RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/60  
 
20 October 2014  
(14-6033)  Page: 1/13  
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 26 JUNE 2014 
CHAIRMAN: MR AARON FOWLER (CANADA) 
INTRODUCTION 
The Committee adopted the proposed agenda for the meeting that was circulated in 
document WTO/AIR/4323 and dated 13 June 2014. An annotated agenda for the meeting was 
circulated in document JOB/IT/13, dated 17 June 2014. The Chairman stated that he would take up the issue of the "date of the next meeting" under Other Business.  
INTRODUCTI ON ............................................................................................................... 1
 
1   REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL 
DECLARATION ON TRADE IN INFO RMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/1/REV.50) ............................................................................................................. 1  
2   REVIEW OF PR ODUCT COVERAGE ................................................................................ 3  
3   NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME (G/IT/19, 
G/IT/SPEC/Q4/19/RE V.2 AND G/IT/SPEC/ Q2/11/REV.1) ............................................. 7  
4   EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF THE TYPES OF CONFORMITY 
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.12) ...................................................................................................... 8
 
5   DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27 AND JOB/IT/12) .............................................................................................................. 9
 
6   NEW PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................. 12  
7   ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON ..................................................................................... 12  
8   OTHER BU SINESS ...................................................................................................... 13  
Date of next meeting ........................................................................................................ 13 
 
1  REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNO LOGY PRODUCTS (G/IT/1/REV.50) 
1.1.  The Chairman told Participants that an ov erview of the Status of Implementation of the 
Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products could be found in 
document G/IT/1/Rev.50. As at previous meetings , he flagged two issues. First, for El Salvador, 
the completion of its domestic legal procedural requirements was still pending. He invited the 
delegation of El Salvador to provide an update on  the status of this work. Second, for Morocco, he 
indicated that Morocco became a participant to the ITA on 14 November 2003. However, it had not 
yet submitted its final ITA schedule of commitments. Despite his predecessor's letter to the 
delegation of Morocco, on 14 November 2011, and his subsequent contacts with them earlier in the year concerning the status of Morocco's ITA sch edule, there had still been no formal response 
received. Consequently, as had been signalled at the last Committee meeting, he sent a follow-up 
letter to the Moroccan delegation once again to urge action on this outstanding issue. Since neither G/IT/M/60 
 
