  
4412 Plywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood.
4418 Builders' joinery and carpentry of wood, including cellular wood panels, a ssembled parquet panels, 
shingles and shakes.  
4801 00 000 0
 Newsprint paper rolled or in sheets
4803 00  Paper napkins or face napkins, paper towels or paper diapers and other kinds of paper for 
household or sanitary-hygienic purp oses, cellulose cotton and sheet of cellulos e fibre, full-creped 
or not creped, corrugated or not corrugated, embossed or not embossed, perforated or not 
perforated, with coloured or uncoloured surfac e, printed or unprinted, in rolls or sheets.  
4808 Paper and paperboard, corrugated (with or without glued flat surface sheets), creped, crinkled, 
embossed or perforated, in rolls or sheets, othe r than paper of the kind described in Heading 
4803. 
4814 Wallpaper and similar wall coverings;  window transparencies of paper.
4818 Toilet paper and similar paper, ce llulose wadding or webs of cellulose fibres, of a kind used for 
household or sanitary purposes, in rolls of a widt h not exceeding 36 cm, or cut to size or shape; 
handkerchiefs, cleansing tissues, towels, tablecloths, serviettes, napkins for babies, tampons, bed sheets and similar household, sa nitary or hospital articles, ar ticles of apparel and clothing 
accessories, of paper pulp, paper, cellulos e wadding or webs of  cellulose fibres.
 
4819 Cartons, boxes, cases, bags and other packing containers, of paper, paperboard, cellulose wading 
or webs of cellulose fibres; box files, letter trays,  and similar articles, of paper or paperboard, of a 
kind used in offices, shops or the like.
4820 Registers, account books, note books, order b ooks, receipt books, le tter pads, memorandum 
pads, diaries and similar articles, exercise-books,  blotting pads, binders (loose-leaf or other), 
folders, file covers, manifold business forms, interleaved carbon sets and other articles of 
stationery, of paper or paperboard; albums for samples or for collections and book covers, of 
paper or paperboard.  
5001 00 000 0
 Silk cocoon, good for reeling  
5002 00 000 0
 (Thrown) raw silk  
5003 00 000 0
 Silk wastes (including cocoons, not good for r eeling, cocoon thread wastes and unravelled raw 
silk) 
5004 00  Silk thread (except for yarn from silk  wastes), not packed for retail sale.
5005 00  Yarn from silk wastes, no t packed for retail sale.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 343 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5006 00  Silk thread and yarn from silk wastes, packed for retail sale, fibre from silk moth fibroin  
5007 Woven fabrics of silk or of silk waste.
5101 Wool, not carded or combed.  
5102 Fine or coarse animal hair, not carded or combed.
5103 Waste of wool or of fine or coarse animal hair , including yarn waste but excluding garnetted stock.
5104 
00 000 0  Unravelled wool or fine or coarse animal hair
5105 Wool and fine or coarse animal hair, carded or  combed (including combed wool in fragments).
5106 Yarn of carded wool, not put up for retail sale.
5107 Yarn of combed wool, not put up for retail sale.
5108 Yarn of fine animal hair (carded or combed), not put up for retail sale.
5109 Yarn of wool or of fine animal hair, put up for retail sale.
5110 00 
000 0 Yarn of coarse animal hair or horse hair (inclu ding gimp thread from horse hair), packed or not 
packed for retail sale.  
5111 Woven fabrics of carded wool or of carded fine animal hair.
5112 Woven fabrics of combed wool or of combed fine animal hair.
5113 00 000 0
 Fabric from coarse animal hair or horse hair
5201 00  Cotton fibre, not carded or combed
5202 Cotton waste (including yarn waste and garnetted stock).
5203 00 
000 0 Cotton fibre, carded or combed
5204 Cotton sewing thread, whether or  not put up for retail sale.
5205 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread), containing  85% or more by weight  of cotton, not put up 
for retail sale.
5206 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread), containing less than 85% by weight of cotton, not put up for retail sale.
5207 Cotton yarn (other than sewing thread) put up for retail sale.
5208 Woven fabrics of cotton containing 85% or more by weight of cotton, weighing not more than 
200 g/m2. 
5209 Woven fabrics of cotton containing 85% or more  by weight of cotton, weighing more than 
200 g/m2. 
5210 Woven fabrics of cotton, containing less than 85% by weight of cotton, mixed mainly or solely with man-made fibres, weighing not more than 200 g/m
2.
5211 Woven fabrics of cotton, containing less than 85% by weight of cotton, mixed mainly or solely with man-made fibres, weighing more than 200 g/m
2.
5212 Other woven fabrics of cotton.
5301 Flax, raw or processed but not spun; flax tow and waste (including yarn waste and garnetted 
stock).  
5302 True hemp (Cannabis sativa L.), raw or proces sed but not spun; tow and waste of true hemp 
(including yarn waste and garnetted stock).
5303 Jute and other textile bast fibres (excluding flax , true hemp and ramie), raw or processed but not 
spun; tow and waste of these fibres (inc luding yarn waste and garnetted stock).  
5305 00 
000 0 Fibre of coconut, abacus ( Musa textilis Nee ), rami and other plant textile fibres, not named or not 
included under other tariff lines,  raw or processed, but not spinned; combings and wastes from 
these fibres (including spinning wastes and unravelled raw fibres)  
5306 Flax yarn.  
5307 Yarn of jute or of other text ile bast fibres of Heading 5303.
5308 Yarn of other vegetable te xtile fibres; paper yarn.
5309 Woven fabrics of flax.  
5310 Woven fabrics of jute or of other textile bast fibres of Heading 5303.
5311 00  Fabrics of other plant textile fibres; fabrics of spun cotton
5401 Sewing thread of man-made filaments, whether or not put up for retail sale.  
5402 Synthetic filament yarn (other th an sewing thread), not put up fo r retail sale, including synthetic 
monofilament of less than 67 decitex.
5403 Artificial filament yarn (other than sewing thread ), not put up for retail sale, including artificial 
monofilament of less than 67 decitex.
5404 Synthetic monofilament of 67 decitex or more and of which no cross– sectional dimension exceeds 
1 mm; strip and the like (for example, artificial stra w) of synthetic textile ma terials of an apparent 
width not exceeding 5 mm.  
5405 00 000 0
 Monofilament of 67 decitex or mo re and of which no cross– sectional dimension exceeds 1 mm; 
strip and the like (for example, ar tificial straw) of artificial text ile materials of an apparent width 
not exceeding 5 mm.  
5406 00 
000 0 Chemical filament yarn (except for sewi ng threads), packed for retail sale.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 344 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5407 Woven fabrics of synthetic filament yarn, incl uding woven fabrics obtained from materials of 
Heading 5404.
5408 Woven fabrics of artificial filament yarn, incl uding woven fabrics obtained from materials of 
Heading 5405.
5501 Synthetic filament tow.  
5502 00  Man-made filament tow.  
5503 Synthetic staple fibres, not carded, comb ed or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5504 Artificial staple fibres, not carded, comb ed or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5505 Waste (including noils, yarn waste and garnetted stock) of man-made fibres.  
5506 Synthetic staple fibres, carded, combed  or otherwise processed for spinning.  
5507 00 
000 0 Man-made fibres, carded, combed or processed differently for spinning.
5508 Sewing thread of man-made staple fibres , whether or not put up for retail sale.  
5509 Yarn (other than sewing thre ad) of synthetic staple fibres , not put up for retail sale.  
5510 Yarn (other than sewing thread) of artifici al staple fibres, not put up for retail sale.  
5511 Yarn (other than sewing thread) of man-ma de staple fibres, put up for retail sale.  
5512 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containi ng 85% or more by weig ht of synthetic staple 
fibres. 
5513 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containing  less than 85% by weight of such fibres, mixed 
mainly or solely with cotton, of a weight not exceeding 170 g/m2.
5514 Woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres, containing  less than 85% by weight of such fibres, mixed 
mainly or solely with cotton, of a weight exceeding 170 g/m2.
5515 Other woven fabrics of synthetic staple fibres.
5516 Woven fabrics of artificial staple fibres.
5601 Wadding of textile materials and articles thereo f; textile fibres, not exceeding 5 mm in length 
(flock), textile dust and mill neps.
5602 Felt, whether or not impregnated, coated, covered or laminated.
5603 Nonwovens, whether or not impregna ted, coated, covered or laminated.
5604 Rubber thread and cord, textile covered; textile yarn and strip and the like of Heading 5404 or 
5405, impregnated, coated, covered or sheathed with rubber or plastics.
5605 00 0  Gimped or not gimped metallic thread, which is a te xtile thread or flat or similar thread under HS 
codes 5404 or 5405, mixed with metal in the form of a thread, plate or powder, or covered with metal.
 
5606 00  Thread gimped and flat and similar thread un der HS codes 5404 or 5405, gimped thread (except 
for thread under HS code 5605 and gimped thread  from horse hair); chen ille yarn (including 
flocked chenille); fancy loop yarn.
5607 Twine, cordage, ropes and cables, whether or  not plaited or braided and whether or not 
impregnated, coated, covered or sh eathed with rubber or plastics.
5608 Knotted netting of twine, cordage of rope; made up  fishing nets and other ma de up nets, of textile 
materials.  
5609 00 000 0
 Products from threads or yarn, flat or simila r threads under HS codes 5404 or 5405, twine, 
cordage of rope, not named or not included under other tariff lines.
5701 Carpets and other textile floor covering s, knotted, whether or not made up.  
5702 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, woven, not tufted or flocked, whether or not made up, 
including "Kelem", "Schumacks", "Kar amanie" and similar hand-woven rugs.  
5703 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, tufted, whether or not made up.  
5704 Carpets and other textile floor coverings, of felt, not tufted or flocked, whether or not made up.
5705 00  Carpets and other textile floor cove rings, whether or not made up.
5801 Woven pile fabrics and chenille fabrics, other than fabrics of Heading 5802 or 5806.  
5802 Terry towelling and similar woven terry fabrics, ot her than narrow fabrics of Heading 5806; tufted 
textile fabrics, other than products of Heading 5703.
5803 00  Leno fabrics, except for narrow fabrics under HS code 5806.
5804 Tulles and other net fabrics, not including woven, knitted or crocheted fabrics; lace in the piece, in strips or in motifs, other than fabrics of Headings 6002– 6006.
5805 00 000 0
 Hand-made tapestry similar to Belgian, Aubusson,  Beauvais or similar ta pestry and embroidered 
tapestry (for example, cross-stitched or satin-stitched), whether or not made up.  
5806 Narrow woven fabrics, other than goods of Heading 5807; narrow fabrics consisting of warp 
without weft assembled by means of an adhesive (bolducs).
5807 Labels, badges, and similar articles of textile materials, in the piece,  in strips or cut to shape or 
size, not embroidered.  
5808 Braids in the piece; ornamental trimmings in the piece, without embroidery, other than knitted or crocheted; tassels, pompons and similar articles.
5810 Embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs.
5811 00 
000 0 Quilted textile fabrics in piece, consisting of one or a few layers of textil e materials, sewed with a 
soft layer or connected in another way, except for embroidery under HS code 5810.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 345 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
5901 Textile fabrics coated with gum or  amylaceous substances, of a kind  used for the outer covers of 
books or the like; tracing cloth; prepared painti ng canvas; buckram and similar stiffened textile 
fabrics of a kind used for hat foundations.
5902 Tyre cord fabric of high-tenacity yarn of nylon or other polyamides, poly esters or viscose rayon.
5903 Textile fabrics impregnated, coat ed, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of 
Heading 5902.
5904 Linoleum, whether or not cut to shape; floor coveri ngs consisting of a coating or covering applied 
to a textile backing, whether or not cut to shape.
5905 00  Wall carpets from textile products 
5906 Rubberized textile fabrics, other than those of Heading 5902.
5907 00  Textile products saturated or covered in anothe r way; painted fabrics fo r theatrical scenery, 
background scenery for art studios or similar fabrics.
5908 00 000 0
 Textile wicks, woven, braided or knitted for lamps, oil cooking stoves, lighters, candles or similar products; gas mantle and tubular textile fabr ic for gas mantles, coated or not coated
 
5909 00  Textile hoses and similar textile tubes with pads, trimming or accessories from other materials or 
without thereof  
5910 00 000 0
 Conveyor belt or drive belt or belting from textile materials, coat ed or not coated, covered or not 
covered, laminated  with plastics or not laminated, or armoured with metal or other material
5911 Textile products and articles, for technical uses, specified in Note 7 to this Chapter.  
6001 Pile fabrics, including "long-pile" fabric s and terry fabrics, knitted or crocheted.  
6002 Knitted or crocheted fabric s, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, containing by weight 5% or more of 
elastomeric yarn or rubber thread, other than fabrics of Heading 6001.
6003 Knitted or crocheted fabrics, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, other than fabrics of Headings 6001 or 6002.
 
6004 Knitted or crocheted fabric s, of a width not exceeding 30 cm, containing by weight 5% or more of 
elastomeric yarn or rubber thread, other than fabrics of Heading 6001.
6005 Raschel lace (including crocheted fabrics for manufacture of lace), other than fabrics of 
Headings 6001– 6004.  
6006 Other knitted or crocheted fabrics.
6101 Men's or boys' overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks , anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, 
wind-jackets and similar articles, knitted or crocheted, other than those of Heading 6103.  
6102 Women's or girls' overcoats, car-coats, cape s, cloaks, anoraks (including ski-jackets), 
wind-cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles, knitted or crocheted, other than those of Heading 6104.
 
6103 Men's or boys' suits, ensembles, jackets, blazer s, trousers, bib and brac e overalls, breeches and 
shorts (other than swimwear), knitted or crocheted.
6104 Women's or girls' suits, ensembles, jackets, blaze rs, dresses, skirts, divided skirts, trousers, bib- 
and-brace overalls, breeches and shorts (other than swim wear), knitted or crocheted.  
6105 Men's or boys' shirts, knitted or crocheted.
6106 Women's or girls' blouses, shirts, and shirt– blouses, knitted or crocheted.  
6107 Men's or boys' underpants, briefs, nightshirts, pyjamas, bathrobes, dressing gowns and similar 
articles, knitted or crocheted.  
6108 Women's or girls' slips, petticoats, briefs, pant ies, nightdresses, pyjama s, negliges, bathrobes, 
dressing gowns and similar ar ticles, knitted or crocheted.
6109 T–shirts, singlets and other vests, knitted or crocheted.
6110 Jerseys, pullovers, cardigans, waistcoats and similar articles, knitted or crocheted.  
6111 Babies' garments and clothing a ccessories, knitted or crocheted.
6112 Track suits, ski suits and swimwear, knitted or crocheted.
6113 00  Clothes from textile machine or hand-knitted fabric
6114 Other garments, knitted or crocheted.
6115 Pantyhose, tights, stockings, socks and other ho siery, including graduated compression hosiery 
(for example, stockings for varicose veins) an d footwear without appl ied soles, knitted or 
crocheted.  
6116 Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted, or crocheted.
6117 Other made up clothing accessories, knitted or cr ocheted; knitted or croc heted parts of garments 
or of clothing accessories.  
6201 Men's or boys' overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks , anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-cheaters, 
wind-jackets and similar articles, other than those of Heading 6203.
6202 Women's or girls' overcoats, car-coats, capes,  cloaks, anoraks (including ski-jackets), wind-
cheaters, wind-jackets and similar articles, other than those of Heading 6204.  
6203 Men's or boys' suits, ensembles, jackets, blazer s, trousers, bib and brac e overalls, breeches and 
shorts (other than swimwear).
6204 Women's or girls' suits, ensembles, jackets, blaze rs, dresses, skirts, divided skirts, trousers, bib 
and brace overalls, breeches and shorts (other than swimwear).
6205 Men's and boys' shirts.  
6206 Women's or girls' blouses, shirts and shirt-blouses.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 346 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
6207 Men's or boys' singlets and other vests, underp ants, briefs, nightshirts,  pyjamas, bathrobes, 
dressing gowns and similar articles.
6208 Women's and girls' singlets and other vests, sl ips, petticoats, briefs, panties, nightdresses, 
pyjamas, negliges, bathrobes, dres sing gowns and similar articles.
6209 Babies' garments and clothing accessories.
6210 Garments, made up of fabrics of Headings 5602, 5603, 5903, 5906 or 5907.  
6211 Track suits, ski suits and swimwear; other garments.
6212 Brassieres, girdles, corsets, braces, suspenders, garters and similar articles and parts thereof, 
whether or not knitted or crocheted.
6213 Handkerchiefs.
6214 Shawls, scarves, mufflers, mantillas, veils and the like.
6215 Ties, bow ties and cravats.  
6216 00 000 0
 Gloves and mittens.  
6217 Other made-up clothing accessories ; parts of garments or of clothing accessories, other than 
those of Heading 6212.  
6301 Blankets and travelling rugs.  
6302 Bed linen, table linen, toilet linen and kitchen linen.
6303 Curtains (including drapes) and interi or blinds; curtain or bed valances.
6304 Other furnishing articles excluding those of Heading 9404.
6305 Sacks and bags, of a kind used for the packing goods.
6306 Tarpaulins, awnings and sunblinds; tents; sails fo r boats, sailboards or landcraft; camping goods.
6307 Other made-up articles, in cluding dre ss patterns.
6308 
00 000 0  Sets of fabrics and yarn or threads with accesso ries or without thereof,  for carpets, tapestry, 
embroidered table clothes or na pkins or similar textile products, packed for retail sale.  
6309 
00 000 0  Used clothes and other used products
6310 Used or new rags, scrap twine, cordage, rope and cables and worn out articles of twine, cordage, 
rope or cables, of textile materials.
6403 Footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leat her or composition leather and uppers of leather.
6404 Footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leat her or composition leather and uppers of textile 
materials.  
6405 Other footwear.  
6806 Slag wool, rock wool and similar mineral wools; exfoliated vermiculite, expanded clays, foamed 
slag and similar expanded mineral materials; mixtures and articles of heat-insulating, 
sound-insulating or sound-absorbing mineral materi als, other than those of Heading 6811 or 6812 
or of Chapter 69.  
6907 Unglazed ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall tiles; unglazed ceramic mosaic cubes and the like, whether or not on a backing.
6908 Glazed ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall ti les; glazed ceramic mosaic cubes and the like, 
whether or not on a backing.  
6909 Ceramic wares for laboratory, chemical or other te chnical uses; ceramic troughs, tubs and similar 
receptacles of kind used in agriculture; ceramic po ts, jars and similar articl es of kind used for the 
conveyance or packing of goods. ceramic wares  for laboratory, chemical or other technical uses.
6910 Ceramic sinks, wash basins, wash basin pedestals, baths, bidets, water closet pans, flushing 
cisterns, urinals and similar sanitary fixtures.
6911 Tableware, kitchenware, other household articles  and toilet articles, of porcelain or china.  
7005 Float glass and surface ground or polished glass, in sheets, whether or not having an absorbent, 
reflecting or non-reflecting la yer, but not otherwise worked.
7009 Glass mirrors, whether or not frame d, including rear-view mirrors.
7010 Carboys, bottles, flasks, jars, pots, phials, ampoules  and other containers, of glass, of a kind used 
for the conveyance or packing of goods; preser ving jars of glass; st oppers, lids and other 
closures, of glass.  
7013 Glassware of a kind used for table, kitchen, toil et, office, indoor decorati on or similar purposes 
(other than that of Heading 7010 or 7018).
7016 Paving blocks, slabs, bricks, squares, tiles and ot her articles of pressed or  moulded glass, whether 
or not wired, of a kind used for building or co nstruction purposes; glass cubes and other glass 
small wares, whether or not on a backing, for mosaics or similar decora tive purposes; leaded 
lights and the like; multicellular or foam glass in  blocks, panels, plates, shells or similar forms.
7019 Glass fibres (including glass wool) and articles  thereof (for example,  yarn, woven fabrics).  
7105 Dust and powder of natural or synthe tic precious or semi-precious stones.  
7204 Ferrous waste and scrap; remelting scrap ingots of iron or steel.
7209 Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, cold-rolled 
(cold-reduced), not clad, plated or coated.
7210 Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, clad, plated or coated.
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 347 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
7213 Bars and rods, hot-rolled, in irregularly wound coils, of iron or non-alloy steel.  
7214 Other bars and rods of iron or  non-alloy steel, not further worked than forged, hot-rolled, hot-
drawn or hot-extruded but including those twisted after rolling.
7216 Angles, shapes, and sections of iron or non-alloy steel.
7219 Flat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of 600 mm or more.
7220 Flat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of less than 600 mm.
7225 Flat-rolled products of other alloy st eel, of a width of 600 mm or more.
7227 Bars and rods, hot-rolled, in irregula rly wound coils, of other alloy steel.
7228 Other bars and rods of other allo y steel; angles, shapes and sections, of other alloy steel; hollow 
drill bars and rods, of alloy or non-alloy steel.
7303 00  Tubes, pipes and hollow pr ofiles, of iron casting.
7304 Tubes, pipes and hollow profil es, seamless, of iron (other than cast iron) or steel.  
7305 Other tubes and pipes (for example, welded, ri veted or similarly closed), with circular 
cross-sections and external diameter of which exceeds 406.4 mm, of iron or steel.  
7306 Other tubes, pipes and hollow prof iles (for example, open seam or welded, riveted, or similarly 
closed), of iron or steel.  
7404 00  Copper wastes and scrabs.  
7408 Copper wire.
7410 Copper foil (whether or not printed or backed with  paper, paperboard, plastics or similar backing 
materials) of a thickness (excluding any backing) not exceeding 0.15 mm.  
7606 Aluminium plates, sheets and strip, of a thickness exceeding 0.2 mm.
7607 Aluminium foil (whether or not printed or backed  with paper, paperboard, plastics or similar 
backing materials), of a thickness (exclu ding any backing) not exceeding 0.2 mm.  
7608 Aluminium tubes and pipes.  
8104 Magnesium and articles thereof, including waste and scrap.
8302 Base metal mountings, fittings and similar articl es suitable for furnitur e, doors, staircases, 
windows, blinds, coachwork, saddlery, trunks, ches ts, caskets or the like; base metal hat-racks, 
hat-pegs, brackets and si milar fixtures; castors with mountings of base metal; automatic door 
closers of base metal.  
8309 Stoppers, caps and lids (including crown corks, screw caps and pouring stoppers), capsules for 
bottles, threaded bungs, bung covers, seals, and other packing accessories, of base metal.  
8407 Spark-ignition reciprocating or rotary  internal combustion piston engines.  
8408 Compression-ignition, internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel engines).  
8415 Air conditioning machines, comprising a moto r-driven fan and elements for changing the 
temperature and humidity, including those machin es in which humidity cannot be separately 
regulated.  
8418 Refrigerators, freezers and other refrigerating or freezing equipment, electric or other; heat 
pumps other than air conditioning machines of Heading 8415.
8424 Mechanical appliances (whether or not hand-ope rated) for projecting, dispersing or spraying 
liquids or powders; fire extinguishers, whether or  not charged; spray guns  and similar appliances; 
steam or sand blasting machines and similar jet projecting machines.
8428 Other lifting, handling, loading or unloading machin ery (for example, lifts, escalators, conveyors, 
teleferics).  
8432 Agricultural, horticultural or forestry machiner y for soil preparation or cultivation; lawn or 
sports-ground rollers.  
8433 Harvesting or threshing machinery, including straw or fodder balers; grass or hay mowers; 
machines for cleaning, sorting or grading eggs, fru it or other agricultural  produce, other than 
machinery of Heading 8437.  
8434 Milking machines and dairy machinery.
8443 Printing machinery used for printi ng by means of plates, cylinders  and other printing components 
of Heading 8442; other printers, copying mach ines and facsimile machines, whether or not 
combined; parts and accessories thereof.
8450 Household or laundry-type washing machines, in cluding machines which both wash and dry.
8451 Machinery (other than machines of Heading 8450) for washing, cleaning, wringing, drying, 
ironing, pressing (including fusing presses), bl eaching, dyeing, dressing, finishing, coating or 
impregnating textile yarns, fabrics, or made up  textile articles and machines for applying the 
paste to the base fabric or other support used in the manufacture of floor coverings such as 
linoleum; machines for reeling, unreeling, fo lding, cutting or pi nking textile fabrics.  
8452 Sewing machines, other than book-sewing machines  of Heading 8440; furniture, bases and covers 
specially designed for sewing machines; sewing machine needles.
8455 Metal-rolling mills and rolls therefore.
8456 Machine-tools for working any materi al by removal of material, by laser or other light or photon 
beam, ultrasonic, electro-discharge, electro-chem ical, electron beam, io n-beam or plasma arc 
processes.  
8457 Machining centres, unit construction machines (single station) and multi-station transfer machines for working metal.
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 348 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
8458 Lathes (including turning ce ntres), for removing metal.
8459 Machine-tools (including way-type unit head machines) for drilling, boring, milling, threading or 
tapping by removing metal, other than lathes  (including turning centres) of Heading 8458.  
8460 Machine-tools for deburring, sharpening, grinding, honing, lapping, polishing or otherwise finishing 
metal or cermets by means of gr inding stones, abrasives or polishing products, other than gear 
cutting, gear grinding or gear finishing machines of Heading 8461.
8461 Machine-tools for planing, shaping, slotting, broa ching, gear cutting, gear grinding or gear 
finishing, sawing, cutting-off an d other machine-tools working by removing metal or  cermets, not 
elsewhere specified or included.
8462 Machine-tools (including presse s) for working metal by forging, hammering or die-stamping; 
machine-tools (including presses) for working metal by bending, fold ing, straightening, flattening, 
shearing, punching or notching; presses for work ing metal or metal carbides, not specified above.
8474 Machinery for sorting, washing, crushing, grinding, mixing or kneading earth, stone, ores or other 
mineral substances, in solid (including powder or paste) form; machin ery for agglomerating, 
shaping or moulding solid mineral fuels, ceramic paste, unhardened cements, plastering materials or other mineral products in powder or paste fo rm; machines for forming foundry moulds of sand.
8481 Taps, cocks, valves and similar app liances for pipes, boiler shells, tanks, vats or the like, including 
pressure-reducing valves and thermostatically controlled valves.
8482 Ball or roller bearings.  
8501 Electric motors and generators  (excluding generating sets).
8502 Electric generating sets and rotary converters.
8504 Electrical transformers, static converters  (for example, rect ifiers) and inductors.  
8505 Electro-magnets; permanent magn ets and articles intended to become permanent magnets after 
magnetisation; electro-magnetic  or permanent magn et chucks, clamps and similar holding 
devices; electro-magnetic couplings, clutches and brakes; electro-magnetic lifting heads.  
8507 Electric accumulators, including separators ther efore, whether or not rectangular (including 
square).  
8508 Vacuum cleaners.  
8516 Electric instantaneous or storage water heaters and immersion heaters; electric space heating apparatus and soil heating apparatus; electro-ther mic hair-dressing apparatus (for example, hair 
dryers, hair curlers, curling tong heaters) an d hand dryers; electric smoothing irons; other 
electro-thermic appliances of a kind used for dome stic purposes; electric heating resistors, other 
than those of Heading 8545.
 
