WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
G/VAL/M/53 
21 September 2012 
 (12-5073) 
Committee on Customs Valuation  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 10 MAY 2012 
 
Chairman:  Masafumi Kobayashi (Japan) 
  The agenda proposed for the meeting, circul ated in WTO/AIR/3935/Rev.1, was adopted as 
follows: 
 
I.  REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON 
CUSTOMS VALUATION ............................................................................................................. ....... 2 
II. INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................................... .................. 2  
A. K
INGDOM OF BAHRAIN  ..................................................................................................... 2  
B. BELIZE  .............................................................................................................................. . 3 
C. CAMBODIA  ........................................................................................................................ 3  
D. CHINA ............................................................................................................................... . 3 
E. COSTA RICA ...................................................................................................................... 4  
F. ECUADOR  .......................................................................................................................... 4  
G. NIGERIA  ............................................................................................................................ 5  
H. RWANDA  ........................................................................................................................... 5  
I.  ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES  ................................................................................ 6  
J.  THAILAND  ......................................................................................................................... 6  
K. TUNISIA  ............................................................................................................................. 6 
L. UKRAINE  ........................................................................................................................... 7  
III. CAPE VERDE –WAIVER RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF 
ARTICLE VII OF GATT 1994 AND THE AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF THE GATT 1994 ............................................................................................. 9  
IV. INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE 
COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION ................................................................................... 9  
V. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ................................................................................................... 10  
A. I
NFORMATION ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ................................................................... 10  
B. ARTICLE 20.3  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRADE -RELATED TECHNICAL 
ASSISTANCE  .................................................................................................................... 10  
VI. UNITED STATES - ARMENIA'S REFERENCE PRICE SYSTEM IN 
CONNECTION WITH THE VALUATIO N OF GOODS (G/VAL/W/213) ................................... 10  
VII. PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES ............................................. 11  
- PARAGRAPH 8.3 OF DOCUMENT WT/MIN/(01)/17.................................................................. 11  
VIII. PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION .............................................................................................. 13  
IX. COST SAVINGS IN DOCUMENT PRODUCTION AND MEETINGS - 
RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION WHICH WERE ADOPTED  BY THE GENERAL COUNCIL ................. 13  G/VAL/M/53 
Page 2  
 
  X. OTHER BUSINESS ................................................................................................................ .. 14 
A. D
ATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  .......................................................................................... 14  
B. LETTER FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (ICC) ........................... 14  
C. ELECTION OF OFFICERS  .................................................................................................. 14  
ANNEX 1 ....................................................................................................................... ....................... 15  
REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE  ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION ..................................................................................................................... .................. 15  
ANNEX 2 ....................................................................................................................... ....................... 17  
PARAGRAPHS 29 TO 31 OF DOCUMENT WT/BFA/128 ............................................................ 17  
 
_______________ 
 
I. REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION 
1.1 The representative of the World Customs Organization (WCO) reported on the activities of 
the Technical Committee at its 34th session, which was held on 16 to 19 April 2012.  This report is 
contained in Annex 1. 
1.2 The Committee took note of the report. 
II. INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT 
2.1 The Chairman recalled that Article 22 of th e Agreement on Customs Valuation (hereafter, the 
Agreement) required each Member to inform th e Committee of any changes in its laws and 
regulations relevant to the Agreement, as well as of  any changes in the administration of such laws 
and regulations.  He suggested that, under this s ub-item, the Committee take up the legislations in 
sequence, in the order set out in the revised version of the agenda.   
A. Kingdom of Bahrain 
2.2 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at the l ast meeting to revert to Bahrain's notification.  
The United States had posed questions in document G/VAL/W/181, and answers had been provided 
by Bahrain in document G/VAL/W/191.  The United States subsequently submitted follow-up questions in document G/VAL/W/201.   
2.3 The representative of the United States stated th at his delegation still ha d questions on several 
technical issues.  He requested Bahrain to provi de written responses to the follow-up questions that 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/201.  In add ition, he recalled that, in the responses that had 
been provided by Bahrain in G/VAL/W/191, refere nce had been made to a 2008 Customs Law which 
had relevant customs valuation provisions.  The Un ited States requested Bahrain to submit a copy of 
this legislation for review. 
2.4 The representative of Bahrain stated that the information would be forwarded to the 
Secretariat as soon as it was received from capital. 
2.5 The Committee took note of the statements made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.  G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 3 
 
 
  B. Belize 
2.6 The Chairman recalled that, since Belize ha d not been present at the last meeting, the 
Committee had agreed to revert to Belize's notificat ions.  Questions were posed by the United States 
and Canada in documents G/VAL/W/175 and G/VAL/W /176, respectively.  Belize had responded to 
Canada's questions in document G/VAL/W/183, and the United States had put forward follow-up 
questions in G/VAL/W/188.   
2.7 The representative of the United States stated  that his delegation continued to be concerned 
by the fact that Belize had not fully incorporated aspects of the Agreement into its legislation, including 
Article 16 which provided importers with the right to have an explanation in writing, and the interpretive 
notes of the Agreement.  His delegation asked Belize  to reply in writing the two issues that had been 
raised in document G/VAL/W/188.   
2.8 The representative of Canada encouraged Belize to incorporate the interpretative notes into its 
legislative framework. 2.9 The Committee took note of the statements made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
C. Cambodia 
2.10 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at the last meeting to revert to Cambodia's 
notification.  The United States had posed ques tions in documents G/VAL/W/193 and G/VAL/W/201, 
and Cambodia had provided responses in documents G/VAL/W/195 and G/VAL/W/209. 
2.11 The representative of the United States thanked Cambodia for its written responses and 
especially for addressing his delegation's concerns re garding the definition of identical and similar 
goods.  He also thanked Cambodia for its responses to  the check-list of issues on customs valuation, 
which were circulated in October 2011, and on which his delegation would be submitting written 
questions.  Based on a review of the responses  provided, his delegation was concerned about 
Cambodia's implementation of Article 13 of the Agre ement, which provided importers with the ability 
to withdraw their goods in cases where a determinati on on the final customs valuation was delayed.  
It would appear that Article 18(b) of Cambodi a's Customs Law specifically allowed Cambodian 
Customs to refuse to release goods until evidence att esting to the correctness of the declaration was 
received.  He requested Cambodia to clarify this  point and to provide written responses to the 
questions that had been raised. 
2.12 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
D. China 
2.13 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at th e last meeting to revert to China's notification, 
which was circulated in document G/VAL/N/1/CHN/ 5.  The United States had posed questions in 
G/VAL/W/168, including G/VAL/W/168/Corr.1, and G/VAL/W/192.  China's replies had been 
circulated in documents G/VAL/W/184 and G/VAL/W/198.  The United States subsequently posed follow-up questions in G/VAL/W/205. 
2.14 The representative of the United States noted  that his delegation had submitted questions to 
China in October 2011, which were circulated in G/VAL/W/205, requesting clarification on two 
aspects of China's customs valuation practices.  His delegation looked forward to receiving China's 
written responses to these questions.   G/VAL/M/53 
Page 4  
 