- 2 - 
 
  delegation was present, the Chairman proposed that these issues be taken up again at the next 
meeting. 
1.2.  He also informed the Committee that Qatar had recently submitted its ITA schedule of 
commitments to the Secretariat for rectification and modification pursuant to Paragraph 2 of the 
Annex to the Ministerial Declaration. Qatar's submission, as contained in 
document G/MA/TAR/RS/358, was circulated on 28 April 2014. 
1.3.  In addition, he informed the Committee that  the Russian Federation was the only participant 
whose ITA schedule of commitments was still awaiting rectification and modification. He invited 
Participants to provide any updates or comments concerning implementation matters. 
1.4.  The representative of the Russian Federation  stated that her authorities would very shortly 
submit their ITA schedule for modification/rectificati on after the fulfilment of internal procedures. 
1.5.  The representative of the United States thanked Qatar for submitting its rectification to the 
Secretariat earlier in the year, and called on the Russian Federation to submit the rectification of 
its ITA schedule of commitments that were approved by this Committee last September as per the 
Decision of 26 March 1980 on Procedures for Modifi cation and Rectification of Schedules of Tariffs 
Concessions, which is an important final step to complete ITA participation. 
1.6.  The representative of Japan raised anot her issue concerning the implementation of the 
current ITA. He expressed his authorities' deep concern over the sudden imposition by India in 
January of 10% import duties on digital still image video cameras, which had been treated as duty-free under the current ITA for a long time. He felt that the new Indian measure, in accordance with its own domestic regulation, was not only an individual product, but also a serious 
threat to the implementation of the current ITA as a whole. In his view, the sudden change by 
Indian Customs would have a negative influence on the business climate in India as well. He therefore requested India to withdraw such measures. 
1.7.  The representative of India thanked the dele gation of Japan for raising the issue relating to 
India's obligations under the ITA. He reaffirmed that India fully respects its international 
obligations relating to the ITA and that, in fact, India joined the ITA on 25 March 1997 and 
eliminated tariffs on all listed ITA products in a phased manner by the end of year 2005. In this 
process, India had fully exempted "digital still image video cameras", which was one of the listed ITA products, from the whole of the customs duty. In this regard, Members might like to refer to serial No. 13 of Notification No. 25/2005-Customs, which was issued on 1 March 2005 and is 
available on the official website, http://www.cbec.gov.in/ . 
1.8.  He further stated that, subsequent to the issu ance of this notification, there was some lack of 
clarity among different customs formations regarding the meaning of the term "digital still video 
camera", which was resulting in divergent practice s of customs classification and duty exemption. 
Therefore, the Government of India issued a clarification vide Circular No. 32/2007-Customs, wherein it had been explained that the benefit of duty exemption would be extended to those 
digital cameras which have still image recording as their principal function. This would also include 
those digital cameras which have the capability of recording moving images for a limited period of time. This matter had been further elaborated in Notification No. 15/2012-Customs, wherein 
certain criteria had been laid down to distinguish such digital still cameras from "video cameras". 
Thus, it appeared that the specific case referr ed to by the delegation of Japan pertained to 
cameras that did not satisfy these specific criteria. The matter was under investigation by the revenue intelligence agency of India. He reiterat ed that India was extending full customs duty 
exemption to digital cameras listed in the ITA, and was complying with its international obligations 
in this regard. 
1.9.  The representative of Chinese Taipei than ked the Japanese delegation for bringing up the 
issue at the meeting, and shared the same concer ns expressed. He said that "Digital still image 
video cameras" were clearly included in Attachme nt A to the ITA, and should be duty free. He 
therefore encouraged India to hold constructive dialogue with the Participants to resolve the issue in the near future. His delegation would continue to closely monitor the issue, and to encourage 
India to ensure that its practice was in conformity with the ITA. G/IT/M/60 
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.10.  The representative of Japan also thanked the delegation of India for responding to his 
remarks concerning Notification No. 15/2012-Customs, the latest notification by Indian Customs 
on the digital still camera. He recognized that di gital still cameras had been duty free under this 
exact notification for some years, and that these cameras still fell into this category. Nevertheless, 
all of a sudden, from January, Indian Customs ha d begun to impose duties on the digital still 
camera, that fall under this exact notification No. 15/2012 by the Indian Customs. He requested 
the Indian Government to implement the notification No. 15/2012 in an appropriate manner, and 
to make the digital still camera duty free, as In dia had committed to do under the current ITA, and 
requested the Indian delegation to convey this message to capital. 
1.11.  The representative of India responded that the point raised earlier was noted and had been 
conveyed to the Government of India. However, he  believed that in his earlier intervention he had 
already explained that certain criteria had been specified in the clarification notification 
No. 15/2002 which clearly delineated digital still cameras from video cameras. He further reiterated that the specific case referred to by the delegation of Japan pertained to cameras that 
did not satisfy these criteria, and that the matter was under investigation by the Revenue 
Intelligence Agency of India. However, the concerns raised had been noted and would be conveyed. 
1.12.  The Chairman thanked all those delegations that had intervened and urged those 
Participants that had not yet completed the procedures for the formal rectification and modification 
of schedules, as required by the Decision of 26 March 1980, to do so as soon as possible. He suggested that the Committee take note of all statements made under this agenda item. 
1.13.  It was so agreed. 
2  REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE 2.1.  The Chairman recalled that, since the Comm ittee meeting of 15 May 2012, as requested by 
some delegations, "review of product coverage" had been included as a regular agenda item for 
the Committee. It provided an opportunity for the Committee to receive reports and updates from those participants who were engaged in consultations relating to the review of product coverage 
pursuant to Paragraph 3 of the Annex to the ITA. He invited delegations who wished to do so, to 
report or make any statements on this matter. 
2.2.  The representative of the United States stated that concluding the ITA expansion negotiations 
remained a top priority for her Government. While a breakthrough had not yet been achieved, 
they remained optimistic that ITA expansion coul d be concluded soon. She reiterated that a final 
agreement must be balanced and mutually beneficial , reflecting the interests of all participants at 
the negotiating table. That principle had been the driving force behind their approach to the 
ITA negotiations. They had been working to narrow their differences with other key parties, and 
while they had made some progress, they were not there yet. As they had said before, if all participants were ready and willing to make appropriate contributions, they could wrap up the 
plurilateral negotiations in Geneva in a matter of days. But the conditions must be right – they 
could not afford a replay of last July and November. Her delegation looked forward to their continued discussions with China and other ITA pa rticipants in the coming weeks. They were 
hopeful that these engagements would set the stage for a resumption and conclusion of the 
plurilateral negotiations as soon as possible. 
2.3.  The representative of the European Union st ated that the EU also continued to support the 
expansion of the ITA with new products. This was important for the development of the sector, 
with its rapid technological changes and development of new products. The multilateral system 
could also not afford failure. If somehow they would not be able to agree on the expansion of an existing agreement, how could they confront ot her issues, with even more Members involved? 
Also, much progress had already been made. They ha d all worked very hard on this and it would 
be a waste to leave it now, to lo se the momentum and to allow it to wither away, as had happened 
during the first attempt to expand the list. The list, with items overlapping, and without 
reservations, was already quite impressive. With a bit of good will, this could be expanded to a 
very significant and commercially meaningful list. In order to conclude, a few remaining difficulties 
needed to be overcome. Many reservations remained on the list. These would have to be reduced G/IT/M/60 
 