8517 Telephone sets, including telephones for cellular  networks or for other wireless networks; other 
apparatus for the transmission or reception of voic e, images or other data, including apparatus for 
communication in a wired or wireless network (suc h as a local or wide area network), other than 
transmission or reception apparatus of Heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528.  
8519 Sound recording or sound reproducing apparatus.
8521 Video recording or reproducing apparatus, whether or not incorporating a video tuner.  
8525 Transmission apparatus for radio-broadcasting or television, whether or not incorporating 
reception apparatus or sound recording or reprod ucing apparatus; televi sion cameras, digital 
cameras and video camera recorders.
8528 Monitors and projectors, not inco rporating television reception ap paratus; reception apparatus for 
television, whether or not incorporating radio-broadcast receivers or sound or video recording or reproducing apparatus.
 
8529 Parts suitable for use solely or principally with the apparatus of Headings 8525 to 8528.  
8537 Boards, panels, consoles, desks, cabinets and ot her bases, equipped with two or more apparatus 
of Heading 8535 or 8536, for electric control or  distribution of electricity, including those 
incorporating instruments or apparatus of Chap ter 90, and numerical co ntrol apparatus, other 
than switching apparatus of Heading 8517.
8539 Electric filament or discharge lamps, including sealed-beam lamp units and ultra-violet or infra-red lamps; arc-lamps.
 
8542 Electronic integrated circuits.  
8544 Insulated (including enamelled or  anodised) wire, cable (includi ng co-axial cable) and other 
insulated electric conductors, whether or not fitted  with connectors; optical fibre cables, made up 
of individually sheathed fibres, whether or not as sembled with electric cond uctors or fitted with 
connectors.  
8545 Carbon electrodes, carbon brushes, lamp carbons,  battery carbons and other articles of graphite 
or other carbon, with or without metal, of a kind used for electrical purposes.  
8603 Self-propelled railway or tramway coaches, vans and trucks, other than those of Heading 8604.
8605 00 
000 Passenger non-self-propelled railway or tram ca rs; baggage, mail o other specialized railway or 
tram non-self-propelled cars (except for included under tariff lines 8604).  
8701 Tractors (other than tractors of Heading 8709).
8702 Motor vehicles for the transport of ten or more persons, including the driver.  
8703 Motor cars and other motor vehicles principally de signed for the transport of persons (other than 
those of Heading 8702), including station wagons and racing cars.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 349 - 
 
  CET Code  Description of products  
8704 Motor vehicles for the transport of goods.
8705 Special purpose motor vehicles, other than those pr incipally designed for the transport of persons 
or goods (for example, breakdown lorries, crane lo rries, fire fighting ve hicles, concrete-mixer 
lorries, road-sweeper lorries, spraying lorries, mo bile workshops, mobile radiological units).
8708 Parts and accessories of the motor vehicles of Headings 8701 to 8705.
8716 Trailers and semi-trailers; other vehicles, not mechanically propelled; parts thereof.  
8802 Other aircraft (for exam ple, helicopters, aeroplanes); spac ecraft (including satellites) and 
suborbital and spacec raft launch vehicles.
9001 Optical fibres and optical fibre bundles; optical fibre cables other than those of Heading 8544; 
sheets and plates of polarising material; lenses  (including contact lenses), prisms, mirrors and 
other optical elements, of any material, unmounted, other than such elements of glass not optically worked.
 
9003 Frames and mountings for spectacles, goggles or the like and parts thereof.  
9006 Photographic (other than cinematographic) ca meras; photographic flashlight apparatus and 
flashbulbs other than discharge lamps of Heading 8539.
9013 Liquid-crystal devices not constituting articles pr ovided for more specifically in other headings; 
lasers, other than laser diodes; other optical appliances and instruments, not specified or included elsewhere in this Chapter.
 
9016 00  Weight scale with balance sensitivity of 0,05 grams or more, with weights or without thereof.
9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, othe r electro-medical apparatus an d sight-testing instruments.
 
9022 Apparatus based on the use of X-rays or of alph a, beta or gamma radiations, whether or not for 
medical, surgical, dental or ve terinary uses, including radiogra phy or radiotherapy apparatus, 
X-ray tubes and other X-ray generators, high-ten sion generators, control panels and desks, 
screens, examination or treatment tables, chairs  and the like.– apparatus based on the use of 
X-rays, whether or not fo r medical, surgical, dental or veteri nary uses, including radiography or 
radiotherapy apparatus.  
9025 Hydrometers and similar floating instrument s, thermometers, pyro meters, barometers, 
hygrometers and psychrometers, recording or not and any comb ination of these instruments.
9028 Gas, liquid or electricity suppl y or production meters, includin g calibrating meters therefore.
9401 Seats (other than those of Heading 9402), whether or not convertible into beds, and parts 
thereof.  
9402 Medical, surgical, dental or ve terinary furniture (for example,  operating tables, examination 
tables, hospital beds  with mechanical fittings, dentists' chairs); barbers' chairs and similar chairs, 
having rotating as well as both  reclining and elevating movements;  parts of the foregoing articles.
9403 Other furniture and parts thereof.
9406 00  Assembled building construction.
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 350 - 
 
  ANNEX 7 
List of Developing Countries Beneficiarie s of the Tariff Preferences System of the 
Eurasian Economic Union 
1. Albania 
2. Algeria 
3. Anguilla 
4. Antigua and Barbuda 
5. Argentina 
6. Aruba 
7. The Bahamas 
8. Bahrain, Kingdom of 
9. Barbados 
10. Belize 
11. Bermuda 
12. Bolivia, Plurinational State of 
13. Bosnia and Herzegovina 
14. Botswana 
15. Brazil 
16. British Virgin Islands 
17. Brunei Darussalam 
18. Cameroon 
19. Cabo Verde 
20. Cayman Islands 
21. Chile 
22. China 
23. Colombia 
24. Cook Islands 
25. Costa Rica 
26. Côte d'Ivoire 
27. Croatia 
28. Cuba 
29. Democratic Republic of the Congo 
30. Dominica 
31. Dominican Republic 
32. Ecuador 
33. Egypt 
34. Fiji 
35. Gabon 
36. Ghana 
37. Grenada 
38. Guatemala 
39. Guyana 
40. Honduras 
41. Hong Kong, China 
42. India 
43. Indonesia 
44. Iran, Islamic Republic of 
45. Iraq 
46. Jamaica 
47. Jordan 
48. Kenya 
49. Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of 
50. Korea, Democratic People's Republic 
of 
51. Korea, Republic of 
52. Kuwait, the State of 
53. Lebanon  
54. Libya 
55. The former Yugoslav Republic of 
Macedonia (FYROM) 56. Malaysia 
57. Marshall Islands 
58. Mauritius 
59. Mexico 
60. Micronesia, Federative States of 
61. Mongolia 
62. Montenegro 
63. Montserrat 
64. Morocco 
65. Namibia 
66. Nauru, Republic of 
67. Nicaragua 
68. Nigeria 
69. Niue 
70. Oman 
71. Pakistan 
72. Panama 
73. Papua New Guinea 
74. Paraguay 
75. Peru 
76. Philippines 
77. Qatar 
78. Saint-Helena 
79. Salvador 
80. Serbia 
81. Seychelles 
82. Singapore 
83. South Africa 
84. Sri Lanka 
85. St. Kitts and Nevis 
86. St. Lucia 
87. St. Vincent and the Grenadines 
88. Suriname 
89. Swaziland 
90. Syria 
91. Thailand 
92. The Turks and Caicos Islands 
93. Tokelau 
94. Tonga 
95. Trinidad and Tobago 
96. Tunisia 
97. Turkey 
98. United Arab Emirates 
99. Uruguay 
100.  Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of  
101.  Viet Nam 
102.  Zimbabwe WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 351 - 
 
  ANNEX 8 
List of Least-developed Countries Beneficiar ies of the Tariff Preferences System of the 
Eurasian Economic Union 
1. Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of 
2. Angola, Republic of 
3. Bangladesh 
4. Benin, Republic of 
5. Bhutan 
6. Burkina Faso 
7. Burundi 
8. Cambodia 
9. Central African Republic 
10. Chad 
11. Comoros, Union of the 
12. Congo, Democratic Republic of 
13. Djibouti, Republic of 
14. Equatorial Guinea 
15. Eritrea 
16. Ethiopia   
17. The Gambia 
18. Guinea 
19. Guinea Bissau 
20. Haiti 
21. Kiribati, Republic of 
22. Lao People's Democratic Republic 
23. Lesotho 
24. Liberia 
25. Madagascar 
26. Malawi 
27. Maldives 
28. Mali 
29. Mauritania 
30. Mozambique 
31. Myanmar, Union of 
32. Nepal 
33. Niger 
34. Rwanda 
35. Samoa, Independent State of 
36. Sao Tomé and Principe  
37. Senegal, Republic of 
38. Sierra Leone 
39. Solomon Islands 
40. Somalia 
41. Sudan 
42. Tanzania 
43. Timor-Leste 
44. Togo 
45. Tuvalu 
46. Uganda 
47. Vanuatu 
48. Yemen, Republic of 
49. Zambia WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 352 - 
 
  ANNEX 9 
List of Goods Originating and Imported from  Developing and Least-Developed Countries 
Subject to Tariff Preferences 
HS Code  Name of goods *
02 Meat and meat by-products 
03 (except 0305)  Fish and shellfish, clams and other sea invertebrate animals (except for sturgeon 
and salmon fish, and their caviar)
04 Milk products; birds eg gs; natural honey; foodstuffs of animal origin not named or 
included in other positions 
05 Foodstuffs of animal origin not na med or included in other positions  
06 Trees and other plants; bulb, roots and other parts of plants; cut flowers and 
decorative plants 
07 Vegetables and certain edible root and tuber crops 
08 Edible fruit and nuts; citr us peel or melon peel 
09 Coffee, tea, mate or Paraguayan tea, and spices 
1006 Rice 
11 Products of flour-and-cereals industry ; grist; farina; inulin; wheat gluten  
12 Olive seeds and fruits; other seeds, fruits and grain; herbs and plants for technical 
purposes; straw and forage 
13 Lac; gums, resins and other plant sap and extracts
14 Plant materials for braiding; other produc ts of vegetable origin, not named or 
included in other positions 
15 (except 1509, 1517 – 1522 00)
 Fats and oils of animal or vegetable origin   and their split products; finished edible 
fats; waxes of animal or vegetable origin
16 Finished products of meat, fish or shellfish, clams and other sea invertebrate animals 
 
1801 00 000 0  Cacao-beans, whole or granul ated, unroasted or roasted 
1802 00 000 0  Husks, peel and other waste products of cacao 
20 (except 
2001 10 000 0, 2009 50, 2009 71, 2009 79)
 Processed products of vegetables, fru it, nuts or other parts of plants  
2103 Products for sauce making and ready sauc es; flavoring agents and mixed spices; 
ground mustard and ready mustard 
2104 Soups and ready-to-use stocks, homoge nized ingredients of food products  
2401 Tobacco plants; tobacco wastes
25 (except 2501 00 91, 
2529 21 000 0, 2529 22 000 0)
 Salt; sulphur; soils and stones; plastering materials, lime and cement  
26 Ores, slag and cinders 
3003 Pharmaceutical products (except for goods of position 3002, 3005 or 3006), 
consisting of mixtures of two or more components, for therapeutic and preventive 
purposes, but not packaged in dosage  forms or packaged for retail sale  
32 Tannic and dye extracts; tannins and their derivatives; coloring  substances; paints 
and lacquers; filling paints and ot her kinds of mastic; printing ink  
3301, 3302  Volatile oils; resinoids; mixtures of aromatic substances 
3402 Surface-active organic substances (except soap); Surface-active substances, 
detergents (including secondary detergents ) and cleaners, that contain or do not 
contain soap (except goods of position 3401)
35 Protein substances; modified starch; glue; ferments
3923 Products for transportation or packaging of goods, made of plasti c; corks, caps and 
other closure items 
4001 Natural rubber, balata, gutta-percha, guayule,  chicle and the like natural resins in 
original form or in the fo rm of plates or strips 
4403 41 000 0, 4403 49  Rough timber of exotics
4407 21 – 4407 29  Ripped timber of exotics
4420 Mosaic and enchased wood work; wooden caskets and boxes for jewelry or cutlery 
or the like tools; wooden statuettes and other decorations; w ooden furniture, not 
indicated in group 94
4421 Other wooden work
45 Cork and items made of cork 
46 Items made of straw and other materials for platting; wickerwork  
50 Silk 
5101 Wool, not carded or combed 
5201 00  Cotton fiber, not carded or combed 
53 Other plant textile fibers; span cotton and span cotton tissues  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 353 - 
 
  HS Code  Name of goods *
56 Cotton, felt and unwoven textile; special ya rn; twines, cords, ropes, tows and items 
made of them  
5701 Knotted carpets and other textile floor  carpets, finished or unfinished  
5702 10 000 0  "Kilim", "Sumakh", "Kermani" carpets and the like hand-made carpets  
5705 00 800 0  Carpets and other textile floor carpets, finish ed or unfinished, made of wool or thin 
animal hair**, ***
5808 Nubbly braid; nubbly trimmings without embroidery, except hand-knitted and 
machine-knitted; tassels, pompons and the like items 
6702 90 000 0  Artificial flowers, leaves an d fruits and their pa rts; products of artificial flowers, 
leaves or fruits, made of other materials
68 Products made of stone, plaster, ceme nt, asbestos, mica or the like materials
6913 Statuettes and other ceramic decorations
6914 Other ceramic products
7018 10  Glass beads, pearl-like products, precious or semi-precious stones and the like 
products of glass
7117 Imitation jewellery
9401 51 000 0, 9401 59 000 0
 Seat furniture made of reed, willow, bamboo or the like materials  
9403 81 000 0, 9403 89 000 0
 Furniture made of other materials, including reed, willow, bamboo or the like materials 
 