  2.15 The representative of China thanked the Un ited States for the two questions that had been 
raised in document G/VAL/W/205.  On the first question, which was related to the use of the 
transaction value in China, he could confirm that, for the time being, the transaction value was the 
basis for customs valuation in China.  Regard ing the reports that had been received by the 
United States stating that China was still using refe rence pricing, it was not clear to him when such 
reports had been received and what had been the specific situations.  He understood that the best 
resolution for this misunderstanding would be thr ough the bilateral mechanism.  He recalled that 
China provided an administrative review and appeal procedure for traders.  Thus, if there were doubts 
or arguments about the customs valuation, the impor ters could take the administrative procedure to 
appeal the specific cases.  He asked the United St ates to reconsider these reports.  On the second 
question, he stated that his capital experts were re viewing the situation, so written answers would be 
provided at a later stage. 
2.16 The representative of the European Union e xpressed an interest in the replies that China 
might provide in writing to the United States.  She al so recalled that the use of reference prices, which 
could lead to additional taxes or substitute cust oms values, always attracted their interest and 
attention.  Therefore, her delegation shared the concerns mentioned by the United States and 
expressed an interest in receiving in writing the rep lies that China would provide to the United States. 
2.17 The representative of Canada joined the Eu ropean Union in supporting the United States' 
request for written answers to its questions. 
2.18 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
E. Costa Rica 
2.19 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at  the last meeting to revert to Costa Rica's 
notification of legislation, which was circulated in documents G/VAL/N/1/CRI /2.  The United States 
had posed questions in document G/VAL/W/211. 
2.20 The representative of Costa Rica thanked th e United States for its questions and stated that 
her capital was currently working on the responses.  She hoped to be able to submit them shortly to 
the Committee. 
2.21 The representative of the United States noted  that his delegation appreciated Costa Rica's 
efforts to provide answers in writing and that his delegation was looking forward to receiving them.  
2.22 The representative of the WCO noted that the WCO had been in contact with the Costa Rican 
customs administration and had provided advice in respect of this legislation.  The WCO had also 
provided advice on the topics that had been raised by the United States, including on the use of a 
valuation database and on how to develop a strong valuation control programme. 
2.23 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
F. Ecuador 
2.24 The Chairman drew Members' attention to Ec uador's responses to the check-list of issues that 
was circulated in document G/VAL/N/2/ECU/1 .   
2.25 The representative of the United States thanked Ecuador for its notification and stated that his 
delegation had some technical questions, which w ould be submitted in writing after the meeting.   G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 5 
 
 
  In reviewing Ecuador's notificati on, his delegation noted that refe rence had been made to certain 
legislation that had not been notified to the Co mmittee.  Although Ecuador's last notification of 
legislation was made in 1996, its responses to the check-list of issues made reference to several 
decisions and resolutions that had been issued between 2004 and 2010.  He was interested in knowing 
when Ecuador intended to notif y this updated legislation. 
2.26 The representative of Ecuador thanked the delegation of the United States for his comment 
and took note of the request. 
G. Nigeria 
2.27 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at the last meeting to revert to Nigeria's notification.  
The United States and Canada had posed questions to  Nigeria, which were circulated in documents 
G/VAL/W/175 and G/VAL/W/176, respectively.   
2.28 The representative of the United States stated th at his delegation continued to be interested in 
the questions that had been put forward to Nigeri a in G/VAL/W/175, and requested that this agenda 
item remain open until these qu estions had been addressed. 
2.29 The representative of Canada echoed the statement of the United States and noted that her 
delegation continued to be interested in receivi ng written responses to questions that had been 
submitted. 
2.30 The representative of the European Union supported the interventions made by the 
United States and Canada.  Her delegation was also looking forward to receiving the replies to the 
questions that had been raised.  She stressed that if  there was any need for technical assistance, Nigeria 
should make use of the available resources, incl uding getting in contact with  the WTO Secretariat. 
2.31 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
H. Rwanda 
2.32 The Chairman drew Members' attention to Rwanda's new notification, which was circulated 
in document G/VAL/N/1/RWA/1, as well as its res ponses to the check-list of issues in document 
G/VAL/N/2/RWA/1.  The new notification provided a copy of Law No. 72/2008 of 31 January 2008 
entitled "Determining the Entry into Force of the East African Community Customs Management Act 
of 1 January 2008".   
2.33 The representative of the United States welcomed Rwanda's notifications which his 
delegation had reviewed.  In this regard, they had identified a coupl e of areas where clarifications 
were required.  He announced that he would provid e the representative of Rwa nda with a copy of the 
questions after the meeting, which had already been submitted to the Secretariat for circulation.  They asked Rwanda to provide writte n responses to such questions.   
2.34 The representative of the European Union also  welcomed the fact that Rwanda had notified 
its customs valuation legislation and provided replies to the check-list of issues.  Her delegation 
requested more time to look at all the details of the legislation that had recently been submitted.   
2.35 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. G/VAL/M/53 
Page 6  
 