- 4 - 
 
  and problems would have to be increasingly addressed by staging. On the other hand, they had to 
resist the temptation of excessive ambition. 
2.4.  He called on the group to be serious about maintaining the progress made so far. The list of 
November 2013 should form the basis of the work . Delegations had a chance to raise issues at 
that time, they did not want to re-open old discussions and address items already removed by 
consensus in the process of constructing the list. He also called for bilateral progress to be made as quickly as possible, so that the process could resume where it belonged, which was in the group 
of participants, so that all could have their say on the content of the list. The group needed to 
make their last move towards expansion and show that ITA Participants could still work together. He further called on all participants to be open to compromise. The EU were counting on all Members of the Committee to participate in this exercise, as the review was an integral part of the 
ITA and had to be done every three years. No delegation could therefore say that this expansion 
was too early. If anything, it was already late. Ho wever, the EU had very high hopes that it was 
not yet too late. He urged participants to catch this opportunity and, without further delay, to 
conclude the expansion and to demonstrate that the multilateral system had a future. 
2.5.  The representative of Japan expressed hi s delegation's strong support of the ongoing 
ITA expansion negotiations. He expressed deep co ncern about the suspension of the negotiations 
on IT expansion, which had continued for more than half a year, since last November. The group's 
initial goal to conclude the negotiations was by last summer, and then, by Bali. The group was far behind schedule and the global trading system wa s losing credibility. With rapid technological 
development, that the IT sector was spending so much time in negotiation was unacceptable. 
Fortunately, last month, in the APEC trade ministers' meeting in Qingdao, where many of the 
ITA expansion participants were present, APEC members were able to agree that they welcome that key participants had committed to find creative ways to move forward so that these 
negotiations could move towards a commercially significant and balanced conclusion in the 
shortest time-frame possible. Japan would certainl y like to welcome this positive new development 
from the APEC meeting, and the new momentum  created. The group should not miss this 
opportunity, this momentum, and should conclude this negotiation in the shortest time-frame 
possible, as stated and agreed in the APEC trade ministers' meeting. He called on all ITA expansion participants to take action. 
2.6.  The representative of Korea recalled the tr emendous efforts that the group had made over 
the past two and a half years. He underlined that , during this period, the group would not have 
worked so hard if they were not confident that such efforts would contribute to restoring the credibility of the multilateral trading system. Ev en though their negotiations had been suspended 
since last November, he agreed with what was said by the EU colleague, that the group produced 
a draft consolidated list at the last November round. The list was the outcome of all of the negotiations undertaken up to that moment, and at that time the EU urged all delegations to take 
it as the basis for future work, whenever the process would restart. He agreed that the future work 
should restart based upon the November list, and if there should be any compromised positions as the basis for future work in the coming weeks, every participant should be given a fair opportunity to review them in advance and have consultation s with a view to reflecting its interests. He 
reiterated once again that the final product list to be agreed upon should be commercially 
meaningful, credible, and balanced, and the key IT products that were supported by a prevailing number of participants should be reflected in the final list. Otherwise, his delegation would not be 
able to take home the outcome for acceptance. Korea looked forward to working closely with 
participants to produce a credible and balanced list in the forthcoming process. 
2.7.  The representative of Canada stated that Canada was strongly supportive of the negotiation 
to expand the ITA and remained committed to an ambitious outcome. She continued to emphasize 
that a successful ITA expansion deal would provid e significant trade and investment opportunities, 
while lowering input costs for manufacturers and enhancing the affordability and accessibility of technological products to consumers. Canada wa s seeking re-engagement in these negotiations 
with a view to swiftly concluding them. She welcomed the positive discussion that took place 
among China and other ITA participants on the margins of the recent APEC meetings of Ministers responsible for trade, and hoped that all Members could build on this positive momentum to 
re-engage in the negotiations as soon as possible. Canada would like to continue working with all 
participants to ensure that the interests of all were being considered in the process. G/IT/M/60 
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.8.  The representative of Switzerland agreed with previous speakers and was also very 
supportive of the ITA expansion. The ITA expansio n negotiation had been ongoing for a little more 
than two years now. This negotiation, which was meant to be concluded in July of last year, was suspended a second time in November 2013, and time was costly for both the industry and 
consumers. They had been waiting for too long . After more than a half-year of suspension, 
Members must come back to the negotiating table with a clear commitment to conclude this ITA expansion and to reach an ambitious, commerc ially meaningful, and balanced agreement. Her 
delegation would therefore urge and strongly enco urage the main players, as well as all of the 
participants in the ITA expansion, to be more flexible in order to allow the conclusion in Geneva of the ITA expansion in the near future, taking into account the interests of all Members involved in this negotiation. The basis for re-starting the process should be the draft consolidated list as at 
November 2013. It took 15 years to start the revi ew of the ITA, and more than two years of hard 
work from all participants in that review. The multilateral trading system, the industry and consumers all deserved a better outcome. 
2.9.  The representative of Israel stated that it had been involved in the ITA expansion almost 
from the beginning. They would like to see it coming to a successful conclusion soon. The group 
invested lots of energy in the negotiations, and they would like to be able also to reap the fruit. 
However, there had been little progress in the negotiations since they came to a halt last 