9403 90 900 0  Parts of furniture made of other materials 
9601 Finished and good for carving of ivory, bo ne, tortoise shell, an tler, staghorn, coral 
and other materials of animal origin and products made of these materials 
(including molded products) 
9602 00 000 0  Finished materials of vegetable or minera l origin, good for carving, and products 
made of these materials; molded or carved  wax, stearine, natura l resins or natural 
rubber products and other molded or carved  products, not indicated or included in 
other positions; processed uncured gelatin (except gelatin of position 3503) and products of uncured gelatin 
9603 Brooms, brushes (including brushes that  are parts of mechanisms, devices or 
vehicles), mechanical hand brush for fl oor cleaning, mops and feather dusters; 
bundles for making brooms or brushes; pa ds and rollers for paint; rubber mops 
(except rubber rollers for moisture removal)
9604 00 000 0  Cribbles and hand sieves 
9606 Buttons, snaps, button mould and other parts of these items  
9609 Pencils (except indicated in position 9608), color pencils, pencil lead, crayons, 
charcoal pencils, chalk for writing or drawing and tailors chalk  
9614 00  Smoking pipes (including cu p-shaped parts), cigar-holders and cigarette-holders 
and their parts 
9615 11 000 0  Ebonite or plastic combs and the like items
9617 00 000 0  Thermos and other vacuum vessels assembled; their parts, except glass bulbs
97 Artwork, collection items and antiques  
* Goods in this list are defined only by HS codes;  names of goods are given for convenience.      
** Tariff preferences are granted only for hand-made carpets. *** It is necessary to follow both the cust oms commodity code, and name of the goods.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 354 - ANNEX 10 
List of Goods and Rates which Are Subject to  Application of Import Customs Duty Rates 
Different from the CET by One of the CU Parties during the Transitional Period 
HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3001 
 Glands and other organs for organo-therapeutic uses, dried, whethe r or not powdered; extracts of glands or other organs or of t heir secretions for organo-therapeutic 
uses; heparin and its salts; other human or animal substances prepared for therapeutic or prophylactic uses, not elsewhere spec ified or included: 
3001 20 - extracts of glands or othe r organs or of their secretions: 
3001 20 100 0 - - of human origin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3001 20 900 0 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3001 90 - other: 
3001 90 200 0 - - of human origin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3001 90 980 0 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 
 Human blood; animal blood prepared for therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic uses; antisera and other blood fractions and mod ified immunological products, whether 
or not obtained by means of biotechnological processes; vaccines , toxins, cultures of microorganisms (excluding yeasts) and sim ilar products: 
3002 10 - antisera and other blood fractions and modified immunolo gical products, whether or not obtained by means of biotechno logical processes: 
3002 10 100 - - antisera: 
3002 10 100 1 - - - antisera against serpent's 
poison 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 10 100 9 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3002 10 910 0 - - - haemoglobin, blood globulins 
and serum globulins 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - - other: 
3002 10 950 - - - - of human origin: 
3002 10 950 1 - - - - - factors of coagulation of 
human blood 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 10 950 9 - - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 10 990 0 - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 - vaccines for human medicine: 
3002 20 000 1 - - - vaccines against German 
measles 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 2 - - - vaccines against Hepatitus of 
form B 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3002 20 000 9 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 30 000 0 - vaccines for veterinary medicine 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 - other: 
3002 90 100 0 - - human blood 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 300 0 - - animal blood prepared for 
therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic uses 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 500 0 - cultures of microorganisms 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3002 90 900 0 - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 Medicaments (excluding goods of Heading 3002, 3005 or 3006) consisting of mixed or unmixed products for therapeutic or pro phylactic uses, put up in measured doses 
(including those in the form of transdermal administrati on systems) or in forms or packings for retail sale: 
3004 10 000 - containing penicillins or derivatives thereof, with  a penicillanic acid structure, or streptomicins or their deri vatives:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 355 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3004 10 000 1 - - containing as active substances, 
only ampicillinetryhydratem or ampicilline-sodium salt or salts of benzylpenicillin and compounds or karbenicillin or oxacillin or phenoxymethylpenicillin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - put up in measured doses or in forms but not in packings for retail sale: 
3004 10 000 2 - - - containing as active 
substances, only streptomicin sulphate  0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 10 000 3 - - - - other 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3004 10  000 9 - - other:  0 0 5 CET duty rate 
3004 20 000 - containing other antibiotics: 
3004 20 000 1 - - - containing as active 
substances, only amickacin or gentamicin or grizeofulvin or doxycyklin or doksorubycin or kanamycin or fusidin acid and its sodium salt or laevomycetin (chloramphenicol) and its salts or lincomycin or methacyclin or nistatin or rifampicin or cephazolin or cep 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 20 000 2 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 - - other: 
3004 20 000 3 - - - containing as active 
substances only erytromicin or kanamicin sulphate 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 20 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
 -Containing hormones or other 
compounds under tariff line 2937 but not containing antibiotics     
3004 32 000 - - containing adrenal cortical hormones, derivatives thereof: 
3004 32 000 1 - - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail: 0 0 5 CET duty rate 
3004 32 000 9 - - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 39 000 0 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 40 000 - containing alkaloids or derivatives thereof but no t containing hormones, other products of heading 2937 or antibi otics: 
3004 40 000 1 - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail:- - - koffein- benzoat of sodium or nikotinat of csantinol or papaverin or pilokarpin or teobromin or teophillamin 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 40 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 50 000 - other medicaments containing vitamins or other products of Heading 2936:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 356 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
3004 50 000 1 - - put up in forms or in packings 
of a kind sold by retail: - - - other medicaments containing ascorbini acid (vitamin C) or nicotin acid or cokarboxilase or nikotinamid or piridoxin or tiamin and its salts (vitamin B1) or cianokobalamin (vitamin B12) 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 50 000 9 - - - other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3004 90 000 0 other 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 Pharmaceutical goods specified in Note 4 to this Chapter: 
3006 10 - sterile surgical catgut, similar sterile suture materials (including sterile absorbable surgical or dental yarns) and  sterile tissue adhesives for surgical wound closure; 
sterile laminaria and sterile laminaria tents; sterile absorbable surgical or dental haemostatics; sterile surgical or dental a dhesion barriers, whether or not absorbable: 
3006 10 100 0 - - sterile surgical catgut 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3006 10 300 0 - - sterile surgical or  dental  
adhesion barriers, whether or not absorbable 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 10 900 0 - - other 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
3006 20 000 0 - blood- grouping reagents 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 30 000 0 - opacifying preparations for X-ray 
examinations; diagnostic reagents designed to be administered to the 
patient 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 40 000 0 - dental cements and other dental 
fillings; bone reconstruction cements 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 50 000 0 - first-aid boxes and kits 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 60 - chemical contraceptive preparations based on hormones, other compounds of heading 2937 or spermicides:  
3006 60 100 0 - - based on hormones or other 
compounds of heading 2937 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 60 900 0 - - based on spermicides 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3006 70 000 0 - gel preparations designed to be 
used in human or veterinary medicine as a lubricant for parts of 
the body for surgical operations or 
physical examinations or as a coupling agent between the body and medical instruments 0 0 0 CET duty rate  
 - other: 
3006 92 000 0 - - waste pharmaceuticals 0 0 5 CET duty rate  
3901 Polymers of ethylene, in primary forms: 
3901 20 - polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.94 or more: 
3901 20 900 0 - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
7607 Aluminium foil (whether or not printed or backed with pape r, paperboard, plastics or similar backing materials), of a thic kness (excluding any backing) not exceeding 
0.2 mm: 
  - not backed: 
7607 20 - backed: 
7607 20 100 0 - - of a thickness (excluding any 
backing) of less than 0.021 mm 5 CET duty rate 
 - - of a thickness (excluding any backing) of not less than 0.021 mm but not more than 0.2 mm  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 357 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
8603 Self- propelled railway or tramway coaches, vans  and trucks, other than those of Heading 8604: 
8603 10 000 - powered from an external source of electricity: 
8603 10 000 8 - - other 0 CET duty rate  
8603 90 000 0  - other 0 CET duty rate  
8604 00 000 0 Railway or tramway maintenance 
or service vehicles, whether or not self- propelled (for example, workshops, cranes, ballast tampers, trackliners, testing coaches and track inspection vehicles) 5 CET duty rate  
8605 00 000  Railway or tramway passenger coaches, not self- prop elled; luggage vans, post office coaches and other special pur pose railway or tramway coaches, not self- propelled 
(excluding those of heading 8604) 
- other 
8605 00 000 8 - other 5 CET duty rate  
8606 Railway or tramway goods vans and wagons, not self- propelled: 
8606 10 000 0 - tank wagons and the like 5 CET duty rate  
8606 30 000 0 - self- discharging vans and 
wagons, other than those of subheading Nos. 8606 10 or 8606 20 5 CET duty rate  
 - other: 
8606 91 - - covered and closed: 
8606 91 100 0 - - - specially designed for the 
transport of highly radioactive materials 5 CET duty rate  
8606 91 800 0 - - - other 5 CET duty rate  
8606 92 000 0 - - open, with non- removable 
sides of a height exceeding 60 cm 5 CET duty rate  
8606 99 000 0 - - other 5 CET duty rate  
9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental  or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, ot her electro-medical apparatus and sight-testing 
instruments: 
  - electro-diagnostic apparatus (including apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological para meters): 
9018 11 000 0 - - electro-cardiographs 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 19 - - other: 
9018 19 100 0 - - - monitoring apparatus for 
simultaneous monitoring of 2 or more parametres 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 - - syringes, with or without needles: 
9018 31 100 - - - of plastics: 
9018 31 100 1 - - - - for insulin of volume not 
exceeding 2 ml 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 100 9 - - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 900 - - - other: 
9018 31 900 1 - - - - for insulin of volume not 
exceeding 2 ml 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 31 900 9 - - - - other 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 32 - - tubular metal needles and needles for sutures: 
9018 32 100 0 - - - tubular metal needles 0 0 CET duty rate   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 358 - HS codes Product description 2012 2013 2014 2015 
9018 32 900 0 - - - needles for sutures 0 0 CET duty rate  
 - dental devices and appliances, 
other:    
9018 49 - - other: 
9018 49 100 0 - - - chisel, disks, drills, brushes 
used in dental drill engines 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 - other instruments and appliances: 
9018 90 200 0 - - endoscopes 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 500 - - transfusion apparatus: 
9018 90 500 1 - - - apparatus for taking and 
transfusion of blood, blood substitute and infusion solutions 0 0 CET duty rate  
9018 90 840 --other    
9018 90 840 1 - - - ultrasonic lithotripters 0 0 CET duty rate  
9022 Apparatus based on the use of X- rays or of alpha, beta or  gamma radiations, whether or not for medical, surgical, dental or veterinary uses, including radiography or 
radiotherapy apparatus, X- ray tubes and other X- ray generators , high-tension generators, control panels and desks, screens, e xamination or treatment tables, chairs 
and the like:  
 - apparatus based on the use of X- rays, whether or not for medical, surgical, dental or veterinary uses, including radiograph y or radiotherapy apparatus: 
9022 14 000 0 - - for medical, surgical, dental or 
veterinary uses 0 0 CET duty rate  
9406 00 Prefabricated buildings: 
 --from ferrous metals     
9406 00 310 0 - - - greenhouse 0 CET duty rate 
9406 00 800  - - from other materials     
9406 00 800 9 - - - other 0 CET duty rate 
 
 
 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 359 - 
 
  ANNEX 11 
Formulae for Allocation of TR Qs Volumes between Suppliers* 
1. Formulae for allocation of 25% of the established TRQs volumes among suppliers:  
 a)   
 
 
where q 9 is the TRQ volume of the supplier determined at Stage 1;  
Q is the TRQ volume; 
 b)   
 
 
where S 9  is the supplier's share (in percentage terms); 
VI is the supplier's volume for the fi rst year of the previous period; 
VII-9 is the supplier's volume for 9 months of the year prior to the year of TRQ establishment; 
V'I is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of  for the  first year of the previous period; 
V'II-9 is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of for 9 months of the year prior to the year of 
TRQ establishment. 
2. Formulae for allocation of 100% of the established TRQ volumes among suppliers (after 
deduction of volumes calculated in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Annex): 
 a)          
 
 
where q 12 is the TRQ volume established for the supplier determined at stage 2;  
Q is the volume of the established TRQ; 
 b) 
 
 
where S 12 is the share of the supplier (in percentage terms); 
VI is the supplier's volume for the fi rst year of the previous period;  
VII is the supplier's volume for the second year of the previous period; 
V'I is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of for the first year of the previous period;   
V'II is the total supplier's volume to the Republic of for the second year of the previous period. 
*Source: Resolution of the Government of No.269 "On Certain Issues of Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas 
Volumes for Importation of Certain Kinds of Meat" of 24 March 2011. q9= 0,25Q × S 9 
100% 
S9= VI + V II-9 
× 100 
V'I + V' II-9 
q12= Q × S 12 
–  q 9,  
100% 
S12= VI + V II 
× 100, 
V'I + V' II  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 360 - ANNEX 12 
Methodology of Calculation of Cust oms Fee Rates for Customs Escort 
 
No. Number of 
kilometres  Number of 
days spent 
in customs 
export (with 
average 
travelling of 
300 km).  Quantity of fuel 
used (in litres), 
was calculated 
pursuant to Rules 
on Standards for 
Use of Fuel (Order 
of Ministry of 
Transports of 
20 July 2001)Cost of fuel, 
in KZT (the 
average cost 
of 1 litre of 
fuel is taken 
as KZT 88 
as of 
3 Nov 2010)  Cost for cargo 
escort including 
travel allowances 
(per diem  and 
accommodation) and depreciation
 Costs of the 
second officer 
conducting 
escort 
(per annum and 
accommodation 
allowances)  Costs for return 
travel 
(fuel + 
depreciation) 
KZT The 
exchange 
rate – KZT 
per € as of 
3 Nov 2010  Total Costs 
(in €) 
1. 0-50 - 6 511 1,103 - 1,103 205.96 11  
2. 50-100  - 12 1,022 1,614 - 1,614 205.96 16  
3. 100-200  - 23 2,044 2,636 - 2,636 205.96 26  
4. 200-400  1.5 46 4,088 13,158 8,478 4,680 205.96 128  
5. 400-600  2.0 70 6,133 18,620 11,304 6,725 205.96 178  
6. 600-800  3.0 93 8,177 29,734 19,782 8,769 205.96 283  
7. 800-1,000  3.5 116 10,221 40,257 28,260 10,813 205.96 385  
8. 1000-1,500  5.0 174 15,332 55,029 36,738 15,924 205.96 523  
9. 1,500-2,000  7.0 232 20,442 78,279 53,694 21,034 205.96 743  
10. 2,000-2,500  8.5 290 25,553 92,459 62,172 26,145 205.96 878  
 
Calculation of depreciation  was based on the widely used "Niva" automobile: 
- Average price of the car – KZT 1,440,000; - Per annum  depreciation rate – 15%; 
- 1,440,000*15/100 = 216,000; and - 216,000/365days = KZT 592 per day.  Pursuant to limits established in the 2006 Republican budget: - Per diem  = KZT 2,826; and 
- Accommodation = KZT 5,652. 
 Source:  Government Resolution No. 24 "On Adoption of Cust oms Fee Rates Levied by Customs Bodies" of 21 January 2011. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 361 - 
 
  ANNEX 13(A) 
Goods (works, services) with sales turn over exempt from the payment of VAT 
Sales turnover of the following goods, works, and se rvices shall be exempt from value-added tax:   
1. State marks of postal payment; 
2. Excise tax stamps (accounting and control st amps intended for marking excisable goods in 
accordance with Article 653 of this Code); 
3. Services rendered by authorised State bodies in connection with which the State duty is 
collected; 
4. Property purchased for public use in accord ance with the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan; 
5. Main assets, investments in real estate, intangible and biological assets which are 
transferred on the gratuitous basis to a stat e-owned institution or State-owned enterprise 
in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
6. Ritual services of funeral bureaus, services of cemeteries and crematoria; 
7. Lottery tickets, except for services of their distribution; 
8. Services for providing information and technological cooperation between participants of 
settlements, including provision of services for collecting, processing and dissemination of 
information to participants in settlements relating to transactions with payment cards; 
9. Services related to processing and (or) repair  of goods imported in the customs territory of 
the EAEU in accordance with the customs procedure for processing on the customs 
territory;  
10. Works and services related to transportation which is recognised as international in 
accordance with Article 244 of this Code, namely:  works and services of loading, 
unloading, re-loading (discharge-loading), forwarding of goods, including mail, exported 
from the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan , imported into the territory of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, as well as freights  in transit; technical and air navigation services, airport 
activity; services of sea ports related to servicing international lines; 
11. Services related to management, maintenance and operation of housing resources; 
12. Banknotes and coins of the national currency; 
13. Goods, works, services, except for sales turnover of goods, works, services from 
commercial and intermediary activities and production turnover from manufacture and 
sales of excisable goods, public associations of  disabled persons, as well as manufacturing 
organizations if such associations and organizations meet the following conditions: 
 Disabled persons represent not less than 51% of the total number of employees of such 
manufacturing organizations; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 362 - 
 
   Costs of employment of disabled persons are not less than 51% (at specialised 
organizations at which disabled persons with hearing, speech, sight loss work - not less than 35%) of total labour costs; 
14. Works, services related to free repair and (or) technical maintenance of goods during the 
warranty period specified in the transaction, including costs of spare parts and their 
components, where terms of transaction provid e for provision of the quality assurance of 
sold goods, works and services by the taxpayer; 
15. Refined precious metals - gold, platinum manufactured of raw materials of its own 
production; 
16. Investment gold provided the number of conditions specified in the Article are met; 
17. Services for the activities specified in Articles 411 and 420 of the Code; 18. Which are specified in Articles 249-254 of the Code; 
19. Services rendered when performing  notarial acts, advocate activity; 
20. Borrowing transactions in a monetary form on terms of chargeability, timeliness and 
repayment which are carried out as follows: 
 - by a national managing holding company; 
- by legal persons in which 100% of voting shares are held by a national managing 
holding company.  The list of such le gal persons shall be approved by the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
21. Goods placed under the duty free customs procedure; and 
22. Services of a non-resident which are fina nced from the grant within the framework of 
inter-governmental Agreement to which the Republic of Kazakhstan is a party, that is 
aimed at supporting (rendering the assistance to) low-income citizens in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  
Source:  Article 248 of Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 99-IV of 10 December 2008. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 363 - 
 
  ANNEX 13(B) 
Applied Unified Excise Tax Ra tes, as of 1 January 2014 
No. HS Code 
(EAEU)  Types of excisable goods  Rates of excise duties 
(in tenge per unit of measurement)
1. from 2402  Cigarettes with a filter 3,000 tenge/1,000 pieces
2. from 2402  Cigarettes without a filt er, cigarettes with a 
cardboard holder  3,000 tenge/1,000 pieces
3. from 2402  Cigarillos  3,700 tenge/1,000 pieces
4. from 2402  Cigars 475 tenge/piece
5. from 2403  Tobacco for pipes, smoking, chewing, sucking, snuffing, for hookah and other, packed in a consumer pack and designated for final consumption, except for pharmaceutical products, which contain nicotine
 3,800 tenge/kilogram
Note:  According to the Tax Code excise rates for tobacco were to be increased annually up to 2016. 
No. HS Code 
(EAEU)  Categories of excisable goods  Excise duty rates 
(tenge for each unit)
1. from 2709 00  Crude oil, gas condensate 0 tenge/tonne  
2. from 8702  Motor vehicles carrying 10 or more passengers 
w i t h  e n g i n e  c a p a c i t y  o f  m o r e  t h a n  3 0 0 0  c u  c m ,  excluding minibuses, buses and trolley buses  
100 tenge/cm
3 
 
from 8703  Auto or other motor vehicles for carrying passengers with the engine capacity of more than 3000 cu cm (except for manually-operated automobiles or automobiles with manually-operated adapter designed for disabled people) 
from 8704  Motor vehicles on auto chassis with a platform for cargo and driver's cab separated from cargo module by a fixed partition,  with engine capacity of 
more than 3000 cu cm 
 