  I. St. Vincent and the Grenadines 
2.36 The Chairman recalled that, since St. Vincen t and the Grenadines had not been present at the 
last meeting, it was agreed to revert to this no tification.  The United States had posed questions in 
document G/VAL/W/181. 
2.37 The representative of the United States noted  that, although the representative of St. Vincent 
and the Grenadines had responded verbally to some of his delegation's questions during the May 2010 
meeting, his delegation had requested that writte n responses be provided to each of the questions 
contained in document G/VAL/W/181.  He reca lled that, during the May 2010 meeting, the 
representative of St. Vincent and the Grenadines had mentioned that draft harmonised legislation was 
being examined by the Government with a view to implementing it by July 2010.  His delegation 
asked for an update regarding the status of this legislation.   
2.38 The Committee took note of the statement made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
J. Thailand 
2.39 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at the last meeting to revert to Thailand's 
notification.  The United States, the European Union and the Philippines had raised questions 
concerning the valuation of imports of alcoholic be verages and cigarettes, which were contained in 
documents G/VAL/W/128, G/VAL/W/143, G/VAL/W/160, G/VAL/W/164, G/VAL/W/165 and G/VAL/W/181.  Thailand's replies were circul ated in documents G/VAL/W/130, G/VAL/W/158, 
G/VAL/W/174 and G/VAL/W/190.   
2.40 The representative of the United States stated that his delegation wanted to seek clarification 
on two remaining points.  First, the United States wanted Thailand to confirm whether or not there 
had been any change to the customs valuation legi slation as notified to the Committee in July 2003.  
If so, his delegation would request Thailand to spec ifically identify those changes and to provide a 
copy to the Committee.  Second, Thailand had indi cated that the draft amendment abolishing section 
11bis was still pending approval, so his delegation w ould appreciate receiving an update on the status 
of this amendment.  He also requested Thaila nd to explain how customs currently treated the 
provision and whether it could still be  applied for customs purposes.   
2.41 The representative of Thailand stated that the concerns expressed by Members regarding the 
potential use of reference pricing, as stipulated in section 11 bis of our Customs Act, had been well 
noted.  As it had been previously indicated at th e last meeting, the customs department had never 
exercised such arbitrary right to impose a customs valu e in ways that would contradict the Agreement.  
In addition, the customs department had taken step s to address such concerns by proposing the legal 
amendment of the Customs Act and remove section 11 bis from it.  The draft legal amendment was 
presently under consideration by the Council of St ate, and Thailand would like to assure Members 
that it would keep this Committee informed with respect to any new development in its customs 
regulations.   
2.42 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
K. Tunisia 
2.43 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at the last meeting to revert to Tunisia's notification.  
The United States had posed questions in docume nt G/VAL/W/188, plus follow-up questions that  G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 7 
 
 
  were circulated in document G/VAL/W/206.  Tunisi a's replies to the first set of questions were 
circulated in document G/VAL/W/202. 
2.44 The representative of the United States stated that, as had been noted in the written questions 
that were circulated in October 2011, his delegatio n continued to have questions regarding Tunisia's 
customs valuation notifications, and looked forward to receiving written responses to the questions 
submitted in G/VAL/W/206. 
2.45 The representative of Canada noted that her delegation would also be interested in receiving a 
copy of Tunisia's written responses  to the United States' questions. 
2.46 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
L. Ukraine 
2.47 The Chairman recalled that it was agreed at the last meeting to revert to Ukraine's 
notification.  The European Union had posed qu estions which were circulated in documents 
G/VAL/W/179, G/VAL/W/188, G/VAL/W/199 and G/VAL/W/207.  Ukraine had provided responses to these questions through documents G/VAL/W/182, G/VAL/W/200 and G/VAL/W/212.   
2.48 The representative of the European Union stated that her delegation had a long-lasting concern 
with respect to Ukraine's customs practices, which it had raised on many occasions  and in different fora.  
The most recent had been at the CTG meeting of last March.  She also noted that, according to the information provided by trade operat ors, the situation on the ground had slightly improved since the last 
CTG meeting.  While her delegati on acknowledged this first sign of progress, the EU encouraged 
Ukraine to continue its efforts to ensure the correct,  effective and lasting application of the Agreement.  
Her delegation would also like to ask Ukraine about the state-of-play of its new the new Customs Code, 
including the new legislation on customs valuation.  She recalled that such customs value provisions 
would have to be notified in due course and, if possible, her de legation wanted to get more information 
at the meeting. 
2.49 The representative of the Unite d States thanked Ukraine for its timely response to its questions.  
In reviewing the responses, a coupl e of issues remained unclear, so his delegation intended to submit 
additional questions following the meeting.  Like the European Union, the United States also wished to 
hear about the new legislation, including the exact date  of entry into force, as well as the plans to notify 
it to the Committee.  He noted that his delegation stil l had an interest in resolving their concerns which 
went beyond the review of legislation.   
2.50 The representative of Switzerland supported the statements made by the European Union and 
the United States.  He noted that Swiss companies continued to face similar problems concerning 
customs valuation in Ukraine.  He considered th at the implementation problems remained unresolved 
and wished to note, with disappointment, that the practices of the Ukrainia n Customs Authorities had 
not changed since his delegation had first raised the issue more than a year ago.  He took note that 
Ukraine had upgraded its customs legislations, but his delegati on had failed to see concrete 
improvements on the ground.  Swit zerland wished to have more  detailed information on the 
modifications of the Ukrainian cust oms legislation, which came into fo rce at the beginning of the year, 
and on how it would contribute to improve the situa tion.  Switzerland urged Ukraine to bring the 
implementation of its customs valu ation legislation into full conformity with its WTO commitments, 
and to instruct its customs authorities to apply the re levant rules in a transparen t, uniform and consistent 
manner.  Switzerland remained ready to work construc tively to find satisfactory solutions, but was also 
ready to continue raising the issue in the appropriate  fora until a satisfactory conclusion was reached.   G/VAL/M/53 
Page 8  
 