November. Israel still believed that reaching an agreement was within reach, but in order to achieve this, the group had to move quickly. Isra el was ready to get back promptly to the table 
and to resolve all outstanding issues. 
2.10.  The representative of Chinese Taipei said that, in May, trade ministers from 
21 APEC members vowed to reach a commercially significant and balanced deal in the ongoing 
ITA expansion negotiations in the shortest possible time. He hoped that this development would 
bring positive momentum to the long delayed negotiations. In order to reach a satisfactory 
conclusion to the negotiations, it was important th at the key Members continued to play an active 
role in moving this issue forward. He urged Members once again to accelerate their domestic 
consultations and to be active in the negotiations as soon as possible. It was only by the full 
engagement of Members, demonstrating their flexibility and sincerity, and conducting negotiations in a pragmatic manner, that the group's quest for an expanded ITA would succeed. Chinese Taipei stood ready to engage in the negotiations. 
2.11.  The representative of Costa Rica stated that it firmly supported the negotiations for the 
enlargement of the ITA, which were essential to ensure that the Agreement would be updated with 
the evolution of this dynamic industry. The ITA was a complement to the efforts of Costa Rica to 
promote investment and had contributed to prom ote an improvement in the diversification and 
sophistication of its exports. It also contributed to improving the competitiveness and efficiency of 
production and consumption in Costa Rica by facilitating new technology. Costa Rica was firmly 
convinced that the group would reach a prompt and efficient conclusion to the negotiations. Costa 
Rica's experience demonstrated that the expansio n of the ITA might well bring important benefits 
for developing countries. 
2.12.  The representative of Norway stated that the ITA was in clear need of updating and 
expansion, and to conclude a credible agreement would be of great value for the industry. Norway 
was extremely disappointed that the group was unable to finalize the ITA expansion negotiations last year, and likewise that there had not been an y substantive developments so far this year. The 
last attempt to update the ITA took place in 1998, and it did not succeed. It took another 14 years 
to start the negotiation process again. The group could not afford another similar delay. There was a sense of urgency for both industry and consumers, and not least for the multilateral trading 
system. Norway was ready and willing to negotiate at any time, the sooner the better. Norway 
wanted to build on and benefit from all the work that had been done over the past two years. In order to reach a final deal, all parties had to be ready to negotiate, and to step up their efforts to conclude the negotiations. It was possible to find creative solutions and to accommodate the 
interests of the different players. However, the result had to be credible, commercially significant, 
and realistic. Norway would mean to include such products as projectors, monitors, and electronic control units. It should be possible to agree to a deal that would be of interest to all of the 
participants, but in order to do so the group needed to have a candid and concrete discussion on 
what the ingredients of that deal should be. She emphasized the need to keep the process of the 
expansion negotiations transparent and open, and that all parties should be allowed to see their 
interests through. G/IT/M/60 
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.13.  The representative of the Philippines, on behalf of the ASEAN participants in the 
ITA expansion negotiations, believed that the group could move forward in their negotiations by 
resuming the technical discussion in a transparent and all-inclusive manner, so as to have an agreement in the shortest time possible. She called for an Agreement that would be commercially 
significant, credible, pragmatic, balanced, and reflective of modern supply chains. 
2.14.  The representative of Singapore associated itself with the statement that the Philippines 
delivered on behalf of the ASEAN ITA expansion participants. It was disappointing that the group 
was still unable to harvest an Agreement. It was essential that the group continued and intensified 
their technical discussions in a transparent manner so as to reach an agreement on expansion as soon as possible. She said that the group should move towards achieving an expanded ITA Agreement that would be commercially significant, credible, pragmatic, balanced, and 
reflective of modern supply chains. Singapor e remained committed to tariff liberalization. 
Singapore felt strongly that it was only by eliminating barriers to trade for these products that the group could achieve enhanced productivity in their IT manufacturing sector. Such improved 
productivity would lead to added benefits in the form of increased economic prosperity and 
inclusive growth for all. The business communi ty had been waiting patiently for such a 
commercially meaningful outcome, and the group should not disappoint them. 
2.15.  The representative of China stated that China had always supported and actively 
participated in this expansion negotiation since it started two years ago. China's discussions and 
interactions with other parties had always gone well and had not stopped. Consequently, the key to the solution of issues was not in the hands of China. China shared the common goal of all 
participants, to conclude the negotiations at an earliest possible date, which would definitely 
strengthen the multilateral trading system, promot e the drafting of the post-Bali work program, 
and bring benefits to the global IT industry. China was willing and always ready to continue the 
work constructively with all parties towards an early conclusion of the negotiations. 
2.16.  The representative of Australia joined others in expressing its support for an ambitious 
outcome and its disappointment at the failure to reach an acceptable outcome on the 
ITA expansion at this point. Since the beginning of the negotiations, Australia had advocated for 
an ambitious, balanced, and commercially significan t package. He recognized that for this to be 
achieved, all Members would need to approach the negotiations in a spirit of cooperation, and to be prepared to make difficult compromises. In recent months, the group had seen some positive 
movement from key proponents and Members with se nsitivities. Australia was appreciative of the 
flexibility that had been shown by others on their sensitivities. In a similar spirit, Australia had done what it could to accommodate other Members' concerns. Unfortunately, these moments of 