 
No. HS Code 
(EAEU)  Types of excisable goods  Rates of excise duties 
(in the tenge per unit of measurement)
1 2 3 4 
1. From 2207  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated with the 
alcohol concentration of 80 volume % or more (except for ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, which is sold to manufacture alcohol products, medical and pharmaceutical prep arations, and also 
which is supplied to State medical 
institutions within the limits of established 
quotas), ethyl alcoho l and other types of 
alcohol, denaturated, of any concentration (except for ethyl alcohol (ethanol) denaturated  fuel (not colourless, coloured) to be consumed in the domestic market)600 tenge/litre
 
2. From 2207  Ethyl alcohol (ethanol) denaturated fuel 
(not colourless, colour ed) to be consumed 
in the domestic market1 tenge/litre
3. From 2208  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, alcohol 
tinctures and other alcohol drinks with the alcohol concentration less than 80 volume % (except for ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, which is sold to manufacture alcohol products, medical and pharmaceutical prep arations, and also 
which is supplied to State medical institutions within the limits of established quotas)
 750 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 364 - 
 
  4. From 2207  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated with the 
alcohol concentration of 80 volume % or more which is sold to manufacture alcohol products
 60 tenge/litre
5. From 2208  Ethyl alcohol non-denaturated, alcohol tinctures and other alcohol drinks with the alcohol concentration less than 80 volume %, which are sold to manufacture alcohol 
products
 75 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  
6. From 3003, 
3004 Alcohol-bearing products of medical designation registered in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan as medical preparations500 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol
 
7. 2208 Alcohol products (except for cognac, 
brandy, wines, wine material and beer)1000 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol
8. 2208 Cognac, brandy  250 tenge/litre of 100% alcohol  
9. 2204, 2205, 
2206 00  Wines 35 tenge/litre
10. from 2204, 2205, 2206 00
 Wine material (except for one which is sold to manufacture ethyl alcohol and alcohol 
products)
 170 tenge/litre  
11. from 2204, 2205, 2206 00
 Wine material, which is sold to manufacture ethyl alcohol and alcohol products
 20 tenge/litre
12. 2203 00  Beer 26 tenge/litre
13. 2202 90 100 1  Beer with the volume content of ethyl alcohol less than 0.5%0 tenge/litre 
 
No.  
 Excise duty rates for each tonne (tenge) 
Petroleum (except 
aircraft motor gasoline)  
(HS Code EurAsEC 
2710 11 410 0-  2710 11 590 0) Motor fuel(HS 
Code EurAsEC 
2710 19  
3100-2710  
19 490 0) 
1 2 3 4 
1.  Wholesale trade by petroleum producers (except aircraft 
motor gasoline) and motor fuel  of domestic manufacture 4,500  540 
2.  Wholesale trade of petroleum and motor fuel (except 
aircraft motor gasoline) by in dividuals and le gal entities  0  0 
3.  Retail sale by petroleum producers (except aircraft 
motor gasoline) and motor fuel for own production needs  5,000  600 
4.  Retail sale of petrol and motor fuel (except aircraft 
motor gasoline) by individual s and legal entities for own 
production needs 500  60 
5.  Import  4,500  540 
 