  2.51 The representative of Ukraine reiterated that his delegation had always supported, and would 
always support, the implementation of best practices in the ar ea of customs valuation.   He recalled that 
Ukraine's legislation fully corresponded to Article VII of the GATT 1994, as had been concluded by the 
Working Party on the Accession of Ukraine to the WTO.  In addition, the first valuation method used by 
Ukraine's customs authorities was in line with the pr actice of other European countries.  Moreover, he 
noted that a new Customs Code had been approve d by Ukraine's parliament on 13 March 2012 and 
signed by the President on 19 April 2012, which conformed with the European Union Modernised 
Customs Code in respect of customs value.  The delegate of Ukraine indicated that controls by Ukraine's Customs Service had revealed that not all importe rs were submitting reliable data during customs 
clearance, including that used in the determination of the value of the goods.  He considered it natural 
that importers would respond to enhanced controls in  this field, because im porters were sensitive to 
taxation.  He also stressed that customs author ities spent minimum time verifying customs value. 
2.52 In order to relieve tensions around the issue, he  wished to inform the Committee that Ukraine's 
Customs Service had held regular meetings with th e European Business Associations, the American 
Chamber of Commerce, businesses, representative of Embassies, and the mass media.  In 2011, 
13 agreements and memoranda on supply of inform ation had been signed authorizing dealers, 
associations and producers.  At the ti me of the meeting, 26 of such agre ements were in fo rce.  A series 
of meetings had been held in Ukraine over the recent  year and a half with the participation of business 
representatives of the European Union member States (Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, France, 
Germany, Slovenia, and Spain), as well as Norway and Switzerland.  The representative of Ukraine noted that there had been a decrease in the number of complaints by economic operators concerning the 
administrative decisions that determined the customs value.  For example, Ukraine's Customs Service 
had received three times fewer complaints in the fo urth quarter of 2011 when compared to the first 
quarter of the same year.  Simila rly, the overall volume of goods being valued according to the first 
method had increased from 82.6 per cent to 90.2 per cent of the total imports in weight terms.  
The increased efficiency was also demonstrated by the fact that the volume of goods imported by direct 
contract had increased to US$26 billion in 2011 from US$17 billion in 2010.  He concluded that these 
indicators showed an improvement of the situati on and reflected Ukraine's unconditional commitment to 
the application of r ecognised standards. 
2.53 The representative of India had some questions on the document circulated by Ukraine in 
G/VAL/W/212 with answers to the questions that had been posed by the United States.  He drew the 
Committee's attention to the answer to Question 5 which stated that " It is foreseen by the provisions of 
the Article 7 of the Customs Code of Ukraine that if the international treaty, concluded officially by 
Ukraine, prescribes the ru les different from those foreseen by the provisions of the Customs Code of 
Ukraine, the rules of the int ernational treaty are applied.".   The provision appeared to suggest that, in 
case of conflict between the Agreement and a bila teral treaty entered into by Ukraine, then the 
provisions of the bilateral treaty w ould prevail.  He considered that it should be the other way around: if 
there was a conflict between an international treaty, particularly  a WTO obligation and a bilateral 
agreement, the WTO provisions should prevail.  Othe rwise agreements in the WTO would be of no use.  
He requested Ukraine to clarify this point.  Hi s second question referred to Ukraine's answer to 
Question 7.  He also noted that the question that had been posed by the Un ited States said "please 
explain how the reference prices are listed in the database, for example are they importer specific or commodity specific".  Ukraine's answer to that questio n was that "the source of creating databases is the 
information which is automatically got from the electr onic copies of the customs freight declarations 
after the customs clearance of goods is finished".  He noted that the issue was about reference prices 
regarding valuation, but that the answer talked about  electronic copies of cust oms freight declarations.  
The point was not very clear to him,  so he asked Ukraine to provide some clarification on how this was 
relevant.   
2.54 The representative of Ukraine thanked India for the questions raised and said Ukraine would be 
ready to provide India with  the full answers after re ceiving them in writing.  G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 9 
 
 
  2.55 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
2.56 The Chairman noted that he had been info rmed by the Secretariat that there were 40 
Members, i.e. about one quarter of the WTO member ship, which had not yet notified their legislation 
in accordance with Article 22 of the Agreement.  A complete list was contained in document 
G/VAL/W/203.  Since this document had been circulated on 30 September 2011, only Rwanda had made a notification.  The Chairman reminded Memb ers that this was one of the most important 
transparency obligations, so he urged those Member s who had not yet made a notification to do so as 
soon as possible.  He also reminded Members that  the Secretariat was available for those who 
required technical assistance in this respect.   
2.57 The Committee took note of this information. 
2.58 Before moving to the next agenda item, th e Chairman recalled that the notification to the 
Committee of legislation by the Separate Custom s Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu 
remained suspended since the Co mmittee's meeting on 4-5 November  2002 pending resolution of the 
difference in views between the parties i nvolved in notifications across the WTO. 
III. CAPE VERDE –WAIVER RELATED TO TH E IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 
VII OF GATT 1994 AND THE AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF 
ARTICLE VII OF THE GATT 1994 
3.1 The Chairman recalled that the General Counc il had decided to waive the obligation of Cape 
Verde concerning the implementation of Article VII of GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Customs 
Valuation until 1 January 2012, instead of 1 January  2011.  This Decision was contained in document 
WT/L/812.  Cape Verde reported the progress it ha d made towards fulfilling the Action Plan in 
document G/VAL/65, which was taken up at the l ast meeting of the Committee.  Since then, 
Cape Verde had submitted documents G/VAL/ 68 and G/VAL/69 where it had informed the 
Committee of the publication of Order No. 512011 of  30 December 2011, published in the Official 
Bulletin No. 42 I Series of 30 December 2011, which est ablished the entry into force of Article VII of 
the GATT 1994 and the WTO Agreement on Custom s Valuation as of 1 January 2012.   
3.2 The Committee took note of this information. 
IV. INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE 
ON CUSTOMS VALUATION 
4.1 The Chairman recalled that, under this ag enda item, the Committee took note of any new 
notifications concerning the application of the De cisions of the Committee on Customs Valuation on, 
firstly, the "Treatment of Interest  Charges in the Customs Value of Imported Goods" and, second, the 
"Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software for Da ta Processing Equipment".  Both Decisions were 
adopted by the Committee in 1995 a nd were contained in document G/VA L/5.  The Chairman noted that 
there had not been any new notific ation since the last meeting. 
4.2 The Committee took note of this information. G/VAL/M/53 
Page 10  
 