positive movement had been more than matched by longer periods where progress had been 
frustrated. Not all Members appeared to be in th e 'end-game' at this stage, and not all Members 
had been engaged in the negotiations. Australia wa s aware that considerable work was being done 
in capitals and elsewhere by a number of Members wi th an aim to bringing these negotiations to a 
successful conclusion in a timely fashion. He urged all Members to demonstrate leadership to the broader WTO membership, and to seize the opport unity offered by the expansion of the ITA. A 
commercially meaningful deal was clearly within reach, but could not be achieved unless all 
Members would put behind them the short-term risks of reduced tariff revenue and industry 
competition in a global environment and look to the unquestioned longer term benefits of enhanced trade. 
2.17.  The representative of Hong Kong, China said that, like previous speakers, Hong Kong, 
China, was very supportive of the ITA expansion. It was encouraging to hear about the positive 
discussion, enthusiasm, and optimism among Members to take forward the work with the aim of 
concluding the ITA expansion swiftly. She strongly encouraged Members to show more flexibility, 
taking into account each other's interests in order to have a more balanced and commercially credible product list. She hoped that the negotiation would resume as early as possible. Hong Kong, China, would continue actively to engage in  the process and to look forward to working with 
all participants towards an early conclusion of the ITA expansion negotiations. 
2.18.  The representative of Nicaragua stated that  his delegation had reservations with regard to 
participating in the work of the expansion of the ITA. Nevertheless, they were carrying out the 
relevant analysis and holding internal consultations domestically on this matter. His delegation 
would continue to inform the Committee about the decisions taken by his authorities with regard to their ability to participate or not in these negotiations in due time. G/IT/M/60 
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.19.  The representative of Colombia stated that , like others, Colombia was fully committed to the 
prompt conclusion of the negotiations on the IT A product expansion, and agreed with what other 
delegations had said about its importance. While some Members were holding bilateral discussions, Colombia hoped that the Geneva discussions would continue rapidly. The solution for pending 
matters was a collective task that the group could not hand over to anyone else. 
2.20.  The representative of New Zealand supported  an outcome to this expansion exercise, for all 
the reasons that others had already mentioned. New Zealand could certainly support an outcome 
that the group could collectively reach, that wo uld deliver a commercially meaningful, balanced, 
and pragmatic list. It was very clear that participants in the expansion exercise wanted to get to an outcome; the question was how. Clearly a lot more reflection needed to go on in capitals, and conversations in Geneva. New Zealand stood ready to engage in that process, with others, to 
move things forward. 
2.21.  The Chairman thanked the eighteen delegations that had intervened. He said that he was 
always encouraged by the level of engagement under this agenda item. He had heard a broad 
recognition of the importance of the work, both commercially and systemically, for the WTO as an 
organization. There was obviously a desire to keep working, reflecting the high-level statements that the Committee had heard outside of Geneva, including recently at the APEC MRT, to which 
some had made reference, and there had been ongo ing work, both in capitals and bilaterally. He 
hoped that that would continue. He encouraged the group to continue to discuss amongst the participants how best to advance this process with a view to eventually re-engaging in plurilateral discussions at an appropriate time, in order to bring this exercise to a swift conclusion. He wished 
the group well in that endeavour. He suggested that the Committee take note of the statements 
made, and agreed to revert to this agenda item, as appropriate, at the next Committee meeting. 
2.22.  It was so agreed. 
3  NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME (G/IT/19, G/IT/SPEC/Q4/19/REV.2 
AND G/IT/SPEC/Q2/11/REV.1) 
3.1.  The Chairman recalled that, at the Committee meeting of 14 October 2013, agreement was 
reached on the Swiss proposal to organize an industry-driven workshop dedicated to 
NTBs affecting trade in IT products in the first half of 2014. At the Committee meeting on 17 March 2014, it was agreed that this workshop would instead be held on 30 September, and back-to-back with this year's WTO Public Forum. Now, for logistical reasons, as indicated in his fax 
dated 21 May 2014, it was proposed to change the date of the workshop to Thursday, 
30 October 2014, which would then be followed by the ITA Committee's autumn meeting, on Friday, 31 October. Although the deadline for dele gations to propose themes for discussions at the 
workshop, as well as the names of possible candidates for speakers or panellists, had been 
extended twice, only limited inputs and feedback  had been received, notably from the delegations 
of Guatemala, Sweden, Switzerlan d, Chinese Taipei, and the EU, and there still remained space on 
the workshop agenda. Therefore, he encouraged delegations to submit additional proposals as 
soon as possible after the meeting with a view to enabling the Secretariat to finalize the development of a draft programme in the coming days. 
3.2.  The representative of Switzerland stated th at the postponement of the Workshop on NTBs to 
30 October 2014 would give enough time to Members to propose speakers and themes for 
discussion. Members should submit globally relevant inputs and engage with their industry so that there would be a dialogue on NTB issues, includin g experiences from stakeholders. The sooner the 
Secretariat received those inputs, the sooner Members would have the possibility to elaborate and 
to agree on a balanced and high quality prog ramme. Therefore, she encouraged Members to 
continue to contact stakeholders, including globally active firms, so as to ensure that the workshop 
would succeed in identifying the main impediments to trade in the IT sector. A successful 
workshop would take stock of the main NTBs and the existing mechanisms to overcome them, and might serve as a starting point for a new and efficient process to discuss and tackle NTBs in the IT sector. 
3.3.  The representative of the European Union ex pressed gratitude for the call for reactions on the 
workshop. He stated that the EU industry was very much involved in organizing the workshop, and 
encouraged all delegations to take part. He also encouraged the participation of industry. In his G/IT/M/60 
 