Note: The nomenclature of goods shall be determined with the code of the CN FEA EurAsEC and (or) name 
of goods. 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 365 - ANNEX 14 
Common List of Goods Subject to Bans and Re strictions on Importation and Exportation by  EAEU member States in Trade with Third 
Countries 
Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
1. Goods which transportation across the cust oms border of the EAEU is prohibited 
1.1 Ozone destroying 
substances   2903 77 100 0; 
2903 77 200 0; 2903 77 300 0; 2903 77 400 0; 2903 77 500 0; 
2903 76 100 0; 
2903 76 200 0; 2903 76 900 0; 2903 77 900 0; 2903 14 000 0; 2903 19 100 0; Ex. 2903 79 210 0; Ex. 2903 79 900 0; Ex. 2903 39 110 0; Ex. 3824 71 000 0; Ex. 3824 72 000 0; Ex. 3824 74 000 0 – Ex. 3824 79 000 0; 8415 10; 8415 81 00; 8415 82 000; 8418 61 00; Ex. 8418 69 000; 8418 10 200; 8418 10 800; Ex.8418 50; Ex. 8418 69 000; Ex. 8418; 
Ex. 8419; 
8418 10 200;  8418 10 800; 8418 30 200; 8418 30 800; 8418 40 200; 8418 40 800; Import and export 
prohibition, all EAEU member States (except for goods in transit)     
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 366 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 8418 50; Ex. 8418 69 000; Ex. 8479 89 970 1; Ex. 8479 89 970 2; Ex. 3921 11 000 0 – Ex. 3921 19 000 0; Ex. 3907 20 200 1; Ex. 3907 20 200 9; Ex. 8424 10 000 0. 
1.2 Hazardous wastes   Ex. 0511 99 100 0; 
Ex. 2106 90 980 3; Ex. 2524; Ex. 2620; Ex. 2620 91 000 0; Ex. 2620 21 000 0; Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621; Ex. 2706 00 000 0; 2707 91 000 0; 2707 99; Ex. 2710; 2710 91 000 0; 2713 20 000 0; Ex. 2713 90; Ex. 2714 90 000 0; Ex. 28; 
Ex. 29; 
Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2818; Ex. 2826 19 100 0; Ex. 2826 90 800 0; 2833 25 000 0; Ex. 2837; Ex. 2842; Ex. 2901 - 2942 00 000 0; Ex. 2903; Ex. 2908 99; Ex. 2915; Ex. 2916; Ex. 2917 Import prohibition 
(including goods in transit), all EAEU member States      
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 367 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 2918; Ex. 3006 92 000 0; Ex. 3101 00 000 0; Ex. 3802; Ex. 3808; Ex. 3811 11; Ex. 3824; Ex. 3824 90 610 0; Ex. 3825; Ex. 3825 30 000 0; Ex. 3825 41 000 0; Ex. 3825 50 000 0; 
Ex. 3825 61 000 0; 
Ex. 3825 69 000 0; Ex. 3915; Ex. 3923; Ex. 4013; Ex. 4017 00 000 0; Ex. 4101 – 4103; Ex. 4115 20 000 0; Ex. 4301;  
Ex. 4401 39; Ex. 4415; Ex. 4707; Ex. 4819; Ex. 5701 90; Ex. 5702 32; Ex. 5702 42; Ex. 5702 50 310 0; Ex. 5702 50 390 0; Ex. 5702 92 100 0; Ex. 5702 92 900 0; Ex. 5703 20; Ex. 5703 30; 
Ex. 5705 00 300 0; 
6811 40 000; Ex. 6812; Ex. 7001 00 100 0; Ex. 7010; Ex. 7019; Ex. 7204; Ex. 7404 00;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 368 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 7503 00; Ex.7602 00; Ex. 7802 00 000 0; Ex. 7902 00 000 0; Ex. 8002 00 000 0; Ex. 8101 97 000 0; Ex. 8102 97 000 0; Ex. 8103 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 20 000 0; Ex. 8104 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 90 000 0; Ex. 8105 30 000 0; 
Ex. 8106 00 100 0; 
Ex. 8107 30 000 0; Ex. 8108 30 000 0; Ex. 8109 30 000 0; Ex. 8110 20 000 0; Ex. 8111 00 190 0; Ex. 8112 13 000 0; Ex. 8112 22 000 0; Ex. 8112 52 000 0; Ex. 8112 92 100 0;  
Ex. 8112 92 210 1; Ex. 8112 92 210 9; Ex. 8113 00 400 0; Ex. 8539; Ex. 8540; Ex. 8548 10. 
1.3 Printed information or information on audio-visual and other devices containing information which may cause damage to political or economic interests of the republic, to  its State 
security, to the health and morality of its citizens  Ex. 3706; 
Ex. 4901;  Ex. 4902; Ex. 4908; Ex. 4909 00 000 0; Ex. 4910 00 000 0; Ex. 4911; Ex. 8523. Import/export/transit 
prohibition, all EAEU member States      
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 369 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
1.4 Plant protection chemicals prohibited to be imported to the customs territory of the EAEU subject to Annexes A and B of the Stockholm Convention on persistent polluting substances signed in Stockholm on 22 May 2001 2903 82 000 0; 
2903 89 900 0; 2903 92 000 0; 2903 99; 2910 40 000 0; 2910 90 000 0; 3808 50 000 9; 3808 91 200 0; 3824 82 000 0. Import prohibition, all 
EAEU member States (except for goods in transit)    
1.5 Timber, recovered 
paper, paperboard and wastepaper  Ex. 4401 10 000 0;  
Ex. 4401 31 000 0; Ex. 4401 39; 4403 10 000 -  4403 20; 4403 91 – 4403 99; 4404; 4406; 4407 10; 4407 99 980; 4707. Export prohibition, 
Kazakhstan    
1.6 Office or civil 
weapon, its main parts and cartridges  Ex. 93; 
Ex. 9303; Ex. 9304 00 000 0; Ex. 9306 21 000 0; Ex. 9306 30; Ex. 9306 90; Ex. 9307 00 000 0. Import/export/transit 
prohibition, all EAEU member States (except for goods, subject to the export control system)    
1.7 Implements for 
catching aquatic biological resources  Ex. 5608 11 800 0;  
8543 20 000 0. Import prohibition, all 
EAEU member States     
1.8 Skins of Greenland 
seals and baby seals  Ex. 4301 80 709 5; 
Ex. 4301 80 709 7; Ex. 4301 90 009 0; Ex. 4302 19 410 0; Ex. 4302 19 499 0; Ex. 4302 20 009 0; Ex. 4302 30 100 0; Ex. 4303 10 101 0; Ex. 4303 10 109 0; Import prohibition, all 
EAEU member States      
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 370 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 4303 10 908 0; Ex. 4303 10 909 0; Ex. 4302 30 510 0; Ex. 4302 30 559 0; Ex. 6506 99 908 0. 
2. Goods which transportation across the customs border of the EAEU is restricted 
2.1 Ozone destroying substances and products containing such substances  Ex. 2903 71 000  0; 
Ex. 2903 73 000  0; Ex. 2903 74 000  0; Ex. 2903 75 000  0; Ex. 2903 79 110  0; Import and export 
licensing, all EAEU member States (except for goods in transit) Ministry of Energy 
 None Activity licence is not 
required  
2.2 Plant protection 
chemicals  Ex. 3808 Import licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture; 
Ministry of Energy 
 Activity licence for 
production, 
processing, purchase, storage, sale, use and destruction of toxic substances (Article 14.1 of the Law on Licensing) is required and issued by  the Ministry of Investments and Development 
2.3 Hazardous wastes  Ex. 0511 99 100 0; 
2307 00; Ex. 2520 10 000 0; Ex. 2530 90 000  9; 
2618 00 000 0; 
Ex. 2619 00; Ex. 2619 00 900 0; Ex. 2620 2620 11 000 0; Ex. 2620 19 000 0; Ex. 2620 21 000 0 – Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 29 000 0; Ex. 2620 30 000 0; Ex. 2620 40 000 0; 2620;  Ex. 2620 60 000 0; Ex. 2620 91 000 0; Import and/or export 
licensing, all EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Energy 
 Activity licence for 
collection (purchase), storage, processing and sale of scrap and 
waste of nonferrous 
and ferrous metals by juridical persons is required (Article 12.3 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by Government executives (Akims) of Oblast, Cities of Astana and Almaty  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 371 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621 Ex. 28; Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2806 10 000 0; Ex. 2807 00; Ex. 2808 00 000 0; Ex. 2811 11 000 0; Ex. 2811 19 100 0; Ex. 2814 20 000 0; Ex. 2815 12 000 0; Ex. 2815 20 000 0; 
Ex. 2837; 
Ex. 2907; Ex. 2908; Ex. 2926; Ex. 2929; Ex. 3206; Ex. 3208; Ex. 3212; Ex. 3504 00; Ex. 3802; Ex. 3824; Ex. 3825; Ex. 3825 41 000 0; Ex. 3825 49 000 0; Ex. 3825 61 000 0; Ex. 3912 20; Ex. 4004 00 000 0; Ex. 4012 20 000 0; Ex. 4101 – 4103; Ex. 4115 10 000 0; Ex. 4115 20 000 0; Ex. 4301; 
Ex. 5003 00 000 0; 
Ex. 5103 20 000 0;  
Ex. 5202 10 000 0; Ex. 5505; Ex. 5601 30 000 0; Ex. 7112 30 000 0; Ex. 7112 99 000 0; Ex. 7204;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 372 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 7404 00; Ex. 7503 00; Ex. 7602 00; Ex. 7802 00 000 0; Ex. 7902 00 000 0; Ex. 8002 00 000 0; Ex. 8101 97 000 0; Ex. 8102 97 000 0; Ex. 8103 30 000 0; Ex. 8104 20 000 0; Ex. 8105 30 000 0; Ex. 8106 00 100 0; 
Ex. 8107 30 000 0; 
Ex. 8108 30 000 0; Ex. 8109 30 000 0; Ex. 8110 20 000 0; Ex. 8111 00 190 0; Ex. 8112 13 000 0; Ex. 8112 22 000 0; Ex. 8112 52 000 0; Ex. 8112 92 210 9; Ex. 8113 00 400 0; Ex. 85 Ex. 8548 10 910 0; Ex. 8548 10 100 0; Ex. 8548 10 210 0; Ex. 8548 10 290 0; Ex. 2620. 
2.4 Collectible materials in mineralogy and palaeontology  Ex. 9601; 
Ex. 9705 00 000 0. Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development  Ministry of Education and 
Science;  Ministry of Culture and Sports;  Ministry of Investments and Development Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 373 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.6 Wild live animals,  certain wild growing plants and wild growing crude drug Ex. 01; 
Ex. 0301; Ex. 0306; Ex. 0307; Ex. 0308; Ex. 0407; 0802 90 500 0; 1211; 1212 21 000 0; 1212 29 000 0; Ex. 1302. Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture 
 Activity licence is not 
required 
2.7 Species of wild fauna and flora subject to the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora   No CN Codes are 
provided. Only the names of species of wild fauna and flora are specified.  Export restriction, all 
EAEU member States (the goods included into this list are not subject to licensing and transported through the customs border of the EAEU member States in accordance with the order established by the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora as of 3 March 1973) Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required  
2.8 Rare and endangered species of wild animals and wild growing plants and parts thereof and/or derivates inscribed in the "Red books" of the EAEU member States  Ex. 0101 – 0106; 
Ex. 0301; 0306 -  0308; Ex. 0601 – 0604; Ex. 07; Ex. 1211; Ex. 1212; Ex. 20; Ex. 2102. Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 374 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.9 Precious metals and gems  Ex. 2530 90 900 1;  
7101 10 000 0; Ex. 7102 21 000 0; 7102 31 000 0; 7103 10 000 0; 7103 91 000 0; 7103 99 000 0; 7106; 7106 10 000 0; 7106 91 000; 7108; 7108 11 000 0; 
7108 12 000; 
7108 20 000; 7110; 7110 11 000; 7110 19 100 0; 7110 21 000; 7110 29 000 0; 7110 31 000 0; 7110 41 000 0. Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States (except for precious metals exported by the Central (National) Banks of the EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required  
2.10 Unprocessed precious metals, waste and scrap of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals and commodities 
containing precious 
metals  2603 00 000 0; 
2604 00 000 0; 2607 00 000 0; 2608 00 000 0; 2609 00 000 0; 2616; 
Ex. 2617; 
2620 19 000 0; 2620 21 000 0; 2620 29 000 0; 2620 30 000 0; 2620 91 000 0; 2620 99 100 0; 2620 99 400 0; 2620 99 950 1; 2620 99 950 2; 2620 99 950 3; 2620 99 950 9; Ex. 2621; 7106 91 000; 7108 12 000 9; Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 375 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
7110 11 000 9; 7110 21 000 9; 7110 31 000 0; 7110 41 000 0; 7112; 7401 00 000 0; 7402 00 000 0; 7501; 7801 99 100 0. 
2.11 Mineral raw materials (only untreated stones)  Ex. 7103 10 000 0; 
Ex. 2530 90 000 1 Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required 
2.12 Drugs, substances with psychotropic effects and their precursors 1209 99 910 0; 
1211 30 000 0; 1211 40 000 0; 1211 90 850 0;  
1301 90 000 0; 1302 11 000 0; 1302 19 800 0; 
2806 10 000 0; 
2807 00 100 0; 2812 10 950 0; 2841 61 000 0; 2902 30 000 0; 2902 90 000 0; 2903 39 190 0; 2903 99 900 0; 2904 20 000 0; 2905 39 250 0; 2905 51 000 0; 2907 19 900 0; 2909 11 000 0; 2909 30 900 0; 2912 21 000 0; 2912 49 000 0; 2914 11 000 0; 2914 12 000 0; 2914 31 000 0; 2914 50 000 0; 2915 21 000 0; 2915 24 000 0; Import and/or export 
licensing, all EAEU member States  Ministry of Internal Affair s None Activity licence for 
circulation of drugs (narcotics), psychoactive substances, precursors is required (Article 17 of the Law on 
Licensing) and issued 
by  the  Ministry of Internal Affairs  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 376 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2915 90 000 0; 2916 12 000 0; 2916 14 000 0; 2916 34 000 0; 2918 19 980 0; 2920 90 100 0; 2921 11 000 0; 2921 19 990 0; 2921 30 100 0; 2921 46 000 0; 2921 49 000 0; 2922 14 000 0;  
2922 19 850 0; 
2922 29 000 0; 2922 31 000 0; 2922 39 000 0; 2922 43 000 0; 2922 44 000 0; 2922 49 850 0;  
2922 50 000 0; 2924 23 000 0; 2924 24 000 0; 2924 29 980 0; 2925 12 000 0; 2926 90 950 0; 2926 30 000 0; 2924 11 000 0; 2924 29 980 0; 2930 90 990 0; 2932 11 000 0;  2932 20 900 0; 2932 91 000 0; 2932 92 000 0; 2932 93 000 0; 
2932 94 000 0; 
2932 95 000 0; 2932 99 000 0; 2933 29 900 0; 2933 32 000 0; 2933 33 000 0; 2933 39 990 0; 2933 41 000 0;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 377 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2933 49 300 0; 2933 49 900 0; 2933 53 100 0; 2933 53 900 0; 2933 55 000 0; 2933 59 950 0; 2933 72 000 0; 2933 91 100 0; 2933 91 900 0; Ex. 2933 99; 2933 99 800;  2933 99 800 9;  
2934 91 000 0; 
2934 99 900 0; 2939 11 000 0; 2939 19 000 0; 2939 41 000 0 -  2939 49 000 0; 2939 51 000 0; 2939 61 000 0; 2939 62 000 0; 2939 63 000 0; 2939 69 000 0; 2939 91 000 0;  
2939 99 000 0; Ex. 3003; 3003 40 000 0; 3003 90 000 0; Ex. 3004; 3004 40 000; 3004 40 000 9; 3004 90 000 2;  3004 90 000 9;  3824 90 970.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 378 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.13 Toxic substances except for precursors of the drugs and substances with psychotropic effects   Ex. 1211 90 850 0;  
Ex. 1302 19 800 0; 2804 70 001 0; 2804 80 000 0; Ex. 2805 40; Ex. 2811 29 900 0; Ex. 2837 11 000 0; Ex. 2837 19 000 0; Ex. 2842 90 800 0; Ex. 2843 29 000 0; Ex. 2848 00 000 0; Ex. 2852 10 000 7;  
Ex. 2852 90 000 8;  
2905 11 000 0; Ex. 2905 59; Ex. 2907 11 000 0;  
Ex. 2922 19 850 0; Ex. 2924 19 000 0; Ex. 2926 90 950 0;   
Ex. 2930 90 990 0; Ex. 2931 10 000 0; Ex. 2931 90 900 9;  Ex. 2933 39 990 0; Ex. 2939 20 000 0; Ex. 2939 99 000 0; Ex. 3001 90 980 0; Ex. 8112 51 000 0. Import/export licensing, 
all EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of National 
Economy  Activity licence for 
production, processing, purchase, storage, sale, use and destruction of toxic substances is required (Article 14.1 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Investments and Development 
2.14 Medicines and pharmaceutical products    Ex. 2106 90 980 3; 
Ex. 2106 90 980 9; Ex. 2904 - Ex. 2909; Ex. 2912-  Ex. 2942 00 000 0; Ex. 2936; Ex. 3001; Ex. 3002; Ex. 3003; Ex. 3004; 3006 30 000 0; 3006 60; Ex. 3913. Import restriction, all 
EAEU member States     Activity licence for 
pharmaceutical activity is required (Article 26.2 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Public Health and Social Development   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 379 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.16 Civil radio-electronic and/or high-frequency means including built-in or forming part of other goods    Ex. 8419; 
Ex. 8470; Ex. 8471; Ex. 8514; 8516 50 000 0; Ex. 8517; Ex. 8517 12 000 0; Ex. 8517 62 000 9; Ex. 8517 69 900 0; Ex. 8518; Ex. 8518 10; Ex. 8519; 
Ex. 8521; 
Ex. 8525; Ex. 8526; Ex. 8527; Ex. 8528; Ex. 8531; Ex. 8540; Ex. 90; Ex. 9018; Ex. 9021; Ex. 9027. Import licensing, all 
EAEU member States   Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development Activity licence is not 
required  
2.17 Special devices for unauthorised obtaining of information   Ex. 8301 70 000 0; 
Ex. 8471;  Ex. 8505 90 200 0; Ex. 8517 61 000; 
Ex. 8517 62 000; 
Ex. 8517 69 390 0; Ex. 8517 69 900 0; Ex. 8517 70 900 1; Ex. 8518 30 950 0; Ex. 8518 40; Ex. 8519 81 550; Ex. 8519 81 510 0; Ex. 8519 81 610; Ex. 8519 81 650; Ex. 8519 81 750; Ex. 8519 81 850; Ex. 8519 89 900; Ex. 8521; Ex. 8523 51; Import/export licensing, 
all EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development National Security Commit tee Activity licence for 
development,  production, repair and sale of special 
technical devices 
designed for conducting of operative-investigation activities is required (Article 19 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the  National Security Committee  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 380 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 8523 29 310 1; Ex. 8523 29 310 2; Ex. 8523 49 250 0; Ex. 8523 49 450 0; Ex. 8523 49 910 1; Ex. 8523 51 910 1; Ex. 8523 59 910 1; Ex. 8523 80 910 1; Ex. 8525 50 000 0; Ex. 8525 60 000 0; Ex. 8525 80; Ex. 8526 10 000 9; 
Ex. 8526 91; 
Ex. 8527; Ex. 8529 10 390 0; Ex. 9002; Ex. 9006 51 000 0; Ex. 9006 52 000 9; Ex. 9006 53 100 0; Ex. 9019 10 900 9; Ex. 9022 19 000 0. 
2.19 Encryption devices   Ex. 8443 31; 
Ex. 8443 32 100 9; Ex. 8443 32 300 0; Ex. 8443 99 100 9; Ex. 8470 10 000 9; Ex. 8470 50 000; 
Ex. 8471 30 000 0; 
Ex. 8471 41 000 0; Ex. 8471 49 000 0; Ex. 8471 50 000 0; Ex. 8471 70 500 0; Ex. 8471 70 980 0; Ex. 8471 80 000 0; Ex. 8471 90 000 0; Ex. 8473 21 100 0; Ex. 8473 21 900 0; Ex. 8473 30 200 9; Ex. 8473 30 800 9; Ex. 8517 11 000 0; Ex. 8517 12 000 0; Ex. 8517 18 000 0; Import/export licensing, 
all EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development National Security Commit tee Activity licence for 
development and sale (including other types of transfer) of  cryptographic devices of information 
protection  is required 
(Article 18 of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the  National Security Committee  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 381 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 8517 61 000 1; Ex. 8517 61 000 2; Ex. 8517 61 000 8; Ex. 8517 62 000; Ex. 8517 69 390 0; Ex. 8517 69 900 0; Ex. 8517 70 900; Ex. 8523 29 310 1; Ex. 8523 29 310 2; Ex. 8523 29 330; Ex. 8523 49 250 0; Ex. 8523 49 450 0; 
Ex. 8523 49 910 1; 
Ex. 8523 49 930 0; Ex. 8523 51 910 1; Ex. 8523 51 930 0; Ex. 8523 52; Ex. 8523 59 910 1; Ex. 8523 59 930 0; Ex. 8523 80 910 1; Ex. 8523 80 930 0;  
Ex. 8525 50 000 0; Ex. 8525 60 000 0; Ex. 8528 71 130 0;  
Ex. 8529 90 200 1;  
Ex. 8529 90 650 0; Ex. 8529 90 970 0; Ex. 8526 91 200 0; Ex. 8526 91 800 0; Ex. 8526 92 000;  
Ex. 8542 31 901 1; Ex. 8542 31 909 9; Ex. 8542 32 900 9; Ex. 8543 70 900 0; 
Ex. 8543 90 000 9. 
2.20 Cultural values, 
documents of the national archive funds, originals of the archive documents  Ex. 37; 
Ex. 39; Ex. 40; Ex. 42; Ex. 44; Ex. 4420; Ex. 46; Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States   Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Culture and 
Sports Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 382 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 49; Ex. 4907 00; Ex. 57; Ex. 58; Ex. 61; Ex. 62; Ex. 63; Ex. 64; Ex. 65; Ex. 66; Ex. 69; Ex. 6913; 
Ex. 70; 
Ex. 7018; Ex. 7113; Ex. 7114; Ex. 7117; Ex. 7118; Ex. 73; Ex. 74; Ex. 75; Ex. 76; Ex. 78; Ex. 79; Ex. 80; Ex. 81; Ex. 82; Ex. 8306; Ex. 84; Ex. 85; Ex. 87; Ex. 88; Ex. 89; Ex. 90; 
Ex. 91; 
Ex. 92; Ex. 93; Ex. 94; Ex. 95; Ex. 96; Ex. 9611 00 000 0; Ex. 97;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 383 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
Ex. 9702 00 000 0; Ex. 9705 00 000 0. 
2.21 Human organs and tissues, blood and 
its components Ex. 3001 90 200 0; 
Ex. 3002 10 910 0; 
Ex. 3002 10 950; 
Ex. 3002 90 100 0. Import and (or) export 
licensing, all EAEU 
member States  
 Ministry of Public Health and 
Social Development None Activity licence for 
medical activity is 
required (Article 26.1 
of the Law on Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Public Health and Social Development  
2.22 Official and civil weapon, its main parts and cartridges  Ex. 9302 00 000 0; 
Ex. 9303; Ex. 9303 20 100 0; Ex. 9303 20 950 0; Ex. 9303 30 000 0;  Ex. 9304 00 000 0; Ex. 9305 10 000 0; Ex. 9305 20 000 0; 
Ex. 9306 21 000 0; 
Ex. 9306 30 100 0; Ex. 9306 30 900 0;  
Ex. 9306 29 000 0; Ex. 9306 30 900 0; Ex. 8211; Ex. 9307 00 000 0; Ex. 9506 99 900 0. Import/export licensing, 
all EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Internal Affa irs  Activity licence for 
development, manufacture, repair, trade, collecting, exhibit of civil and official fire-arms and their cartridge shells is required (Article 20.5 
of the Law on 
Licensing) and issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.  
2.23 Information on subsoil  Export licensing, all 
EAEU member States  Ministry of Investments and 
Development Ministry of Investments and 
Development  Activity licence is not 
required 
2.24 Goods subject to quantitative restrictions  7204 (*); 
7404 00 (*); 7503 00 (*); 7602 00 (*).  Export and/or import 
restriction.   - (*) Applied to the goods originating from the Republic of Belarus when exported from the customs territory of the EAEU. Application of the exclusive right is regulated by the Belarus' legislation; N/A N/A N/A  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 384 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.25 Goods subject to licensing   1701 13*; 
1701 14*; Ex. 2709 00**; 2710**;  
2712 10**; 2713**; 3102**; 3103**; 3105**. Export and/or import 
approval.  Applied to: *- the goods imported to the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from the third countries **- the goods, originating 
from the Republic of Belarus when exported from the customs territory of the EAEU  Ministry of National Economy  Ministry of Agriculture Activity licence is not 
required   
2.26 Goods subject export/import monopoly Goods subject to 
export exclusive licenses  2711 11 000 0 (*); 2711 21 000 0 (*); 3104 (**).  Goods subject to import exclusive licenses (***)  1604; 2401; 2402; 2403; 
2207; 
2208 90 910; 2208 90 990; Ex. 1302; Ex. 2101; 2103 90 300 0; Ex. 2103 90 900 9; Ex. 2106 90 200 0; Ex. 3302 10; 2204; 2205; 2206 00; 2208 60; 2208 20; 2208 30; - (*) Applied to the 
goods originating from the Russian Federation when exported from the customs territory of the EAEU.  Application of the exclusive right is regulated by the Russian Federation's legislation;  - (**) Applied to the goods originating from the Republic of Belarus when exported from the customs territory of the EAEU.  Application of the exclusive right is 
regulated by the Belarus' 
legislation; - (***) Applied to the goods originating from the third countries when imported to the Republic of Belarus. Application of the exclusive rights is regulated by the Belarus' legislation.  N/A N/A N/A  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 385 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2208 40; 2208 50; 2208 70; 2208 09 (except 2208 09 910 0, 2208 09 990 0). 
2.27 Goods subject to Tariff Rate Quotas 0201 10 000 1; 
0201 20 200 1; 0201 20 300 1; 0201 20 500 1; 0201 20 900 1; 0201 30 000 4; 0202 10 000 1; 0202 20 100 1; 0202 20 300 1; 0202 20 500 1; 0202 20 900 1; 0202 30 100 4; 0202 30 500 4; 0202 30 900 4; 0203 11 100 1; 0203 11 900 1; 0203 12 110 1; 0203 12 190 1; 0203 12 900 1; 0203 19 110 1; 0203 19 130 1; 
0203 19 150 1; 
0203 19 550 1; 0203 19 590 1; 0203 19 900 1; 0203 21 100 1; 0203 21 900 1; 0203 22 110 1; 0203 22 190 1; 0203 22 900 1; 0203 29 110 1; 0203 29 130 1; 0203 29 150 1; 0203 29 550 1; 0203 29 590 1; 0203 29 900 1; Import TRQ, all EAEU 
member States (within EAEU member State TRQ).  Import procedure is determined by a Decision of the Commission in accordance with  Annex No. 6 to the EAEU Treaty Ministry of National Economy  
 None Activity licence is not 
required  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 386 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
0203 29 550 2; 0203 29 900 2; 0207 11 100 1; 0207 11 300 1; 0207 11 900 1; 0207 12 100 1; 0207 12 900 1; 0207 13 100 1; 0207 13 200 1; 0207 13 300 1; 0207 13 400 1; 0207 13 500 1; 
0207 13 600 1; 
0207 13 700 1; 0207 13 910 1; 0207 13 990 1; 0207 14 100 1; 0207 14 200 1; 0207 14 300 1; 0207 14 400 1; 0207 14 500 1; 0207 14 600 1; 0207 14 700 1; 0207 14 910 1; 0207 14 990 1; 0207 24 100 1; 0207 24 900 1; 0207 25 100 1; 0207 25 900 1; 0207 26 100 1; 0207 26 200 1; 0207 26 300 1; 0207 26 400 1; 0207 26 500 1; 
0207 26 600 1; 
0207 26 700 1; 0207 26 800 1; 0207 26 910 1; 0207 26 990 1; 0207 27 100 1; 0207 27 200 1; 0207 27 300 1;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 387 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
0207 27 400 1; 0207 27 500 1; 0207 27 600 1; 0207 27 700 1; 0207 27 800 1; 0207 27 910 1; 0207 27 990 1; 0207 41 200 1; 0207 41 300 1; 0207 41 800 1; 0207 51 100 1; 0207 51 900 1; 
0207 60 050 1; 
0207 42 300 1; 0207 42 800 1; 0207 52 100 1; 0207 52 900 1; 0207 60 050 1; 0207 53 000 1; 0207 53 000 1; 0207 43 000 1; 0207 54 100 1; 0207 44 100 1; 0207 60 100 1; 0207 44 210 1; 0207 54 210 1; 0207 60 210 1; 0207 60 310 1; 0207 44 310 1; 0207 54 310 1; 0207 60 410 1; 0207 44 410 1; 0207 54 410 1; 0207 54 510 1; 
0207 44 510 1; 
0207 60 510 1; 0207 54 610 1; 0207 44 610 1; 0207 60 610 1; 0207 44 710 1; 0207 54 710 1; 0207 60 810 1;  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 388 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
0207 44 810 1; 0207 54 810 1; 0207 44 910 1; 0207 54 910 1; 0207 60 910 1; 0207 44 990 1; 0207 54 990 1; 0207 60 990 1; 0207 55 100 1; 0207 45 100 1; 0207 60 100 1; 0207 45 210 1; 
0207 55 210 1; 
0207 60 210 1; 0207 45 310 1; 0207 55 310 1; 0207 45 410 1; 0207 55 410 1; 0207 55 510 1; 0207 45 510 1; 0207 60 510 1; 0207 55 610 1; 0207 45 610 1; 0207 60 610 1; 0207 45 710 1; 0207 55 710 1; 0207 60 810 1; 0207 45 810 1; 0207 55 810 1; 0207 55 930 1; 0207 45 930 1; 0207 45 950 1; 0207 55 950 1; 0207 60 910 1; 
0207 45 990 1; 
0207 55 990 1; 0207 60 990 1.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 389 - Description CN codes (in version of 
HS 2012) Measure and territorial 
scope Institutions issuing licence Ministries subject to 
coordination upon issuing 
licenses (in case of 
licensing) Activity Licence 
Requirement (in case 
of licensing) 
2.28 Goods subject to restrictions in accordance with the commitments undertaken upon accession to the WTO 4403 20 110 1; 
4403 20 110 2; 4403 20 190 1; 4403 20 190 9; 4403 20 310 1; 4403 20 310 2; 4403 20 390 1; 4403 20 390 9. Export tariff quotas. 
The Russian Federation. N/A N/A N/A 
2.29 Goods subject to 
import licensing on the basis of application of import quotas as a special safeguards  7304 11 000 1; 
7304 11 000 2; 7304 11 000 3;  7304 11 000 4;  7304 11 000 8; 7304 41 000 9; 7304 49 100 0; 7304 49 930 0; 7304 49 950 0; 7304 49 990 0; 7306 11 100 0; 7306 11 900 0; 7306 40 200 1; 7306 40 200 9; 7306 40 800  2; 7306 
40 800 8; 8433 51 000 1; 8433 51 000 9; 8433 90 000 0.  Import  licensing, all 
EAEU member States   Ministry of National Economy None Activity licence is not 
required 
 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 390 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(A) 
Cryptographic Devices Subject to Export and Import Control* 
Description CN codes (in version of HS 2012) 
1. Printers, copying machines, fax machines and their 
electronic modules that have encryption (cryptographic)  functions  Ex. 8443 31 
Ex. 8443 32 100 9  Ex. 8443 32 300 0  Ex. 8443 99 100 9  
2. Handheld  machines for recording, playback and visual 
presentation of data with calculating functions that have 
encryption (cryptographic) functions  Ex. 8470 10 000 9  
3. Cash registers with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8470 50 000  
4. Handheld computers with encryption (cryptographic) 
functions  Ex. 8471 30 000 0  
5. Computers and their parts with encryption 
(cryptographic) functions Ex. 8471 30 000 0  
Ex. 8471 41 000 0  
Ex. 8471 49 000 0  Ex. 8471 50 000 0  Ex. 8471 90 000 0  Ex. 8473 30 200 9  
6. Computer devices with encryption (cryptographic) 
functions Ex. 8471 70 500 0  
Ex. 8471 70 980 0  
Ex. 8471 80 000 0  
7. Electronic modules and parts of handheld devices with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8473 21 100 0  
Ex. 8473 21 900 0  Ex. 8473 30 200 9  Ex. 8473 30 800 9  
8. Subscriber communication equipment with encryption 
(cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 11 000 0  
Ex. 8517 12 000 0  Ex. 8517 18 000 0  
9. Base stations with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 61 000 1  
Ex. 8517 61 000 2 
Ex. 8517 61 000 8 
10. Telecommunications equipment and its parts with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8517 70 900  
11. Programme encryption (cryptographic) devices 
regardless of information carrier Ex. 8523 29 310 1  
Ex. 8523 29 310 2  
Ex. 8523 29 330  
Ex. 8523 49 250 0  Ex. 8523 49 450 0  Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 49 930 0  
Ex. 8523 51 910 1  
Ex. 8523 51 930 0  Ex. 8523 52  Ex. 8523 59 910 1  Ex. 8523 59 930 0  
Ex. 8523 80 910 1  
Ex. 8523 80 930 0 
12. Broadcasting or television equipment and its parts with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8525 50 000 0  
Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8529 90 200 1  Ex. 8529 90 650 0  
Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
13. Radio navigational receivers, remote control equipment 
and their parts with encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8526 91 200 0  
Ex. 8526 91 800 0  Ex. 8526 92 000  Ex. 8529 90 650 0  Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
14. Internet access equipment and television receivers/sets 
with communication function, their parts with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8528 71 130 0  
Ex. 8529 90 650 0  
Ex. 8529 90 970 0  
15. Electronic integral schemes, storing devices with 
encryption (cryptographic) functions f or having encryption (cryptographic) devices  Ex. 8542 31 901 1  
Ex. 8542 31 909 9  Ex. 8542 32 900 9  
16. Other electric devices and equipment with individual 
functions that have encryption (cryptographic) devices Ex. 8543 70 900 0  
Ex. 8543 90 000 9 
*  In order to use this list, it is necessary to follow both the customs commodity code, and name of the goods. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 391 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(B) 
Special Technical Devices Subject to  Export and Import Licensing* 
Description CN codes (in version of HS 2012) 
1. Special technical devices for disguised obtaining and registration of acoustic information:    
(а) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
obtaining and (or) registration of acoustic information; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  
(b) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised obtaining 
and (or) registration of acoustic information;  
 Ex. 8517 70 900 1  
Ex. 8518 30 950 0  Ex. 8518 40  Ex. 8523 49 450 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  
Ex. 8527  
Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(c) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
acoustic information. 
 Ex. 8519 81 510 0  
Ex. 8519 81 550  
Ex. 8519 81 610  
Ex. 8519 81 650  Ex. 8519 81 750  Ex. 8519 81 850  Ex. 8519 89 900 0  Ex. 8523 51 
2. Special technical devices intended for disguised visual observation and recording:  
(а) pin-holelens Ex. 9002  
(b) photo cameras having at least one of the following 
features: camouflaged under another items; having pin-hole lens  Ex. 9006 51 000 0  
Ex. 9006 52 000 9  Ex. 9006 53 100 0 
(c) television and videocameras having at least one of the 
following features:  camouflaged under another items; having pin-hole lens Ex. 8525 80  
 
(d) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
obtaining and (or) registration of video information; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  
(e) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised obtaining 
and (or) registration of video information; 
 Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  
Ex. 8523 49 450 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8527  Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(f) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
acoustic information. Ex. 8521  
Ex. 8523 51 
3. Special technical devices for disguised interception of telephone conversations: 
(a) wired connection systems intended for disguised 
interception of telephone conversations; Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000   
(b) radio-electronic devices intended for disguised;  Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8525 50 000 0  Ex. 8525 60 000 0  Ex. 8527  Ex. 8529 10 390 0  
(c) electronic devices intended for disguised registration of 
information on telephone conversations. Ex. 8519 81 510 0  
Ex. 8519 81 550  Ex. 8519 81 610  Ex. 8519 81 650  
Ex. 8519 81 750  
Ex. 8519 81 850  Ex. 8523 51 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 392 - 
 
  Description CN codes (in version of HS 2012) 
4. Special technical devices for disguised eavesdropping 
and registration of information from technical channels 
of connection  
 Ex. 8471  
Ex. 8517 61 000  
Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8523 29 310 1  Ex. 8523 29 310 2 Ex. 8523 49 250 0  Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 51 910 1  Ex. 8523 59 910 1  Ex. 8523 80 910 1  Ex. 8527  
5. Special technical devices for disguised control of 
messages received and sent by mail Ex. 9022 19 000 0  
 
6. Special technical devices for disguised research of 
objects and documents, including portable compact X-ray TV units, fluoroscopic and radiographic equipment.  Ex. 9022 19 000 0  
  
7. Special technical devices for disguised entry and inspection of premises, vehicles and other objects: 
(a) means for disguised opening of closure devices;  Ex. 8301 70 000 0  
 
(b) portable compact X-ray TV units, fluoroscopic and 
radiographic equipment. Ex. 9022 19 000 0 
8. Special technical devices for disguised control over 
movement of vehicles Ex. 8526 10 000 9  
Ex. 8526 91  
9. Special technical devices for disguised obtaining 
(modifying, deleting) of information from technical devices of information storage, processing and transmission Ex. 8471  
Ex. 8505 90 200 0  Ex. 8517 61 000  Ex. 8517 62 000  
Ex. 8517 69 390 0  
Ex. 8517 69 900 0  Ex. 8523 29 310 1  Ex. 8523 29 310 2  Ex. 8523 49 250 0  Ex. 8523 49 910 1  Ex. 8523 51 910 1  Ex. 8523 59 910 1  Ex. 8523 80 910 1  Ex. 8527  
10. Special technical devices for disguised identification of 
persons.  Special technical devices for disguised registration of psychophysiological reactions of humans Ex. 9019 10 900 9 
  