  V. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 
A. Information on Technical Assistance 
5.1 The Chairman recalled that, under this item, the Secretariat in formed Members of the technical 
assistance activ ities carried out under the auspices of the WCO.  Document G/VAL/8/Add.26 contained 
the most recent information compiled by the Tec hnical Committee on Custom s Valuation on technical 
assistance activities carried out by  Members and the WCO Secretariat. 
5.2 The Committee took note of this information. 
B. Article 20.3 Technical Assistance and Trade-Related Technical Assistance 
5.3 The Chairman recalled that the Committee's work programme on technical assistance for 
capacity building as regarded the implementation and administration of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation was now incorporated in the ov erall technical assistance programme of the WTO.  
The WTO was currently implementing the 2012-2013 biennial Technical Assistance Plan, which 
foresaw regional activities on "Market Access Issues " and included customs valuation as one of the 
areas covered in that training.  Three such ac tivities were scheduled for 2012 and four for 2013.  
In addition, requests for technical assistance on customs valuation could be made at any time by 
individual Members and would be met by a nationa l activity designed to meet the needs of the 
recipient.  In June and July 2012, the WTO woul d hold a national activity on customs valuation in 
Kyrgyz Republic and in Honduras.  
5.4 The Committee took note of this information. 
VI. UNITED STATES - ARMENIA'S REFERENCE PRICE SYSTEM IN CONNECTION 
WITH THE VALUATION OF GOODS (G/VAL/W/213)  
6.1 The Chairman recalled that Armenia had notified its national legislation in document 
G/VAL/N/1/ARM/1 in August 2003, as well as its res ponses to the check-list of  issues in document 
G/VAL/N/2/ARM/1.  The Committee concluded the examination of this legislation on 
18 October 2005.  Subsequently, the United States ha d posed new questions, which were circulated in 
document G/VAL/W/208.  Armenia had provided responses in document G/VAL/W/213. 
6.2 The representative of the United States stated  that his delegation appreciated Armenia's 
statement that its customs officials did not apply re ference or control prices.  However, his delegation 
continued to receive reports stating that Armenia was using arbitrary pricing and refusing to accept 
the declared import value.  Therefore, his dele gation would appreciate receiving further details on 
Armenia's risk assessment procedures for determ ining whether or not to accept the declared 
transaction values.  In its responses in G/VAL/W/213,  Armenia had indicated that it had encountered 
difficulties to apply the transaction value for imports coming from countries with whom Armenia was unable to exchange trader's information.  The Un ited States had requested Armenia to provide more 
details regarding the steps that ha d been taken to determine whethe r the transaction value could be 
used in cases where it had reasons to doubt the truth or the accuracy of the declared value.  He also 
wanted to know whether Armenia had communicated  to the importers the grounds for doubting the 
truth or accuracy of the declared value before taking a final decision, and whether the importers were given the opportunity to respond.  He also asked Armenia to confirm that its customs administration 
was providing a written explanation to the importer wh en there was a final determination rejecting the 
declared transaction value.  The United States had he ld initial discussions with Armenian officials and 
would continue to work bilaterally  on this issue with the hope of addressing their concerns prior to the 
Committee's next meeting.    G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 11 
 