- 8 - 
 
  view, for the success of the workshop, it would be important to have a broad participation of 
industry from all around the world. 
3.4.  The representative of Japan agreed with Switzerland and the European Union. He said that, 
since the NTB Workshop would be quite important for the Committee, Japan was discussing with 
its industry and preparing to make some contribu tion to the workshop. They would report to the 
Secretariat as soon as possible. 
3.5.  The representative of the Philippines, spea king on behalf of ASEAN, supported the holding of 
the workshop on NTMs as they believed that NTMs  were becoming an increasingly important topic 
in their work on market access. They were trying to find out from their own industry if there could be a contribution, at least for the Philippines, and her delegation had been trying to talk with various industry groups although until now they had not received any feedback. They would keep 
on trying. 
3.6.  The representative of Chinese Taipei stated that, since removing and eliminating NTBs to 
trade in ITA products was important and needed , his delegation fully supported the workshop. 
Therefore, they had proposed two topics to be pr esented in the workshop, focussing on the use of 
mutual recognition agreements and accreditation to reduce NTBs in ITCT products. The speakers included non-profit foundations, and industry. His delegation looked forward to working together 
with other Members in the preparations for the workshop. 
3.7.  The Chairman thanked those delegations th at took the floor for their interventions. He 
encouraged all delegations to continue their enga gement in this area and urged them to submit 
further proposals to the Secretariat as soon as possible, bearing in mind that the Secretariat would 
have then to develop a draft programme for consultation by the Committee. He also indicated that 
there might be a risk of revisiting the dates in  the autumn. He suggested that the Committee take 
note of the statements made, and agree with the time-frame and deadlines that he had proposed. 
3.8.  It was so agreed. 
4  EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF THE TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.12) 
4.1.  The Chairman recalled that, at previous m eetings of the Committee, Participants indicated 
that they had found the information contained therein very useful and wished to have it 
completed. To date, among the 50 ITA Participants  (excluding Afghanistan), 29 had provided such 
information, including the Survey on EMC/EMI submitted by the Russian Federation, which was 
received just prior to the last Committee meeting. However, including the most recently joined 
Participants, there were still a total of 21 Participants who had neither submitted a survey response nor a notification regarding the types of  assessment procedures used by their authorities 
for EMC/EMI. 
4.2.  He invited the delegations to comment, intervene, or update information as contained in 
document G/IT/W/17/Rev.12. He clarified that this  revision included the survey submitted by the 
Russian Federation. 
4.3.  He stated that, since this information in creased transparency on the types of conformity 
assessment procedures for EMC/EMI used by ITA Participants, and since it facilitated trade in this important sector, he encouraged those 21 delegations that had not yet done so to provide this 
information to the Secretariat as soon as possible in order to enable the Committee to complete its 
work. He requested those delegations that had any query to contact the Secretariat for detailed information, clarification, or assistance. He also asked the Secretariat to continue contacting those 
delegations that had not yet submitted information, in particular those who had joined most 
recently, with a view to providing technical assistance if and as necessary so as to facilitate the preparation of any outstanding survey responses. 
4.4.  He asked Participants once again to reflect upon what subsequent steps, if any, they would 
be prepared to consider with a view to maximizing the utility of the information on EMC/EMI conformity assessment procedures that had already been provided, and that which would hopefully be forthcoming in the near future. He invited Participants to share their insights with him G/IT/M/60 
 
- 9 - 
 
  and the Secretariat in this regard at any time, or in the Committee now or at its next meeting. As 
no delegation wanted to comment on his summary, he suggested that the Committee take note of his statements. 
4.5.  It was so agreed. 
5  DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27 AND 
JOB/IT/12) 
5.1.  The Chairman stated that under this agenda item there were two sub-items: (i) the 
implementation of the Decision (G/IT/27); and ( ii) the Room Document tabled by Switzerland. 
5.2.  On the first sub-item, he recalled that, on 20 July 2013, the Decision contained in 
document G/IT/27 regarding the endorsement of List IA items of document G/IT/W/6/Rev.3 was 
approved. As required by the Decision, each partic ipant should reflect the agreed classifications in 
its WTO Schedule of concessions, as appropriate, and follow the procedures set forth in the 1980 Decision on Procedures for Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions 
(BISD 27S/25). Participants should submit the relevant documentation in connection with such 
modification no later than 30 April 2014, as specified in the Decision. The WTO Secretariat agreed to provide technical assistance in making such modifications to developing country Participants 
upon request. At the moment, the Secretariat had been approached by four ITA Participants, of 
whom three were developing country Participants. The technical work in the Secretariat with regard to these requests was ongoing. It should be  noted that the technical work that was involved 
in this exercise was quite time-consuming and so it could only be undertaken on a gradual basis. 
In anticipation of additional requests, the Secretariat had undertaken a preliminary analysis of the 
remaining developing country Participants. He urged these developing country Participants to contact the Secretariat as soon as possible if they anticipated that they would require assistance in 
this area. 
5.3.  The representative of the Philippines in dicated that her delegation had requested and 
received technical assistance from the Secretariat. The Secretariat's technical assistance had 
helped her capital to move the process forward. Sh e hoped that they would be able to submit their 
rectification sooner rather than later. 
5.4.  The Chairman thanked the update by the dele gation of the Philippines and suggested that the 
Committee take note of the statements made. 
5.5.  It was so agreed. 
5.6.  The Chairman referred to the second sub- item and recalled that a revised version of the 
Swiss Room Document was circulated subsequently as JOB/IT/12 on 11 April 2014, at the request 
of the Swiss delegation. He invited the Swiss dele gation to speak on the revised Room Document. 
5.7.  The representative of Switzerland stated  that, in April 2014, her delegation submitted a 
proposal to address divergences of classification  in the ITA. In her view, HS96 was a very old 
classification, which had existed for almost 20 years. The basic idea of their proposal, as contained 
in document JOB/IT/12, was to use the model list of the Secretariat's Document (JOB(07)/96) to speed up the resolution of classification divergences for the remaining 37 items as listed in Attachment B or as for Attachment B in section 2 of Attachment A. The model list was in HS2007, 
where the main changes had affected ITA. Switzerl and proposed, first, that the Secretariat would 
be asked to prepare a simple list for the 37 remaining items, with their possible HS2007 classification. Second, on the basis of this document, ITA Participants would be required 
to indicate the following: for which item their classification diverged from the list prepared by the 
Secretariat, and the relevant HS2007 sub-heading at the HS six-digit level, under which they classified the product in question. Third, the WT O Secretariat would then compile all the answers 
received in a document that would act as a basis for the Committee to assess next steps. She said 
that, since the summer break was close, the time-frame suggested in document JOB/IT/12 (of two months before the autumn 2014 Committee meeting) was a little bit ambitious. However, as there were only 37 items to check, which did no t require a huge amount of work, Switzerland was 
of the view that one month before the next ITA Committee meeting could be an appropriate target G/IT/M/60 
 