*  In order to use this list, it is necessary to follow both the customs commodity code, and name of the goods. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 393 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(C) 
Categories of Goods which are Encryption (C ryptographic) Means or Containing thereof 
the Technical and Encryption Characteristics of which are Subject to Notification 
1. Goods containing encryption technology which consist of any of the following components: 
 (a) a symmetric cryptographic algorithm employing a key length not exceeding 56 bits 
  l o n g ;  o r   (b) an asymmetric cryptographic algorith m based on one of the following methods: 
- factorization of integers not exceeding 512 bits; 
- computation of discrete logarithms in multiplicative group of a finite field of a size 
not exceeding 512 bits; or 
- the discrete logarithm in group other than in item B hereof not exceeding 112 bits.  
Remark: (1) Bites of parity are not included in the length of a key. 
(2) The term "cryptography" does not refer to fixed methods of compression or 
coding of data. 
2. Goods containing encryption with the following limited functions: 
 (a) authentication, including all the aspects of access control without encryption of 
files and texts, except encryption related to passwords and identification and other 
similar data protection from unauthorised access; and 
 (b) electronic digital signature. 
Remark: Functions of authentication and electronic digital signature include connected with 
them function of keys distribution. 
3. Encryption (cryptographic) means, which are the components of programme operations 
systems, cryptographic abilities of which canno t be altered by users, which are developed 
for installation by the user individually without further substantial support by the provider 
and technical documentations (the description of algorithms of cryptographic changes, 
protocols on interactions, description of interfaces, etc.) on which is available. 
4. Personal smart-cards: 
 (a) cryptographic abilities of which are limited by use in equipment and systems, 
referred to in paragraphs 5-8 of the present list; or 
 (b) for wide, publicly available use, cryptographic abilities of which are not available 
for use and which as a result of special development have limited abilities of 
protection of stored personal information on them. 
Remark: If a smart-card can perform few functions, then the control status of each of them 
is defined separately. 
5. Receiving equipment for radio-broadcasting and commercial TV broadcasting or analogue 
commercial equipment for broadcasting to limited audience without encryption of digital signal, except for the cases of use of encryption solely for management of video or 
audio-channels and sending of bills or return of information connected to the programme 
to the providers of broadcasting. 
6. Equipment encryption functionality of which are not available to the user, specially 
developed or limited to the use with any of the following:  
 ( а) software is protected from copy; 
 (b) access to any of the following: 
- data protected from copy stored on the medium available for read only; and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 394 - 
 
  - information, stored in encrypted form on media, when these media are offered for 
sale to public in identical kits; 
 (c) control of coping of audio- and vide o-information protected by the copyrights.  
7. Encryption (cryptographic) equipment specia lly designed and limited for banking use and 
financial operations. 
Remark: Financial operations include duties and charges for transport services and 
crediting.  
8. Portable or mobile radio electronic devi ces for civil use (for example for use with 
commercial civil cellular radio communication systems) that are not capable of transmitting encrypted data directly to another radiotelephone or equipment.  
9. Wireless radio equipment encrypting information only in radio channel with the maximum 
effective range of unboosted cordless operation is less than 400 meters according to the 
manufacturer's specifications.  
10. Encryption (cryptography) means used for protection of technological channels of 
information-telecommunication systems and communication networks.  
11. Goods whose encryption function is blocked by the manufacture.  12. "Mass market goods" are goods that meet all of the following:   
 (a) Generally available to the public in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan  by 
being sold, without restriction, from stock at retail selling points by means of any of the following: 
  1. Over-the-counter transactions; 
  2. Mail order transactions; 
  3. Electronic transactions; or    4. Telephone call transactions. 
 (b) The cryptographic functionality cannot easily be changed by the user;  
 (c) Designed for installation by the user without further substantial support by the 
supplier; and 
 (d) When necessary, details of the items are accessible and will be provided, upon 
request, to the appropriate authority in the regulator's country in order to ascertain compliance with conditions described in paragraphs (a) to (c) above.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 395 - 
 
  ANNEX 15(D) 
Format of Notification of Goods which contain Encryption Means 
Registered in the Register "___" ___________ 20__ .     N _____ 
 
Place for Seal      ___________________________________  
 ________________                        (signature of a person of authorized body)       (Name) 
 
NOTIFICATION 
 
on characteristics of goods (products), which contain encryption means 
 
1. Name of a good (product) _____________________________________________________ 
______________________________________________________________________________
___  
2. Use of a good (product) 
_______________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ 
 
3. Requisites of a producer of a good (product) _______________________________________ 
______________________________________________________________________________
____  
4. Used encryption algorithms:                            N of a good category 
                                                                    from Annex 1  а) _______________________________________________________________________ 
____________________________________________________________________________ 
b) _______________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 
c) ________________________________________________________________________ 
_____________________________________________________________________________  
5. Presence of functional ability in a good (product), which is not described in a provided 
exploitation documents to the user ______________________________  6. Period of validity of notification till "__" _____________ 20__. 
 
7. Requisites of the applicant _________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 
 
8. Requisite of the document of a producer, wh o provided to the authority's representative 
the rights for drafting of notification (if necessary)  
___________________________________________ 
_____________________________________________________________________________  9. The date of adaptation of notification "__" _______________ 20__ . 
 
 Place for Seal       ______________________________    __________________ 
                      (signa ture of applicant)           (Name) 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 396 - 
 
  ANNEX 16 
Additional Information on Trade Remedy Measures Applied in Kazakhstan and the 
Eurasian Economic Union 
(i) Prior to the date of the entry into force of the Agreement on Application of Safeguard, 
Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures to Third Countries of 25 January 2008, there were no trade remedy measures in place in Kazakhstan.  
(ii) On the date of the entry into force of  the Agreement on Application of Safeguard, 
Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures to Third Countries of 25 January 2008, there was one safeguard investigation in relation to accumulators in Kazakhstan, which had been initiated on 
8 June 2010.  The investigation had been comp leted without introduction of the safeguard 
measure due to the fact that the complainant did not satisfy the criteria of the 25% of the total 
production of the Customs Union.  
(iii) Currently, Kazakhstan did not apply any safeguard measures  at national level. 
There were  two safeguard and eight anti-dumping measures applied on the common 
customs territory of the EAEU.  
No. Product Type of measure Period of application 
1. Cold-worked seamless 
pipes and tubes of stainless steel Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from China  
14 May 2018 
2. Enameled baths of cast 
iron Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from China 25 January 2018 
3. Light commercial 
vehicles Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from Germany, Italy and Turkey 14 June 2018 
4. Some types of steel 
pipes Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from Ukraine 18 November 2015 
5. Rolling-contact bearings Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from China 20 January 2018 
6. Steel forged rolls for 
rolling mills  Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from Ukraine 27 February 2015 
7. Rolled metal with 
polymeric coating Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from China 30 June 2017 
8. Graphite electrodes Anti-dumping measure with regard to imports of this 
product from India 25 January 2018 
9. Tableware and 
kitchenware of porcelain Safeguard measure 28 September 2016 
10. Combine harvesters and 
modules thereof Safeguard measure 21 August 2016 
(iv) At the moment , five anti-dumping investigations were  being  conducted by the EEC.  
No. Product Type of investigation Date of initiation of 
investigation 
1. Seamless steel tubes used for 
the drilling and operation of oil and gas wells Anti-dumping investigation with regard to 
imports of this product from China 31 March 2014 
2. Rolling-contact bearings Sunset review of anti-dumping measure with 
regard to imports of this product from Ukraine 28 February 2014 
3. Lemon acid Antidumping investigation with regard to 
imports of this product from China 21 February 2014 
4. Kitchenware and tableware 
made of stainless steel Antidumping investigation with regard to 
imports of this product from China 31 January 2014 
5. Steel rods Antidumping investigation with regard to 
imports of this product from Ukraine 20 November 2013 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 397 - 
 
  ANNEX 17 
Unified List of Products for which Mand atory Requirements are Established in 
the Customs Union 
1. Machinery and equipment. 
2. Low-voltage equipment. 
3. High-voltage equipment. 4. Devices operating on gaseous fuels. 
5. Equipment operating under excess 
pressure. 
6. Vessels working under pressure. 7. Equipment for use in hazardous 
environments. 
8. Rides, equipment for children's 
playgrounds. 
9. Elevators. 
10. Wheeled vehicles. 11. Tractors. 
12. Agricultural machinery. 
13. Machinery for forestry. 14. Tires. 15. Rolling stock of railways, including 
high-speed. 
16. Metro Rolling Stock. 17. Light rail vehicles and trams. 
18. Objects of sea transport. 
19. Objects of inland waterway transport. 20. Boats. 
21. Buildings and facilities. 
22. Building materials and products. 23. Rail transport infrastructure, 
including high-speed. 
24. Underground railway (metro) 
infrastructure. 
25. Highways. 
26. Pyrotechnic compositions and goods 
containing them. 
27. Explosives for civilian use and 
products containing them. 
28. Production of light industry (ready-
made piece-goods, carpets, knitted goods, clothing and leather goods, 
shoes, furs and fur products). 
29. Toys. 30. Products for children and 
adolescents. 
31. Products for children care. 32. Cookware. 
33. Products for sanitary and hygienic 
purposes. 
34. Perfumes and cosmetics. 35. Oral hygiene products. 36. Packaging. 
37. Personal protective equipment. 
38. Means of fire safety. 39. Fire extinguishing means. 
40. Medical products. 
41. Sanitary products. 42. Furniture products. 43. Chemical products. 
44. Synthetic detergents. 
45. Household chemical goods. 46. Paints and solvents. 
47. Fertilizers. 
48. Plant protection products. 49. Petrol, diesel and marine fuel, jet fuel 
and heating oil. 
50. Lubricants, oils and special fluids.  51. Devices and systems of water, gas, 
heat, electricity.  
52. Devices and systems of oil and 
refined products.  
53. Food products. 
54. Alcoholic products. 
55. Feed and feed additives  56. Grain. 
57. Tobacco products. 
58. Hunting and sporting weapons, 
ammunition. 
59. Telecommunications facilities. 
60. Coal and its products. 
61. Liquefied petroleum gas used as fuel. 62.       Materials contacting human skin; 
63.       Products intended for civil defence 
and protection of natural and man-made disasters. 
64.       Oil, prepared for transportation and 
use. 
65.       Combustible natural gas, prepared 
for transportation and use.  
66.       Mainline pipelines for 
transportation of liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons. 
 
  
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 398 - 
 
  ANNEX 18 
SEZs Operating under Law No. 469-IV "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 21 July 2011 
SEA/SEZ Establishing Legisl ation Time-frame Purpose 
Astana – 
New City Presidential Decree 
No. 645  of 29 June 2001  the period 
2002-2027 to facilitate the development of the 
capital of Kazakhstan by attracting investments, building public facilities, real estate and modern infrastructure based on advanced construction technologies, an d creation of 
competitive industries 
Aktau Seaport Presidential Decree 
No. 853  of 26 April 2002 the period 
2003-2028 to facilitate the development of the 
seaport infrastructure and its auxiliary services by attracting new investments, creating new jobs and introducing modern administration and management methods 
Innovation Technologies Park Presidential Decree 
No. 1166 of 18 August 2003 until 2028 to diversify the economy through the 
production of information technology (IT) products and the effective use of the country's scientific and technical innovation capacity 
Ontustyk Presidential Decree 
No. 1605 of 6 July 2005 until 1 July 2030 to diversify the economy by creating 
jobs and attracting foreign investment through the development of the textile industry (cotton) in southern Kazakhstan 
National Industrial Petrochemical Techno-Park (in Atyrau oblast) Presidential Decree 
No. 495  of 19 December 2007 until 
31 December 2032 to develop and implement 
"breakthrough" investment projects aimed at developing an internationally-
competitive deep hydrocarbon processing and high value-added petrochemica l products 
Burabai (in the 
Akmola oblast) Presidential Decree 
No. 512 of 15 January 2008 until 
1 December 2017 to develop an effici ent and competitive 
tourism infrastructure 
Saryarka (in Karaganda oblast) Decree of the President 
No. 181 of 24 November 2011  until 
1 December 2036 to develop metallurgical industry  
Pavlodar 
(in Pavlodar oblast) Decree of the President 
No. 186 of 29 November 2011  until 
1 December 2036 to develop chemical and  metallurgical 
industries  
Horgos-East Gates Decree of the President 
No. 187 of 29 November 2011 until 2035 to develop Kazakhstan's transport 
infrastructure and transit capacity through construction of logistics centre in the SEZ 
Chemical Park Taraz Decree of the President No. 
426 of 13 November 2012  until 2037 to develop сhemical industry 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 399 - 
 
  ANNEX 19(A) 
List of Goods, Works and Services Covere d by Government Proc urement by Auction 
1. Agriculture products, hunting products, agriculture and hunting services, other than live 
animals, products and services related to hunting, fishing and bird breeding. 
2. Forest and logging products, forestry and logging services.  
3. Fishing products, fish hatcheries and fi sh farms, services related to fishing. 
4. Coal and lignite, peat. 
5. Crude oil and natural gas, services for th eir extraction, other than exploratory works. 
6. Metallic ores. 7. Stone, clay, sand and other types of minerals. 8. Food products and beverage. 
9. Tobacco and other products of the tobacco industry. 
10. Textiles. 11. Clothing, fur and fur goods, except for children's clothing. 
12. Leather and leather goods, saddler goods and footwear. 
13. Wood, wood goods, cork, straw and plai ting materials, except for furniture. 
14. Pulp, paper, paperboard and articles thereof. 
15. Printed and published materials, except advertisements, drawings, designs, printed 
photos, souvenir and gift sets (pads and notebooks), election and referendum ballots. 
16. Coke ovens products. 17. Refined petroleum products, petroleum-refinery and pyrolysis gas, products of gas 
processing plants. 
18. Products of organic and inorganic synthesis. 19. Rubber and plastic products. 
20. Other non-metallic mineral products, except for household and interior glass products, as 
well as non-structural non-refractory ceramic ware products. 
21. Production of metallurgical industry. 
22. Metal products, except for machinery and equipment (other than nuclear reactors). 
23. Machinery and equipment not included in ot her groups, except for weapons, ammunition 
and their parts, explosive devices and explosives for household purposes. 
24. Office, accounting and computing machinery. 
25. Electric motors and electrical equipment, not included in other groups. 
26. Equipment and instruments for radio, television and communication. 27. Medical equipment, measuring equipment, photo and video equipment, clocks. 
28. Motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers, car bodies, parts and accessories for 
automobiles, garage equipment. 
29. Other vehicles except for trade and passenger ships, warships, aircraft and space vehicles, 
equipment and parts of aircraft. 
30. Finished products, except for jewelry, an d related products, musical instruments, games 
and toys, equipment for training processe s, textbooks and school equipment, craft 
products, artworks and collectibles, exposed film; human, animal and synthetic hair and 
articles thereof. 
31. Waste and scrap used as raw material. 32. Natural water and ice. 
33. Construction services and construction projects, including major and minor repair, except 
for technically complicated construction projects (including major and minor repairs), a list of which is established in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
architecture, urban planning and construction activities.  
34. Trade services, services for maintenance and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles. 35. Wholesale and commission trade services, exce pt for trade services of motor vehicles and 
motorcycles. 
36. Retail trade services. 
37. Hotel and restaurant services. 38. Land transport services, except for railway transport services, underground services, 
pipeline transportation services. 
39. Water transport services. 40. Ancillary transport services and ancillary serv ices in the sphere of tourism and excursion, 
except for travel and tourist agencies services, other assistance services to tourists. 
41. Communications services, except for courier services, other than national post services, 
telecommunications services. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 400 - 
 
  42. Financial intermediation services, except for insurance and pension funding, bond issue 
services. 
43. Ancillary services to financial intermediati on services, except for evaluation services. 
44. Services related to real estate. 
45. Services for the maintenance and repair of  office equipment, electronic computers and 
other equipment used in conjunction with office equipment. 
46. Cleaning services. 
47. Packaging services. 
48. Sewage and waste disposal services, sanitation and other like services. 49. Housing and communal services except for hairdressers, beauty salons and cosmetic 
medical institutions and funeral, burial and cremation services. 
50. Services related to the activities in the manufacturing sector, except for coke production 
services, refined petroleum products and nuclear fuel, furniture production services, equipment maintenance services, not included in this list. 
 
Source: Approved by the Resolution of the Govern ment of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 339 dated 
19 March 2012 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 401 - 
 
  ANNEX 19(B) 
The List of Goods and Services for Daily or Weekly Needs which Are Purchased by 
Customers in Order to Ensure Non-stop Acti vity, as well as Procur ement from a Single 
Source for the Period until Results of a Tender Are Announced, and the Agreement on 
Government Procurement Enters into Force 
1. Food stuffs. 
2. Fuels and lubricants. 
3. "Paper" A-4, A-3. 
4. Works on maintenance of roads in winter season 
5. Catering services. 
6. Services of burial of lonely citizens and citizens without relatives. 
7. Bath and laundry services. 
8. Motor transport services. 
9. Installation, assembly, repair and operation of means of traffic control. 
10. Service on maintenance of office buildings:      
 (1) cleaning inside offices and facade of the building and in the surrounding area;  
 (2) urban land improvement and landscaping of surrounding area, and maintenance of 
  plants inside the buildings; 
 (3) sanitation inside of the buildings and in the surrounding area;    (4) removal of garbage and snow from the surrounding area;  
(5) custodial services, provision with signal systems and other devices for the 
protection of buildings, fire safety and in  the surrounding areas of the buildings. 
11. Communication services (including Internet, satellite, telephone, courier mail service). 
12. Services in support of information systems. 
13. Services on publication of information in the media. 
14. Services for the maintenance of fire fighting systems and air conditioning of server rooms. 
15. Services on hardware and software system-maintenance. 
16. Services for conduction of a scientific expertise of draft laws, regulations and concepts of 
the draft laws. 
17. Services for the production of Collected Acts of central executive and other state bodies of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
Source: Approved by the Resolution of the Govern ment of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 341 dated 
19 March 2012. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 402 - 
 