 
  6.3 The representative of Canada thanked Armeni a for the responses that had been provided in 
document G/VAL/W/213.  After reviewing them, he r delegation had a follow-up question that would 
be submitted in writing after the meeting.  This qu estion related to Article 90 which dealt with the 
transaction price method for determining customs va lue.  Specifically, Canada wanted to know if 
paragraph 90.2 allowed for refere nce pricing to be used if the value of the imported good differed 
from the value of identical or similar goods already imported. 
6.4 The representative of the European Union expr essed her delegation's interest on this issue and 
especially with regard to the possible use of referenc e prices.  She also noted that the European Union 
supported the on-going work at the technical level in Armenia.   
6.5 The representative of Armeni a thanked the previous speakers for their questions and noted 
that Armenia was ready to provide answers on ce written questions had been received.   
6.6 The representative of the WCO reported that they had been contact with the Armenian 
Customs Administration and the WCO had provided them with written advice on both the use of 
database prices and developing a s ound valuation control programme.  He also noted that the WCO 
was in discussions to deliver a technical assistance mission to Armenia later in the year, which would 
create further opportunity of providing advice to Armenian Customs in this regard.   
6.7 The Committee took note of the statements made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
VII. PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES 
- Paragraph 8.3 of document WT/MIN/(01)/17  
7.1 The Chairman recalled that the General C ouncil, at its meeting in December 2002, had 
authorized the Committee to continue its work u nder the existing mandate in paragraph 8.3 of the 
Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns, and to repor t back to the General Council 
once its work had been completed.  Under this  item, India had argued that "in recognising the 
legitimate concerns of importing Members on the accu racy of the declared value" Ministers had 
directed this Committee to iden tify and assess practical means to address such concerns, including 
through the exchange of information on export values .  Thus, India considered that this was a separate 
mandate that should be addressed by this Committee.  However, other Members were of the view that 
the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation was the appropriate venue to c ontinue these discussions, 
in particular because it was examin ing proposals that contained elements that were very similar to 
India's proposal.   
7.2 The representative of India noted that the issu e had been discussed in several meetings of the 
Committee without arriving to any result.  Becau se the Chairman had summed up well the issue, he 
considered that he did not have to elaborate on this subject.  To briefly recollect the issue, he recalled 
that India had submitted a proposal to the Comm ittee in document G/VAL/W/102, which sought to 
operationalize the mandate contained in paragraph 8.3 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, which 
related to the exchange of information on customs va lue.  The issue had been discussed in the past in 
the Committee, where some Members had suggested that the exchange of information on valuation 
should be subject to Members' domestic laws a nd regulations.  These Members had also pointed out 
that the mandate contained in paragraph 8.3 of Do ha Ministerial Declaration did not provide for a 
binding mechanism.  One Member had suggested th at the extended information had to be arranged on 
a bilateral basis.  Furthermore, some Members had observed that the matter was under active consideration in the Negotiating Group on Trade Fac ilitation and that this was the appropriate forum 
to address it. This was what the Chairman had st ated.  However, the representative of India had G/VAL/M/53 
Page 12  
 
  wanted to reiterate that nothing in the Doha Mini sterial Declaration stated that the exchange of 
information on customs value had to be on a non-bi nding basis.  Paragraph 8.3 of the Declaration 
clearly underlined the importance of strengthening co-operation between customs administrations of 
Members in the prevention of customs fraud.  Th is provision stated that, in cases where the customs 
administration of an importing Member had reasonabl e grounds to doubt the truth or accuracy of the 
declared value, it could seek assi stance from the customs administration of an exporting Member.  In 
such cases, the exporting Member "shall"  furnish information on the export value of the goods 
concerned. 
7.3 Another aspect of the mandate was that, pur suant to Article 10 of the Customs Valuation 
Agreement, the information provided in this context shall be treated as confidential.  India's proposal 
provided an appropriate mechanism to operationalize the various elements of the Ministerial mandate, 
including the requirement to protect confidential information.  One of the prime objectives of the 
Customs Valuation Agreement was to secure additi onal benefits for the international trade of 
developing countries, as clearly retained in the preamble of the WTO Agreement.  India's proposal would help prevent valuation fra ud and would, therefore, safeguard the customs revenues of 
Members, particularly developing country Memb ers and LDCs.  The proposal would further the 
objectives of the Customs Valuation Agreement.  Recognising the legitimate concerns of the 
importing Members on the accuracy of the declared va lue, Ministers had directed this Committee to 
identify and assess practical means to  address such concerns, including  exchange of information on 
actual values.  Therefore, it was of utmost importanc e that the mandate contained in paragraph 8.3 be 
operationalized early on.  And Members should amend their domestic laws and regulations if required 
to comply with such a requirement.  He recalle d that some Members had proposed to enter into 
bilateral agreements for the exchange of such info rmation.  However, he considered that it was not 
possible to enter into bilatera l agreements with 155 Members. 
7.4 Regarding the suggestions that the Indian pr oposal should be discussed in the context of the 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation, he stressed th at the mandate in paragraph 8.3 was a separate 
mandate that must be operationalized by this Commi ttee.  The fact that this issue was being handled 
in another Committee was a separate matter which s hould not be confused.  The representative of 
India noted that the importance of their proposal was well-known, and that the minutes of the previous meetings showed that the WCO representative ha d described how developing countries were facing 
challenges in accessing the customs value of goods and how it was a matter of concern to many countries.  This could also be seen from the document filed by Armenia that was circulated in 
G/VAL/W/213.  He drew the Committee's attention to the last paragraph of this document, which 
stated that "the customs authorities in Armeni a are often facing difficulties when applying the 
transaction value method for goods imported from certai n countries".  The issue had also been stated 
in the report by Armenia saying that it they ha d no possibility to exchange information with some 
countries and, as a result, it was not possible to check  through post-clearance audits the reliability of 
the information presented regarding imported goods  from these countries.  After underlining the 
importance of India's proposal he requested that th e Ministerial Mandate shoul d be operationalized as 
soon as possible and without waiting for the results  in the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation. 
7.5 The representative of the United States noted th at his delegation continue d to believe that the 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation was the appr opriate venue to continue these discussions, 
because it was currently examining proposals that cont ained very similar elements to those contained 
in India's proposal.  On India's comments about th e difficulties that certain countries could face, he 
noted that there were certainly other ways to tackle them, including technical assistance. 
7.6 The representative of the European Union said that she would not repeat the well-known 
position of her delegation.  She considered it obvious that there was no consensus on the Indian 
proposal, and that the issue was already being dealt with in another forum.  The European Union's 
position had not changed.  G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 13 
 