- 10 - 
 
  date for the submission of answers to the Secretar iat. She said that Switzerland remained open to 
discussions with any interested Member wishing to express engagement with respect to their proposal. 
5.8.  The representative of Singapore supported the Swiss proposal and said that her delegation 
stood ready to engage on this work together with other ITA Participants. 
5.9.  The representative of the Philippines supported the ideas contained in the Swiss paper. 
However, she had a technical question, wondering if, when submitting its schedules for 
rectification, it would be possible for a participant to move directly from HS96 to HS2007. She felt 
that there had always to be a process by which Part icipants had to move from one HS classification 
system to another before they could come up to HS2007. Her capital had a query regarding the process to pose to the Committee. In her view , Participants could not just move from HS96 
immediately to HS2007 as there might be something lost in between. 
5.10.  The Chairman thanked the delegation of the Philippines. He proposed that the question be 
discussed once the Committee had gone through all other interventions. 
5.11.  The representative of Canada expressed gratitude for the idea of adopting HS2007 as the 
benchmark for identifying classification divergences. She felt that it was a logical and simplified 
means of ensuring greater harmonization and redu cing divergences in the future. Therefore, she 
supported the Swiss proposal contained in document JOB/IT/12. 
5.12.  The representative of the United States a ppreciated Switzerland's proposal. In her view, it 
represented a constructive way to advance technical discussions on the classification divergences 
relating to Attachment B commitments and how they were classified in each Participant's schedule. 
5.13.  Shifting the Committee's focus to a more updated nomenclature was prudent as there had 
been significant changes to the way in which information technology products were classified. Her delegation felt that the Secretariat's model list in HS2007 was a useful reference for the 
Committee's technical discussions, recognizing, however, that the Secretariat's transpositions were 
not definitive, and nor did they reflect any agr eement by Participants. In past discussions, the 
Committee had determined that many of the classification divergences with respect to 
Attachment B items could not be resolved at the technical level but rather needed policy decisions. 
5.14.  To have a better understanding of the divergences on the basis of HS2007 could help inform 
future discussions and frame possible decisions in the Committee. In terms of the specifics of the 
Swiss proposals, given that the technical work would most certainly require Members' coordination 
with their respective customs authorities, it would be difficult to undertake this technical work 
based on the timeline outlined in the paper. Sh e suggested perhaps setting a deadline for later in 
the autumn, or perhaps early 2015, to provide sufficient time for each participant to compile their 
answers. Her delegation might also consider whether it would be useful to involve customs experts 
in the future Committee discussion on this topic. 
5.15.  The representative of Norway thanked Switze rland for their contribution with regard to this 
important and long-standing issue, and supported the Swiss proposal. She said that the proposed 
time-frames were workable and could form the basis of the Committee's work. She felt that the work should be done on the basis of HS2007. She also believed that it would be useful to consider whether and how the Committee could invite expertise from the WCO Secretariat to assist the 
Participants in moving this process forward. 
5.16.  The representative of the European Un ion thanked the delegation of Switzerland and 
supported their proposal. 
5.17.  The representative of India thanked the delegation of Switzerland for their efforts in 
bridging the classification divergence in ITA prod ucts and putting forward a proposal for a possible 
way forward in this area, as contained in document JOB/IT/12. He felt that the proposal appeared 
fairly simple and was based on work already carried out by the WTO Secretariat, as contained in 
document Job(07)/96. However, he informed the Committee that comments from New Delhi were awaited on the proposal and hence that India wished  for the time being to reserve its position on 
the proposal. G/IT/M/60 
 