  ANNEX 19(C) 
The List of Commodity Exchange Goods and Minimum Limits of Provided Lots of  
Goods, which Are Realised through Commodity Exchange 
No. Short name of commodity Code of CU FEACN Minimum 
limits of 
provided lots 
of goods 
1 2 3 4 
1. Fresh or refrigerated potato: others 0701 90 900 0 60 tonnes 
2. Wheat and meslin:  other dink el wheat, soft wheat and other 
meslin** 1001 91 990 0, 
1001 99 000 0 600 tonnes 
3. Barley: others** 1003 90 000 0 600 tonnes 
4. Crashed or non-crashed soybean: others 1201 90 000 0 600 tonnes 
5. White sugar 1701 99 100 60 tonnes 
6. Portland cement, aluminous 
cement, slag cement, supersulphate and like hydraulic cements, either in manu factured form or in the form 
of clinkers 2523 60 tonnes 
7. Coal, briquettes, fuels pellet and similar solid 
fuels manufactured from stone coal* 2701 3,000 tonnes 
8. Lignite or brown coal, 
agglomerated or not agglomerated, except for jet* 2702 3,000 tonnes 
9. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
propane 2711 12 100 tonnes 
10. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
butanes 2711 13 100 tonnes 
11. Petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons: LPG: 
others 2711 19 000 0 100 tonnes 
12. Cotton fiber, carded or combed 5203 00 000 0 600 tonnes 
* Applied for the procurement by municipal juridical persons since 1 January 2013 
** The list is not applied to  State resources of grain 
Source: Approved by the  Resolution of the Government of th e Republic of Kazakhstan No. 375 dated 
6 April 2011.  
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 403 - ANNEX 20 
Rates for Works and Services Rendered by th e National Intellectual Property Institute 
Part I. Section I - For patenting inventions, utility models, industrial designs, selection achievements 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 
12% VAT) Juridical person Natural 
person Juridical 
person Natural person Individual (the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled veterans, 
invalids, students of 
high schools, 
vocational schools, 
technical secondary 
schools, higher 
schools) 
25% 10% 10% 5% 2% 
1. For application to issue a title of protection including formal 
examination:       
for inventions 15,971.2     1,597.1 798.6 319.4 
for utility models 14,425.6     1,442.6 721.3 288.5 
for industrial designs 11,334.4     1,133.4 566.7 226.7 
for selection achievements 10,292.8     1,029.3 514.6 205.9 
In case of payment for application after the set period but not later than two months after its expiration, the amount of the p ayment increases by 20%: 
for inventions 19,165.4   1,916.5 958.3 383.3 
for utility models 17,310.7   1,731.1 865.5 346.2 
for industrial designs 13,601.3   1,360.1 680.1 272.0 
for selection achievements 12,351.4   1,235.1 617.6 247.0 
2. For processing an international application at the recipient authority 
and forwarding it to the International bureau and International searching authority  8,243.2      
3. For checking the Eurasian application in terms of compliance with 
formal requirements and forwarding to the Eurasian patent office 3,091.2      
4. For conducting examination as to substance of an application for 
invention: 62,854.4   6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1 
4.1 additionally for each extra invention 50,489.6     5,049.0 2,524.5 1,009.8 
 When application contains a report on the international search or a preliminary examination report prepared by one of the inte rnational authorities in compliance with international 
agreements to which Kazakhstan is a member, the cost of examination as to substance decreases by 15%. 
When application contains a report on informational search perf ormed in compliance with paragraph 11 of Article 22 of the Paten t Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the cost of 
examination as to substance decreases by 60%. 
5. For conducting examination as to substance of an industrial design 
application: 31,427.2   3,142.7 1,571.4 628.5 
 additionally for each extra industrial design  2,060.8   206.1 103.0 41.2 
6. For introducing changes and amendments to the materials of the 
application by the applicant's initiative 3,091.2   309.1 154.6 61.8  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 404 -  Works and services Rate 
(including 
12% VAT) Juridical person Natural 
person Juridical 
person Natural person Individual (the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled veterans, 
invalids, students of 
high schools, 
vocational schools, 
technical secondary 
schools, higher 
schools) 
25% 10% 10% 5% 2% 
6.1  - for introducing changes and amendments of the same kind into the 
series of the same applicant's applications per each subsequent application 2,060.8   206.1 103.0 41.2 
7. For transforming an invention application into an utility model 
application or an utility model application into an invention application  8,243.2   824.3 412.2 164.9 
8. For preparation of documents to issue the title of protection and the 
author's certificate and for publication of data about such issuance  31,427.2   3,142.7 1,571.4 628.5 
9. For preparation of documents to issue duplicate of the title of 
protection and publication of data about such issuance  20,608.0   2,060.8 1,030.4 412.2 
10. For preparation of documents to issue duplicate of the author's 
certificate and publication of data about such issuance 10,292.8   1,029.3 514.6 205.9 
11. For preparation of documents to re-register the title of protection as a 
result of amending errors made du e to the applicant's fault and for 
publication of data about such re-registration 16,486.4   1,648.6 824.3 329.7 
12. For introducing changes and amendments into the State registers and 
the titles of protection for inventions, utility models, industrial 
designs, and selection achievements 11,334.4 2,833.6 1,133.4     226.7 
12.1  - for introducing changes and amendments of the same kind and 
same owner per each ti tle of protection  3,091.2 772.8 309.1     61.8 
13. For statement from the State registers of inventions, utility models, 
industrial designs, and selection achievements (per each item)  3,091.2 772.8 309.1     61.8 
14. For preparation of documents to extend the validity period of a title of 
protection and for publication of data about the extension of             
14.1  - preliminary patent for inventio n, patent for utility model and   
industrial design; 2,060.8 515.2 206.1     41.2 
14.2  - patent for invention 7,212.8 1,803.2 721.3     144.3 
14.3  - patent for selection achievement  515.2 128.8 51.5     10.3 
15. For preparation of documents to renew validity of a patent for 
invention, utility model, industrial design and for publication of data 
about such renewal  10,292.8     1,029.3 514.6 205.9 
 
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 405 - Part I. Section II - For registration of trademarks, appella tions of origin, and right to use appellation of origin 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 
12% VAT)      
16. For application to register a tr ademark and appellation of origin 
including formal examination 11,334.4           
 In case of payment for application after the set period but no t later than two months after its expiration, the amount of the payment increases by 20%: 
17. For application to register a collective trademark 
 In case of payment for application after the set period but no t later than two months after its expiration, the amount of the payment increases by 20%: 
18. For complete examination of the application to register a trademark 
up to 3 classes of the International Classification of Goods and Services: 22,668.8      
18.1  - additionally for each extra class if more than three  5,152.0      
19. For examination of the application materials to register and/or grant a 
right to use an appellations of origin  14,425.6      
20. For dividing a trademark applicat ion into classes by the applicant's 
initiative 8,243.2      
21. For transforming a trademark application into an application for a 
collective trademark and vice versa  10,292.8           
22. For processing an international application at the recipient authority 
and forwarding it to the International bureau  6,182.4           
23. For examination related to the acknowledgment of a trademark as 
well-known including publication  69,036.8 Excluded by the Order of the Vice Chairm an of the Intellectual Property Rights Committee 
of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 23 June 2010 
24. For preparation of documents to issue trademark certificates, 
certificates of right to use an appell ation of origin or their duplicates 
and for publication of data about such issuance  11,334.4           
25. For changes and amendments into State registers, trademark 
certificates and certificates of right to use an appellation of origin 11,334.4           
25.1  - for introducing one-type changes and amendments into the State 
register and the trademark certificate of the same owner per each certificate  3,091.2           
26. For statement from State registers of trademarks/service marks and 
appellations of origin (per each item) 3,091.2           
27. For preparation of documents to extend the validity period of a 
trademark certificate and for publication of data about such extension for three classes: 22,668.8           
27.1  - additionally per each extra class if more than three  11,334.4           
 In case of extension of the validity period of a certificate after the set period but not later than six months after its expi ration, the amount of the payment increases by 50%: 
28. For preparation of documents to extend the validity period of right to 
use an appellations of origin and for publication of data about such extension 22,668.8           
 In case of extension of the validity period of a certificate after the set period but not later than six months after its expi ration, the amount of the payment increases by 50%: 
Source: Agreed with the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Regulation of Natural Monopolies  and Protection of Competition on 16 August 2004.   
 Approved by the Order of the Chairman of the Intellectual Prop erty Rights Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic  of Kazakhstan No. 37-p dated 
27 May 2004.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 406 - Part II. Section I - Patenting inventions, utility mo dels, industrial designs, selection achievements 
 
 Works and services Rate (including 
12% VAT) Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural person 
(the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled 
veterans, 
invalids, students 
of high schools, 
vocational 
schools, technical 
secondary 
schools, higher 
schools ) Juridical 
person/ 
natural 
person Natural 
person Natural person 
(the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants and 
disabled 
veterans, 
invalids, 
students of high 
schools, 
vocational 
schools, 
technical 
secondary 
schools, higher 
schools ) 
50% 25% 15% 10% 5% 2% 
1. Application inquiring the conventional priority after the 
law-established period including making a formal examination  21,123.2       2,112.3 1,056.2 422.5 
2. Entering into a national phase of the international application upon 
expiration of the period fixed by the Patent Cooperation Treaty 5,152.0       515.2 257.6 103.0 
3. Extending the submission period for translated documents of an 
application into the state and Russian languages  5,152.0       515.2 257.6 103.0 
4. Pre-schedule beginning of a formal examination of an application for 
a patent item  11,334.4       1,133.4 566.7 226.7 
5. Information search to identify the state-of the-arts level with the 
purpose of assessing the patentability of an invention or utility model 37,721.6       3,772.2 1,886.1 754.4 
6. Extension of the submission periods for requested documents per 
each month:               
6.1  - up to 6 month from the date of expiration of the set period  5,152.0       515.2 257.6 103.0 
6.2  - from 6 to 12 months from the date of expiration of the set period  10,214.4       1,021.4 510.7 204.3 
7. Renewal of the period omitted by an applicant  30,912.0       3,091.2 1,545.6 618.2 
8. Preparation and certification of a copy of an application (priority 
document) 2,060.8 1,030.4 515.2 309.1 - -   
9. Production of a copy of an application  1,030.4 515.2 257.6 154.6 - -   
10. Keeping a title of protection in force within the set periods and for 
publication of data about such keeping   See Annex 2 
For keeping a title of protection in force after the set period but not later than six months after its expiration, the amount of payment increases by 50% 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 407 - Part II. Section II - Registration of tr ademarks, appellations of origin, the ri ght to use an appellation of origin 
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT)       
11. Extension of the period to answer the enquiry per each month 5,152.0             
12. Entering an opposition for de cision on preliminary denial in 
registration  16,486.4             
13. Extending of the submission period for entering an opposition for 
examination decision per each month  4,121.6             
14. Preparation and certification of a copy of an application (priority 
document) 1,030.4             
15. Renewal of periods omitted by an applicant  30,912.0             
16. Introduction of changes and amendments to the materials of an 
application by the initiative of an applicant:  8,243.2             
16.1  - for one-type changes and amendments into the series of the 
applications introduced by the same applicant per each following application  3,091.2             
 
Part II. Section III - Examination of agreements on assignment of  titles of protection, licence (sub-licence) agreements to emp loy industrial 
property items, protection titles pledging  agreements, package business licence agre ements (only regarding the protected indust rial 
property items) 
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT)       
17. Examination of agreement on assignment of title of protection per 
each title of protection provided by the agreement and for publication 
of data about the agreement registration  39,155.2             
18. Examination of agreement on assignment of the right to obtain a 
preliminary patent  7,280.0 Excluded by the Order of the vice Chairman of the Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010 
 
 19. Examination of licence (sub-licence) agreement to employ an 
industrial property item, protection title pledging agreement, agreement to issue a package business licence (in respect to protected items of industrial property) and for publication of data about the agreement registration:   
19.1  - in respect to one item of industrial property  39,155.2 
19.2  - in respect to a group of industrial property items additionally per 
each extra item 8,243.2 
20. Introduction of changes into the registered assignment agreement, 
licence (sub-licence) agreement, pledging agreement, package business licence agreement  11,334.4 
21. Application to issue an open licence and publication of data about 
such application  11,334.4 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 408 - Part II. Section IV - Preparation of documents to regi ster patent agents of the Republic of Kazakhstan 
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT)       
22. Preparation of documents to issue a certificate of a patent ag ent excluded Excluded by the Order of the Vice Chairman of th e Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010 23. Publication of data about regist ration of a patent agent 4,121.6 
24. Publication of changes and additions on data about a patent agent 2,240.0 
 
Part II. Section V - Preliminary works to co nsider answers at the Board of appeal of the Intellectual Property Rights Committee  
 
 Works and services Rate 
(including 12% 
VAT) Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural person 
(the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)    
10% 5% 2%    
25. For carrying out the preliminary works (including expenses to 
participate in the meeting of the Board of Appeal of independent 
experts) to create materials required for consideration of objections against denial to issue:                
25.1  - preliminary patent to invention or industrial design  8,254.4 825.4 412.7 165.1       
25.2  - patent to invention, industrial design or selection achievement  53,592.0 5,359.2 2,679.6 1,071.8       
25.3  - patent to utility model 13,406.4 1,340.6 670.3 268.1       
26. For carrying out preliminary works (including expenses to participate 
in the meeting of the Board of Appeal of independent experts) to create materials required for consideration of objections against 
denial to issue a protection title for:                
26.1  - preliminary patent to invention or industrial design  8,254.4 825.4 412.7 165.1       
26.2  - patent to invention, industrial design or selection achievement  53,592.0 5,359.2 2,679.6 1,071.8       
26.3  - patent to utility model 13,406.4 1,340.6 670.3 268.1       
27. For carrying out preliminary works to create materials required for 
consideration at the Board of Appeal of objections against decisions to deny a registration of tr ademarks/appellations of origin, 
acknowledgement a trade mark as well-known, registration of assignment agreement for the right to obtain a protection title, 
assignment agreement for the protection title, licence (sub-licence) 
agreement to employ an industrial property item, agreement to pledge the protection title, agreement to issue a package business licence  6,193.6             
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 409 - Part II. Section VI - General services 
 Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
29. Oral consultations 772.8 1 page           
30. Written consultations concerning the legislation of Kazakhstan on 
protection of industrial property, submission and consideration of international applications in compliance with the Patent Cooperation Treaty; submission of Eurasian applications  1,030.4 per 1 hour           
31. Publication of advertisements on the issues of industrial property 
protection  1,030.4 1 page           
32. Upon request of an applicant orga nization of expert negotiations or 
meetings with participation of the applicant or his/her representative  515.2 per 1 cm2            
33. Patent and information search  1, 545.6 per 1 hour           
34. Search within the works of registered items of industrial property  - agreed price           
34.1  - per each subsequent IP item indicated in the request of one 
applicant 3,696.0             
  Preparation of a duplicate Annex to the title of protection for an 
invention, utility model, industrial design, and selection achievement  918.4             
34.2 Drawing up a petition to the PC T application including the duties 
calculation sheet  5,152.0   1,545.6 772.8 103.0     
35. Drawing up an application to lo wer the duty for PCT application for 
individuals  2,060.8             
36. Drawing up a requirement for international preliminary examination 
of the PCT application including the duties calculation sheet  515.2             
37. Drawing up a petition for Eurasian application including the duties 
calculation sheet  1,030.4             
38. Transfer, upon the applicant's request, a certified copy of one 
national application to the International Bureau  515.2             
39. Request on assignment of the right to obtain a trade mark/service 
mark certificate  2,060.8             
39.1  14,560.0             
40. Preliminary search of a designation in the trademarks database and 
designations applied to be registered  in the context of classes of IGSC 
goods and services indicated by the applicant:                 
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 410 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
40.1  - for one verbal or graphic designation per one IGSC class within a 
monthly period  10,292.8             
40.2   - for simultaneous search of several verbal designations being 
transliterations of each other by coinciding classes, additionally per each extra designation (within preliminary search based on a 
combined designation, factor 2 is applied)  515.2             
40.3  - per each extra IGSC class (factor 2 is applied for an urgent search 
within 10 days upon the customer's request)  1,030.4             
40.4  - supplying of printouts on design ations shown in the search report  
including reproduction of the mark, data about the mark's owner, and a list of goods and services according to the IGSC classes additionally per each designation shown in the search report  1,030.4             
40.1 Carrying out of search works for registered trademarks (except for 
search for identity and similarity)   4,368.0             
    - per each subsequent trade mark indicated in one applicant's 
request  1,097.6             
40.2 Upon applicant's request advancement of a complete examination of 
a trademark application  22,400.0             
40.3 Preparation of a duplicate A nnex to a trademark certificate / 
appellations of origin certificate 5,600.0             
41. Upon applicant's request urgent examination of an application 
suggested to be submitted for th e international registration  10,292.8             
42. Preparation of an international trademark application according to the 
Madrid Agreement 5,152.0             
42.1 Preparation of an application to introduce changes into an 
international application submitted according to the Madrid Agreement  5,152.0             
   - preparation of one-type applications from one applicant additionally 
per each extra application  2,576.0             
43. Preparation of a list of goods and services for international application 
in compliance with the IGSC and translation of each item into French 1,030.4             
44. Bringing, upon the applicant's request, of a trademark to the level of 
available standards with the help of computers 2,060.8             
45. Classification of a designation according to the IGSC upon the 
applicant's request   1,030.4 per 1 class            
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 411 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
46. Legal assistance in development of contractual terms of agreement 
on assignment of titles of protection and of licence agreement for 
their employment  20,585.6 
Excluded by the Order of the vice Chairman of the Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010 47. Certification of signatures of indi viduals being a party or parties of the 
agreement  515.2 
48. Preparation and certification, within one month, of a copy of 
assignment agreement, licence agreement, or pledge agreement (provided their owner submits the original agreements)  1,030.4 
48.1  - per each subsequent copy under condition that all copies are 
prepared at the same time (for urgent copies (up to 15 days) upon the applicant's request, the rate increases by 50%)  515.2 
49. Prolongation, upon a written request of the applicant, of the 
submission period to answer the enquiry in respect to an assignment agreement, licence agreement, or a pledge agreement after the set period has expired  515.2 
50. Renewal of the submission period to answer the enquiry in respect to 
an assignment agreement, licence agreement, or a pledge agreement when omitted by the applicant  5,152.0 
51. Publication, upon the request of a party (parties) of the registered 
agreement, of data about its cancellation  515.2 
52. Carrying out of various search works in the registers of registered 
assignment agreements or licence agreements  1,030.4 
Excluded by the Order of the vice Chairman of the Intellectual Property Rights 
Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 96 dated 
23 June 2010  53. Supervision, upon the request of licensee, of the legal status of the 
title of protection for industrial pr operty item and notification about a 
pre-schedule termination of this document  1,030.4 
54. Sale of bulletins, manuals, and methodological materials published by 
the National Intellectual Property Institute  
(per one pcs) - agreed price           
55. Search of patent documentation:               
55.1  - numerical search 20.2 1 document           
55.2  - title search 51.5 1 document           
56. Sale of complete descriptions of inventions in electronic format 
(through Internet) 2,060.8 1 МB           
57. Sale of databases of pre-patents and patents of Kazakhstan:               
57.1  - a full-text database Patents of Kazakhstan (discount of 30% for 
educational institutions)  30,912.0              
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 412 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
57.2  - a bibliographic database Patents of Kazakhstan for the entire past 
period (free of charge for those who have bought the full-text 
database) 18,547.2 1 year           
57.3  - annual bibliographic database Patents of Kazakhstan 6,182.4 1 year           
58. Analysis of the patent and legal literature fund including selection of 
documents (per one subject matter)  - agreed price           
59. Making annotated subject lists on the matters of intellectual property 
protection (per one list) - agreed price           
60. Subscription service on supply of information about inventions of 
Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, EAPO according to subject requests and granting of copies of abstracts (1 request for 1 group of 
IPC for six months) - agreed price           
61. Supply of information based on stat istical data on titles of protection 
(1 request)  - agreed price           
62. Producing hard copies of docu ments of the National Intellectual 
Property Institute:               
62.1  - one page sheet 10.1 1 page           
62.2  - two page sheet 20.2 -//-           
62.3  - classifiers 30.2 -//-           
63. Producing hard copies of documents of a customer:               
63.1  - one page sheet 10.1 1 page           
63.2  - two page sheet 15.7 -//-           
64. Producing  copies of documents for machine-readable media 51.5 1 file           
65. Printing out of documents  10.1 1 page           
66. Filling in application forms and request forms   1,030.4 1 document           
67. Supply of application forms  20.2 1 form           
68. Investigation of engineering objects and technologies in terms of 
patent clearance (non-infringement) (1 subject, 1 country) - agreed price           
69. Investigation and analysis of trends in the state-of-the-arts 
development                
69.1  - by titles of protection of Ka zakhstan and scientific and technical 
literature    agreed price           
69.2  - by titles of protection of othe r countries and scientific and technical 
literature  - agreed price           
70. Patent and legal analysis of scientific research being of special 
significance to elaborate recommendations for the interested persons (1 subject) - agreed price           
71. Consultative assistance at court examinations related to infringement 
of industrial property rights  - agreed price            
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13
 
- 413 -  Works and services 
Rate (including 
12% VAT) Measurement 
unit Juridical 
person Natural 
person Natural 
person (the 
Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, 
invalids, etc.)   
Issuance of written references to  applicants and patent holders 
regarding payment for applications and protection titles as well as 
references to the interested persons about the registered items of 
industrial property (IP items) 30% 15% 2%   
72. Conduct of internships  on the matte rs of legal protection of IP items 
(preparation and examination of applications and agreements, 
performance of search, methods of work with patent documentation) up to 6,840 1 person/day           
73. Re-setting off previously paid payment or rate 515.2 document           
74. Accounting and control of payments from deposit sub-accounts of 
legal entities and individuals  112.0 per 1 
application or a title of 
protection           
75. Confirmation of receipt by the Na tional Intellectual Property Institute 
of the relevant payment 56.0 per each 
receipt           
Source: Approved by the Order of the Chairman of the Intellectua l Property Rights Committee of the Ministry of Justice of the R epublic of Kazakhstan No. 51-p dated 16 August 2004.WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 414 - 
 