 
  7.7 The representative of Canada noted that he r delegation's position had not changed either.  
Canada believed that the discussions on this i ssue belonged in the Negotiating Group on Trade 
Facilitation. 
7.8 The Committee took note of the statements made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
VIII.  PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION 
8.1 The Chairman recalled that Preshipment Inspection was a standing item on the agenda of the 
Committee on Customs Valuation.  He drew Member s' attention to the most recent update of the 
notifications received under Article 5 of the Ag reement on Preshipment Inspection, which was 
contained in document G/PSI/N/1/Add.16.  At the last  meeting, the United States had noted that it still 
had not received responses to the questions posed to Indonesia on its new preshipment inspection programme.  These questions were circulated in documents G/VAL/W/167 and G/VAL/W/180.   
8.2 The representative of Indonesia stated that he  was not fully aware of this information and 
proposed to revert back to the issue at the next meeting.   
8.3 The representative of the United States noted that his delegation had been requesting 
information from Indonesia regarding its preshipment  inspection regime for nearly three years, and 
they were disappointed at not having received an y response on this matter.  Indonesia had not only 
failed to notify its preshipment inspection, but it had also ignored requests in the Committee for an 
explanation of its requirements.  The United Stat es understood that Indonesia had several preshipment 
inspection requirements in place where certain goods ha d to be inspected by designated surveyors in 
the country of export, who verified information such as country of origin, description of the goods, 
quantity, and HS classification.  Regardless of the fact that Indonesia had referred to this as 
verification, as opposed to preshipment inspection, his delegation's understood  that these requirements 
were still considered to fall within the scope of the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection and, 
therefore, had to be notified to the Committee.  If Indonesia did not share this view, it should then 
explain in detail why it did not consider these requi rements to be covered by such agreement.  
The United States urged Indonesia to promptly notif y all its verification and preshipment inspection 
requirements, and to provide an explanation of  the policy purpose that such requirements were 
intended to accomplish, including information about th e designated surveyors that had been appointed 
to conduct such inspections.   
8.4 The representative of Indonesia thanked the Unite d States for the questions and stated that he 
would have to consult with his capital.  However, he hoped that this problem would be resolved very 
soon.  
8.5 The Committee took note of the statements made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
IX. COST SAVINGS IN DOCUMENT PRODUCTION AND MEETINGS - 
RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION WHICH WERE ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL COUNCIL  
9.1 The Chairman drew the Committee's atten tion to the recommendations concerning cost 
savings in document production and meetings drawn up by the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration which were adopted by the Genera l Council on 30 November 2011 (paragraphs 29 to 
31 of document WT/BFA/128, see Annex 2).  He belie ved that the main message was that the WTO 
was moving towards a paperless environment where distribution of hard copies of documentation within the Secretariat and to Members had been or would soon cease.  Additionally, there was a G/VAL/M/53 
Page 14  
 
  directive to reduce the overall volume of official documents, which would include reducing the length 
of reports, annexes and statements.  This was w ith a view to cutting back on translation and 
interpretation costs.  There was also a request to all Chairs to systematically seek to improve the 
scheduling and conduct of meetings with a view to reducing the number and length of such meetings.  
So for example, Chairs had been requested to start meetings on time and to try and avoid the 
cancellation of meetings.  He invited the Committe e to take note of the recommendations listed in 
paragraphs 29 to 31 of documen t WT/BFA/128 and agree to follow them wherever possible.   
9.2 The Committee so agreed.  
X. OTHER BUSINESS 
A. Date of the next meeting 
10.1 The Chairman informed Members that the ne xt meeting of the Committee was scheduled for 
25 October 2012. 
B. Letter from the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) 
10.2 The Chairman informed Members that he had received a letter fro m Mr. Anthony Barone, 
Chairman of the Customs and Trade Regulations Comm ittee of the International Chamber of Commerce 
(ICC), indicating that they had an interest to work wi th the Committee.  This, in particular, with respect 
to problems that could arise from the eventual misuse  of customs valuation databases to set minimum or 
reference prices.  The Chairman stated further that the ICC was not an observer to the Committee and proposed that his successor would hold informal consultations to explore whether Members were 
interested in having some form of co-operation with this organization.   
10.3 The representative of the WCO informed th e Committee that the WCO had received what 
appeared to be a very similar letter from the ICC.  He observed that there could be a possibility for some 
liaison between WTO and WCO to  assist each other in developing a common approach. 
10.4 The Committee agreed to hold info rmal consultations on the issue. 
C. Election of Officers 
10.5 The Chairman informed the Committee that th e Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods 
had carried out informal consultations on a slate of names for appointment of Chairpersons of 
standing bodies in accordance with the established Gu idelines for Appointment of Officers.  On the 
basis of consultations, he proposed that the Comm ittee elect Mrs. Irena Ba naszynska (Poland) as 
Chairperson for 2012.  He, therefore, pr oposed that the Committee elect Mrs. Irena Banaszynska by 
acclamation. 
10.6 The Committee elected Mrs. Banaszynska by acclamation. 
10.7 Mrs. Banaszynska thanked delegations for trusting her with the responsibility, as well as 
Mr. Masafumi Kobayashi for his successful chairmanship.  She looked forward to continue working 
with the same spirit of co-operation and wanted to  ensure Members that sh e was ready to cooperate, 
and was open to all suggestions and comments as to the functioning of this Committee.  Before 
concluding the meeting, she remi nded Members that a workshop on Customs Valuation would take 
place in the afternoon and she encouraged Members to  attend in order to refresh their knowledge on this 
important agreement.   
10.8 The meeting was adjourned.  G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 15 
 
 
  ANNEX 1 
REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE  
ON CUSTOMS VALUATION 
The Technical Committee on Customs Valuation (Technical Committee) held its 34th Session from 
16 to 19 April 2012 at the WCO Headquarters in Brussels.  The Session was chaired by Mr. Guzmán 
MAÑES (Uruguay).  Sixty WTO/WCO Member admini strations were represented, plus observers 
from the World Trade Organization (WTO), th e International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), 
ASAPRA (Latin America association of Customs brokers), OECD, the UN Transfer Pricing Sub-Committee and CEMAC. 
The Technical Committee discussed th e following technical questions: 
1) Study on royalties and licence fees, based on a case submitted by Brazil.  The Committee 
discussed the new draft Advisory Opinion based on the earlier draft case study.  It was agreed 
that the Secretariat would work with Brazil to  clarify certain facts and redraft the document 
accordingly. 
2) Related party transactions under the Agreement and transfer pricing.  The United States 
presented their proposed new national policy regarding post-importation adjustments.  
The OECD provided an update on recent developm ents regarding the OECD Transfer Pricing 
Guidelines.  The representative of the UN Tran sfer Pricing Sub-Committee explained their 
work in the area of transfer pricing. The ICC presented their policy statement on customs 
valuation and transfer pricing.  The Tec hnical Committee discussed the updated case study, 
based on an earlier example submitted by the Un ited States.  An updated working document 
will be prepared for discussion at the next Session. 
3) Valuation of industrial waste, submitted by Be larus.  After failing to reach consensus on the 
current draft text, the Technical Committee agre ed to examine the new example submitted by 
Belarus, contained in Doc. VT0846E1a.  The S ecretariat will work with Belarus to draft a 
new document based on this example, whic h will be discussed at the next Session. 
4) Interpretation of "condition of sale" in Article 8. 1 (c) and, Application of Article 8.1 (d) with 
respect to payments based on projected net pr ofits; submitted by Singapore.  Discussions took 
place on the different ways of interpreting these cases, and the relationship between them. The Technical Committee agreed that the Secr etariat work with Singapore to merge these 
cases into one document, retaining the different  questions under discussi on, and continue to 
discuss at the next Session. 
5) Treatment of bonus payments; submitted by Thaila nd.  A number of questions were posed to 
Thailand to clarify the facts surrounding this case.  Based on the discussions and Thailand's 
responses, the document will be updated for further discussion at the next Session. 
The Technical Committee: 
 Adopted the Report of its 33rd Session; 
 Agreed to discuss at the next Session a case submitted by Uruguay concerning the application 
of WTO Decision 4.1 (Valuation of carrier media bearing software for data processing 
equipment) for pen drives; 
 Finalised its review of Technical Committee procedures and processes;  
 Took note of: G/VAL/M/53 
Page 16  
 
   - The Director's report on intersessional developments; 
 - An update on the WCO's Revenue Packag e programme, including an overview of the 
new Practical Guidelines on Valuation Control; 
 - An oral report by the WTO Observe r on the activities of the WTO Committee on 
Customs Valuation; 
 - A presentation by Zambia on its progress  in implementation of the WTO Valuation 
Agreement; 
 - Reports on the technical assistance/capac ity building activities undertaken during the 
intersession by the Secretariat and by Members; 
 - The Technical Committee elected Mr. O. A oufi, delegate of Morocco, as Chairperson 
for the next year. Mr. E. Sigande, delega te of Zambia, and Mr. C. Diaz Garcia, 
delegate of Dominican Republic, were elected as Vice-Chairpersons.  The Technical Committee noted the excellent efforts and achievements of the outgoing Chairperson, 
Mr. G. Manes; and 
 - Finally, the 35th Session of the Technical Committee will be held at WCO 
Headquarters in Brussels from 15 to 19 October 2012.  G/VAL/M/53 
 Page 17 
 
 
  ANNEX 2 
PARAGRAPHS 29 TO 31 OF DOCUMENT WT/BFA/128 
B. COST SAVINGS IN DOCUMENT PRODUCTION AND MEETINGS  
… 29. In view of fact that the 2012-2013 biennial budget only provides sufficient funding for a 
document production process with a maximum input volume
1 of 22.8 million words in 2012 and 
21.7 million words in 2013, it is necessary to have mo re effective controls on this input volume by all 
WTO bodies.  To this end, all WTO bodies should u ndertake efforts with a vi ew towards achieving a 
reduction in the overall volume of official documents  by 5 per cent in 2012 and by a further 5 per cent 
in 2013.  Accordingly, we direct that: 
(a) In order to remain within this global limit,  the Chairs of all WTO bodies are instructed to 
work with their Members to reduce the overa ll volume of official documents submitted for 
production.  These measures may include, inter alia, reducing the lengt h of reports, annexes 
and statements without jeopardizing their cont ent or the appropriate reflection of specific 
Members' positions.  It is recognized that each  body would have to devise ways to achieve 
reductions that are consistent with  its particular work and mandate. 
(b) The Secretariat shall continue to furthe r enhance its document processing productivity while 
retaining some flexibility to accommodate sudden changes in volume. 
30. It is also necessary to undertake various meas ures aimed at substantially reducing the printing 
and distribution of documents.  To achieve this objectiv e, the Secretariat is instructed to undertake the 
following changes in the 2012-2013 biennium: 
(a) Discontinue the internal distribution within th e Secretariat of official documents in printed 
form as of 1 January 2012. 
(b) Review the list of subscribers of official documents in printed form  and the number of copies 
dispatched to each subscriber with the objectiv e of creating an electronic subscription model 
as of 1 April 2012.  In revising such lists, the S ecretariat will base its revisions on information 
obtained from Members. 
(c) Provide ad hoc services to Members to subscr ibe to electronic distribution of documents or 
obtain specific documents on request in printed form. 
(d) Establish common practices and tools for a ll committee secretaries to feed the electronic 
"Docs for Meetings" module so as to enable delegations to obtain timely download of 
electronic packs containing all the documents for specific meetings. 
(e) After consulting with Members, discontinue the distribution of certain document series in 
printed form as early as practicable in 2012:  including TBT and SPS notifications and any other documents acceptable to Members for elec tronic distribution.  Committee Chairs shall 
also take steps to move towards the online submission and distribution of notifications. 
(f) Discontinue the distribution of official docum ents, previously circulated, in meeting rooms 
and at the document centre as of 1 January 2012. 
                                                      
1 The "input volume" is the number of words in the original language submitted for translation, printing 
and distribution. G/VAL/M/53 
Page 18  
 
  31. The General Council also requests that all Chairs systematically seek to improve the 
scheduling and conduct of meetings with a view towards reducing the overall number and length of 
such meetings and optimizing the use of ex isting resources supporting official meetings. 
 
__________