  Annex 2 to Part II of the Price List (Bill of Fare) for Works and Services Rendered by the 
National Intellectual Property Institute 
- Amount of payment for keeping the titles of protection in force: 
1. A title of protection for an invention 
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date 
of application Rate (including 
12% VAT Juridical person Natural person Natural person (the Great 
Patriotic War participants 
and disabled veterans, 
invalids, students of high 
schools, vocational 
schools, technical 
secondary schools, higher 
schools ) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4
Second 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4
Third 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4
Forth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0
Fifth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0
Sixth 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6
Seventh 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6
Eighth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0
Ninth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0
Tenth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0
Eleventh 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1
Twelfth 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257,1
Thirteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9
Fourteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9
Fifteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9
Sixteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1
Seventeenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1
Eighteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1
Nineteenth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twentieth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty first 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty second 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty third 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty forth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty fifth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
 
2. A patent for utility model 
 
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date 
of application Rate (including 
12% VAT) Juridical person Natural person Natural person 
(the Great Patriotic War 
participants, invalids, 
etc.) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7
Second 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7
Third 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7
Forth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5
Fifth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5
Sixth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5
Seventh 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5
Eighth 32,972.8 3,297.3 1,648.6 659.5WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 415 - 
 
  3. A title of protection for an industrial design 
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date 
of application Rate (including 
12% VAT Juridical person Natural person Natural person (the Great 
Patriotic War 
participants, invalids, 
etc.) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7
Second 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7
Third 11,334.4 1,133.4 566.7 226.7
Forth 16,486.4 1,648.6 824.3 329.7
Fifth 16,486.4 1,648.6 824.3 329.7
Sixth 19,577.6 1,957.8 978.9 391.6
Seventh 19,577.6 1,957.8 978.9 391.6
Eighth 20,585.6 2,058.6 1,029.3 411.7
Ninth 20,585.6 2,058.6 1,029.3 411.7
Tenth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0
Eleventh 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7
Twelfth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7
Thirteenth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7
Fourteenth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7
Fifteenth 35,033.6 3,503.4 1,751.7 700.7
4. A patent for a selection achievement 
Year of keeping 
the title of 
protection in 
force counting 
from the date of 
application Rate (including 
12% VAT Juridical person Natural person Natural person (the Great 
Patriotic War participants, 
invalids, etc.) 
10% 5% 2% 
First 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4
Second 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4
Third 15,971.2 1,597.1 798.6 319.4
Forth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0
Fifth 23,699.2 2,369.9 1,185.0 474.0
Sixth 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6
Seventh 30,878.4 3,087.8 1,543.9 617.6
Eighth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0
Ninth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0
Tenth 47,398.4 4,739.8 2,369.9 948.0
Eleventh 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1
Twelfth 62,854.4 6,285.4 3,142.7 1,257.1
Thirteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9
Fourteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9
Fifteenth 94,796.8 9,479.7 4,739.8 1,895.9
Sixteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1
Seventeenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1
Eighteenth 110,252.8 11,025.3 5,512.6 2,205.1
Nineteenth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twentieth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty first 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty second 125,708,8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty third 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty forth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty fifth 125,708.8 12,570.9 6,285.4 2,514.2
Twenty sixth - thirtieth  140,616.0 14,061.6 7,030.8 2,812.3
Thirty first - 
thirty five 156,240.0 15,624.0 7,812.0 3,124.8
Thirty six - forty 171,864.0 17,186.4 8,593.2 3,437.3
Forty first - 
forty five 187,488.0 18,748.8 9,374.4 3,749.8
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 416 - 
 
  ANNEX 21 
Preferential Trade Agreements 
I. CIS Free Trade Area  Basic Agreements 
- Agreement on the Creation  of Free Trade Area of 15 April 1994; 
- Protocol on Amending the Agreements on the Creation  of Free Trade Area 
of 15 April 1994 (2 April 1999); 
- Protocol on the Rules for Conducting of Consultations on Phasing-Out of Exemptions from 
Free Trade Regime of the Parties to the Agreement on the Creation  of Free Trade Area 
of 24 December 1999;  
- Agreement on Free Trade Area  of 18 October 2011, signed by following CIS countries:  
Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, the Russian Federation, 
Tajikistan and Ukraine; and, 
- Protocol on Application of the Agreemen t on Free Trade Area of 18 October 2011 
between Parties to the Agreement and the Republic of Uzbekistan 
of 31 May 2013.  
 
Bilateral Free Trade Agreements Concluded under the CIS 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of Republic of Azerba ijan 10 June 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  
Azerbaijan 10 June 1997 - not effective, new Protocol signed; 
- Protocol on Amending the Free Trade Agreem ent between the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Government of th e Republic of Azerbaijan 10 June 1997 
(24 May 2005) - effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Armenia of 20 September 1999 – effective ; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G ove rnme nt of the  R e p ubl ic  of Kaza kh s tan and the Government of Republic of Armenia 
of 20 September 1999 - not effective, terms ended; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of the Republic of Belarus (23 September 1997) – effective ; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Kyrgyz Republic of 22 June 1997 – effective ; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic 
of 22 June 1997 – effective ; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Government of the Republic of Moldova of 26 May 1995 – effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan an d the Government of the Republic of Moldova 
of 26 May 1995 – effective ; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Russian Federation of 22 October 1992 – not effective;  
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the Russian Federation 
of 22 October 1992 - not effective ; 
- Protocol on Establishment of Free Trade Regime without Exemptions and Restrictions - 
not effective ; 
- Amendment of 23 December 1998 to the Protoc ol on Establishment of Free Trade Regime 
without Exemptions and Restrictions between the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
Russian Federation of 20 January 1995 – not effective;  
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Tajikistan of 22 November 1995 - effective;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 417 - 
 
  - Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  Tajikistan of 22 November 1995 – effective ; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of the Republic of Uzbe kistan of 2 June 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  
Uzbekistan of 2 June 1997 - effective; 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of Ukraine of 17 September 1994 – effective ; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t h e  G o v e r n m e n t  o f  U k r a i n e  
of 17 September 1994 – effective;   
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  K a z a k h s t a n  a n d  t he  
Government of Georgia of 11 November 1997 - effective; 
- Protocol on Exemptions from Free Trade Re gime to the Free Trade Agreement between the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of Georgia 
of 11 November 1997 – not effective, new Protocol signed; and, 
- Protocol on Amending the Free Trade Agreem ent between the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and the Government of Geor gia of 11 November 1997 (11 November 2004) 
- effective. 
Most Important Agreements Adopted within the CIS FTA: 
- Decision of the Council of the Heads of the Governments of the Commonwealth of 
Independent States on Rules of Origin of 30 November 2000 - not effective; 
- Agreement on Rules of Origin in th e Commonwealth of Independent States 
of 20 November 2009 - effective; 
- Agreement on Re-export of Goods and the Procedure of Licensing of Re-export 
of 15 April 1994;  
- Agreement on Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic Activity 
of 3 November 1995; 
- Protocol on Amendments into Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity of 4 June 1999; 
- Protocol on Amendments into Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity of 8 October 1999; 
- Protocol to the Agreement on Uniform Goods Nomenclature of CIS Foreign Economic 
Activity of 20 June 2000; and, 
- Agreement on Measures for Prevention and Restraint of Fictitious Trade Marks and 
Geographical Indications of 4 June 1999. 
II. The Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and 
the Russian Federation within the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) 
EurAsEC Agreements that Form Legal Basis for the Customs Union: 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between the Republic of Belarus and the Russian 
Federation of 6 January 1995; and, 
- Agreement on the Customs Union between th e Republic of Belarus, the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation of 20 January 1995; 
Customs Union Agreements that Finalised the Creation of the CU: 
- Agreement on Export Customs Duties with regard to the Third Countries 
of 25 January 2008; 
- Agreement on Common Rules for Determining the Country of Origin of 25 January 2008; - Agreement on Determination of Customs Valuation of Goods Transferred Across the 
Customs Border of the Customs Union of 25 January 2008;  
- Protocol on Common System of Tariff Preferences of the Customs Union 
of 12 December 2008; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 418 - 
 
  - Agreement on Rules of Origin of Goods Originating from Developing and Least-developed 
Countries of 12 December 2008; and, 
- Treaty on the Customs Code of th e Customs Union of 27 November 2009; 
Agreement establishing the Legal Basis for the Si ngle Economic Space between the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation: 
- Agreement on Coordinated Principles on Co unteraction to Illegal Labor Migration from 
Third Countries of 19 November 2010. 
III. Other Bilateral FTAs 
- Free Trade Agreement between the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the 
G o v e r n m e n t  o f  t h e  R e p u b l i c  o f  S e r b i a  o f  7  O c t o b e r  2 0 1 0  ( e n t e r e d  i n t o  f o r c e  on 10 January 2012). 
 
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 419 - 
 
  ANNEX 22 
The List of Spheres where State Enterprises could be Established 
1. public utility services for population (energy, gas, water, heat supply and burial of 
communal wastes, creation and maintenance of waste landfills); 
2. creation of woodland-park, green and protection zones with the restricted regime of nature 
use and forest planting; 
3. activities maintaining the functions of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
Administration of the President of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan and its departments and 
diplomatic service authorities of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
4. maintenance of state-owned automobile roads; 5. public healthcare; public high  and post-graduate education; 
6. operation of public sports and fitn ess entities, culture and leisure parks; 
7. scientific researches;  8. maintenance of the state land cadastre, information databases concerning subsurface and 
subsurface use, state reserves of ecological information and state cadastres of natural 
resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan, state register of regulatory legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
9. maintenance, operation, and safety of water management systems, and facilities which are 
in state ownership; 
10. plant protection and quarantine, and phytosan itary expertise of production subject to plant 
quarantine;  
11. scientific research, preservation, restoratio n, re-creation, repair and adjustment of 
monuments of history and culture; 
12. activity of a sea port; 
13. aero navigation services to users of air space of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
14. formation and storage of the state commodity reserves; 15. economic and business activities in the sp here of technical regulation and metrology; 
16. production activities in the sphere of the criminal-prosecution system and organization of 
employment of prisoners; 
17. performance of functions on: 
- reference function on diag nostics of animal diseases; 
- epizootic monitoring of diseases of wild animals in the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- maintenance of National Collection of Deposited Strains of Microorganisms; - registration testing, approbation of veterinary specimens, feed additives, as well as 
control of series (lots) of drugs at their reclamation; 
- state monitoring, references on provision of food security; - monitoring of safety of veterinary  drugs, feeds, and feed additives; 
- veterinary measures against extremely hazardous and enzootic animal diseases; 
- identification of agricultural animals; - provision of services on artificial insemination of animals; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 420 - 
 
  - provision of services on transportation (delivery), storage of veterinary preparation 
against extremely hazardous and enzootic animal diseases, as well as transportation (delivery) of items (means) and attributes of veterinary purpose for conducting identification of agricultural animals; 
- maintenance of animal burial sites (biothermical pits), slaughter sites, built by local 
executive bodies of corresponding administrative territorial units; 
- trapping and extermination of stray dogs and cats. 
18. liquidation (termination, utilization, burial ) of weapons, military equipment and other not 
used military property, leasing of defence objects, selling (including exports) and purchasing (including imports) of weapon, military equipment, ammunition, their spare and component units, production, equipment and corresponding technology of double 
application for Armed Forces, other troops and military units of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan; 
19. liquidation and conservation of state-owned accident-risk inactive mines and coal 
enterprises, under the list determined by the Government, and also liquidation of 
consequences of their activities; 
20. rendering and automatization of state services on "single window". 
21. performance of mountain rescue and other special operations in emergency and accident 
situations, protection from fire, flood and other natural disasters; 
22. pre-school education and training, additional education, technical, professional and 
post-secondary education; 
23. postgraduate education entities under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
24. work safety and protection of employment , social protection of population, except 
activities, performed by the authorised organi zation according to the Law of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan on "Pension safety", culture and sports; 
25. protection, ensuring sustainable use, reproduction and breeding of fauna and flora spices 
for the purposes of preserving biological diversity and genetic stock, and protection of 
nature (zoological gardens, botanical gardens, dendrological parks), aviation work for 
protection and guarding of the forest reserves; 
26. performance of topographic-geodesic and cartographic works; 27. rendering of special social services to persons (families) in a difficult life situation; 
28. classification and providing for technical safety of vessels.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 421 - 
 
  ANNEX 23(A) 
Rates of Export Duties Currently Applied by Kazakhstan 
HS Number Description of Goods Duty Rate 
4101 Raw pelts of cattle (including buffalos) or animals of 
horse family (vapored or salted, dried, limed, pickled or conserved by other methods, but not tanned, not curried as parchment or without further processing), with hair or without hair, splitting or non-splitting.  20, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
4102  Raw pelts of sheep or lambs (vapored or salted, dried, 
limed, pickled or conserved by other methods, but not 
tanned, not curried as parchment or without further processing), woolly or non-woolly, splitting or 
non-splitting. 20, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
4103 Other raw skins (vapored or salted, dried, limed, pickled 
or conserved by other meth ods, but not tanned, not 
curried as parchment or without further processing), with 
hair or without hair, splitting or non-splitting. 20, but not less than  
€200 per 1,000 kg 
5101 -  5104 00 000 0 Un-carded and uncombed wool. 10, but not less than   
€50 per 1,000 kg 
7204* Iron-and-steel waste and scrap; ferrous metal ingots for 
re-melting (charging ingots). 15, but not less than  
€20 per 1,000 kg 
7302 Ferrous metal products, used for railway lines and 
tram-lines:  rails, flange rail and rack rails, switch blades, point frogs, regulating rods and other cross connections, crossties, splice bars and base-plates, wedges, bedplates, hood joint bolts, bad plates and bracing wires, foundation 
slabs, cross bars and other details for connection and bonding of rails.  20, but not less than  
€20 per 1,000 kg  
7404 00 Copper waste and scrap. 30, but not less than  
€330 per 1,000 kg 
76   Aluminium and aluminium products 
Aluminium and beryllium ligature. 15, but not less than  
€100 per 1,000 kg  
8607 Parts of locomotives and motor-wags of trams and 
rolling-stocks.  20, but not less than  
€15 per 1,000 kg 
2709 00 900 9 Crude Oil Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 12 110 0 –  2710 12 900 9, 2710 20 900 0 Light distillates and products Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 110 0 –  
2710 19 290 0, 
2710 20 900 0 Middle distillates: for specific re-treatment processes; for 
chemical conversions during processes; except for 
indicated in sub-position 2710 19 110 0 for other aims Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 420 0 –  
2710 19 480 0, 
2710 20 110 0, 
2710 20 150 0, 2710 20 190 0 Hard distillates:  gas oils Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 510 1, 
2710 19 510 9 –  
2710 19 550 9 Hard distillates:  liquid fuels Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 620 1 - 
2710 19 680 9, 
2710 20 310 1, 
2710 20 310 9, 2710 20 350 1, 2710 20 350 9, 2710 20 370 1, 2710 20 370 9, 2710 20 390 1, 2710 20 390 9 Hard distillates:  liquid fuels Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2713 20 000 0 –  2713 90 900 0 Bitumen Calculated with a specific 
formula 
2710 19 310 0 –  2710 19 350 0 Hard distillates:  gas oils Calculated with a specific 
formula 
* Rates of export customs duties not applied with respect to goods exported to the customs territory of the 
European Union countries, which were the countries of destination in these cases.  This treatment will be 
eliminated upon Kazakhstan' s accession to the WTO. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 422 - 
 
  ANNEX 23(B) 
Results of Negotiations on Export Duties Refe rred to in Paragraph [528] of this Report 
 
_______________ 
 HS category From the date of 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After one year 
starting  from 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After two years 
starting from 
Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO After three years 
starting from Kazakhstan's 
accession to the 
WTO 
7204 Ferrous waste and scrap; remelting scrap ingots of iron or steel 15%, but not less 
than 15 euro per tonne 15%, but not less 
than 15 euro per tonne 10%, but not less 
than 10 euro per tonne 5%, but not less 
than 5 euro per tonne WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 423 - 
 
  APPENDIX 
 
[DRAFT DECISION 
 
ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
 
Decision of […] 
 
 The [Ministerial Conference] [General Council],  
 Having regard to  paragraph 2 of Article XII and pa ragraph 1 of Article IX of the 
Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (the "WTO Agreement"), and the 
Decision-Making Procedures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed by the 
General Council (WT/L/93),   [ Conducting  the functions of the Ministerial Confer ence in the interval between meetings 
pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article IV of the WTO Agreement,] 
 
 Taking note  of the application of the Republic of Kazakhstan for accession to the 
WTO Agreement dated 29 January 1996, 
 
 Noting  the results of the negotiations directed toward the establishment of the terms of 
accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement and having prepared a Protocol on the Accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan,  
 Decides  as follows: 
1. The Republic of Kazakhstan may accede to the WTO Agreement on the terms and conditions 
set out in the Protocol annexed to this Decision. 
 
 
_______________ 
 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 424 - 
 
  DRAFT PROTOCOL  
ON THE ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
Preamble 
 
 The World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as the "WTO"), pursuant to the 
approval of the [Ministerial Conference] [General Council] of the WTO accorded under Article XII of 
the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as the "WTO Agreement"), and the Republic of Kazakhstan,   
 Taking note of  the Report of the Working Party on the Accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement reproduced in document WT/ACC/KAZ/[…], dated […] 
(hereinafter referred  to as the "Working Party Report"), 
 
 Having regard to  the results of the negotiations on the accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to the WTO Agreement,  
 
 Agree  as follows: 
PART I - GENERAL 
 
1. Upon entry into force of this Protocol pursuant to paragraph 8, the Republic of Kazakhstan 
accedes to the WTO Agreement pursuant to Article XII of that Agreement and thereby becomes a Member of the WTO.  
 
2. The WTO Agreement to which the Republic of Kazakhstan accedes shall be the 
WTO Agreement, including the Explanatory Notes to  that Agreement, as rectified, amended or 
otherwise modified by such legal instruments as may have entered into force before the date of 
entry into force of this Protocol.  This Protocol, which shall include the commitments referred to in paragraph [...] of the Working Party Report, shall be an integral part of the WTO Agreement. 
3. Except as otherwise provided for in paragraph […] of the Working Party Report, those 
obligations in the Multilateral Trade Agreements annexed to the WTO Agreement that are to be implemented over a period of time starting with the entry into force of that Agreement shall be implemented by the Republic of Kazakhstan as if it had accepted that Agreement on the date of its 
entry into force. 
 
4. The Republic of Kazakhstan may maintain a measure inconsistent with paragraph 1 of 
Article II of the GATS provided that such a measure was recorded in the list of Article II Exemptions 
annexed to this Protocol and meets the conditions of the Annex to the GATS on Article II Exemptions. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 425 - 
 
  PART II - SCHEDULES 
 5. The Schedules reproduced in the Annex to this Protocol shall become the Schedule of 
Concessions and Commitments an nexed to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 
(hereinafter referred to as the "GATT 1994") and the Schedule of Specific Commitments annexed to the General Agreement on Trade in Services (hereinafter referred to as "GATS") relating to the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  The staging of the concessions and commitments listed in the Schedules 
shall be implemented as specified in the relevant parts of the respective Schedules.  
6. For the purpose of the reference in paragraph 6(a) of Article II of the GATT 1994 to the date 
of that Agreement, the applicable date in respec t of the Schedules of Concessions and Commitments 
annexed to this Protocol shall be the date of entry into force of this Protocol. 
 
PART III - FINAL PROVISIONS 
 
7. This Protocol shall be open for acceptance, by signature or otherwise, by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan until [...] or such later date as may be  decided by the [Ministe rial Conference][General 
Council]. 
 
8. This Protocol shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the day upon which it shall 
have been accepted by the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
 
9. This Protocol shall be deposited with the Director-General of the WTO.  The Director-General 
of the WTO shall promptly furnish a certified copy of this Protocol and a notification of acceptance by 
the Republic of Kazakhstan thereto pursuant to paragraph 7 to each Member of the WTO and to the Republic of Kazakhstan.    
10. This Protocol shall be registered in accordance with the provisions of Article 102 of the 
Charter of the United Nations.   
 
 Done at […] this […] day of […] in a single copy in the English, French and Spanish 
languages, each text being authentic, except that a Schedule annexed hereto may specify that it is 
authentic in only one of these languages, and the Working Party Report is authentic in English only. 
 
 
_______________ 
 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.13 
 
- 426 - 
 
  ANNEX 
SCHEDULE […] – THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
Authentic only in the English language. 
(Circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/[…]/Add.1) 
_______________ 
SCHEDULE OF SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS ON SERVICES 
LIST OF ARTICLE II EXEMPTIONS 
Authentic only in the English language. 
(Circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/[…]/Add.2)] 
__________