- 11 - 
 
  5.18.  The Chairman referred then, first, to th e question by the Philippines concerning direct 
transposition to HS2007, and, second, to the sugges tion by the United States that the timelines 
proposed by Switzerland might not be sufficiently generous. He invited Switzerland to speak to these two points. 
5.19.  The representative of Switzerland, in addressing the question regarding timelines, stated 
that their proposal on timelines was flexible; what was important was the result. In referring to the 
question by the Philippines, she said that they  knew that there was an issue with regard to 
HS changes. However, according to her know ledge, there were more changes in HS2007 that 
affected the ITA than in HS2002. In addition, if one had its schedule, the full schedule, already certified in HS2002, as per the WTO procedures, she saw no need for further transposition. Otherwise, one might double one's work to certify an ITA list in HS2002 again. Also, and at least to 
her knowledge, the majority of ITA Participants had already submitted their schedules for HS2002. 
She asked the Secretariat to clarify whether or not the work was well advanced on HS2002, and whether or not it could and should be completed within a reasonable period of time. 
5.20.  The representative of the Philippines thanked her Swiss colleague for her response 
concerning HS2002. She stated that, as far as her country was concerned, its schedule had not yet 
been certified in HS2002. It was for this reason that her capital had raised the question as to how 
to move forward. She noted that the work was ongoing in the Committee on Market Access 
regarding HS2002 and HS2007, and that her country might be a unique case. She asked the Secretariat for clarification. 
5.21.  The Secretariat reported on the status of the different HS transpositions. With regard to 
HS2002, the large majority of Members had already concluded. With regard to HS2007, about 
75 Members had already concluded the technical work, and had certified, or else were in the process of undertaking this certification. He reminded the Committee that, in the context of the 
technical work and the divergences on classification, the way it was done before with some of the 
other issues was that Participants first discussed what should be the appropriate classification. Only once they had agreed on the appropriate classification would they decide whether or not to 
amend their schedules. This question was not nece ssarily linked to the status of their current 
schedule, but rather the issue was that of the appropriate classification of those goods in HS2007. So, after an agreement on the appropriate classification, you might or might not need to take an action. 
5.22.  The Chairman stated that it would be useful to have an idea on how to move forward on this 
item. He felt that the Swiss proposal set things out quite well. With regard to the comment by the 
United States, he proposed that the dates and deadlines contained in the Swiss proposal be 
treated as aspirational rather than as binding, and that the Committee move the work forward as 
quickly as possible but at a rate that would neve rtheless allow it to be done properly. He asked 
whether the Committee could agree with the Swiss proposal on the steps that it had set out. 
5.23.  By way of summary, he then asked, first, that the Secretariat prepare, on the basis of 
document JOB(07)/96, a short and simple list of the remaining 37 items and their possible classification in HS2007; second, that each participant indicate those items for which their domestic classification diverged from the list prepared by the Secretariat and its relevant 
HS2007 subheadings, in six digits, for the item in question; and third, that the Secretariat then 
compile the answers received from delegations in to a document and, based on that document, 
that the Committee assess the next steps to be taken. He asked whether this could be acceptable 
to the Committee. 
5.24.  The representative of India reiterated his earlier statement that, since his delegation was 
awaiting comments and a final position from capital, it might not be possible at this moment to 
join the consensus so far as acceptance of the Swiss proposal was concerned. 
5.25.  The Chairman asked whether it was acceptable to ask the Secretariat to get started on the 
work proposed by Switzerland, i.e. to prepare a document setting out the Secretariat's suggestions 
for the 37 remaining items, without then speaki n g  t o  w h a t  n e x t  s t e p s  m a y  b e  e x p e c t e d  o f  
Members, because this was work that needed in any case to be done and was without prejudice, 
and could be done without necessarily compelling  the Committee to take a particular subsequent 
course of action. He asked whether India was in a position to accept such an approach. G/IT/M/60 
 
- 12 - 
 
  5.26.  The representative of India stated that he had no further mandate from capital and placed 
on record its reservation. 
5.27.  The Chairman noted that the Committee was not in a position to take a decision today, and 
suggested it take note of all the statements made. 
5.28.  It was so agreed. 
6  NEW PARTICIPANTS 
6.1.  The Chairman referred to his fax to all Participants, dated 19 March 2014, in which he 
confirmed the approval of the ITA schedule of  Afghanistan. He informed the Committee that 
Afghanistan had therefore become the 79th Participant to the Committee, and that its 
ITA commitments would be implemented upon Afghanistan's accession to the WTO. He also informed the Committee that three more draft sched ules of ITA commitments had been circulated 
for Participants' consideration and approval, namely the draft schedules of Azerbaijan, Seychelles, 
and Kazakhstan. 
6.2.  He stated that, on 12 March 2014, the Secretariat had received a communication from the 
Republic of Azerbaijan confirming its commitment to join the ITA upon its accession to the WTO. 
On 17 March, the Secretariat received Azerbaijan's draft ITA schedule for circulation to Participants for verification and approval. Thereafter, the Secr etariat performed the electronic verification of 
Azerbaijan's ITA schedule and found that there were  no discrepancies. On 8 April, the Secretariat 
distributed Azerbaijan's draft ITA schedule to a ll ITA Participants for their consideration and 
approval. Comments were received from one delegation before the deadline of 30 April 2014. Azerbaijan was in consultations with that delegation  and a fax would be issued in due course to all 
Participants confirming Azerbaijan's participation to the ITA when remaining issues were resolved. 
6.3.  He informed the Committee that, on 2 April 2014, the Secretariat had received a 
communication from the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Seychelles confirming the 
Seychelles' commitment to join the ITA upon its accession to the WTO. On the same date, the 
Secretariat also received the Seychelles' draft ITA schedule for circulation to Participants for verification and approval. After performing the elec tronic verification and finding no discrepancies, 
the Seychelles' draft ITA schedule was distributed to Participants for consideration and approval on 
16 April 2014. A deadline of 16 May 2014 was set for Participants to notify any objection to the Secretariat. This deadline was extended to 30 May at the request of one delegation. Subsequently comments were received from another delegation, within the extended deadline. Currently, the 
Seychelles was in consultation with that delegation , and a fax would be issued in due course to all 
Participants confirming the Seychelles' participation to the ITA once these outstanding issues were resolved. 
6.4.  He also informed the Committee that, on 14 May 2014, the Secretariat received a 
communication from the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Kazakhstan confirming Kazakhstan's commitment to join the ITA upon its accession to the WTO. On the same day, the Secretariat 
received Kazakhstan's draft ITA schedule for circulation to Participants for verification and 
approval. After performing the electronic verifica tion and finding no discrepancies, Kazakhstan's 
ITA schedule was distributed to Participants also on 14 May 2014 for their consideration and approval. Participants were asked to notify any objection to the Secretariat with a deadline of 
10 June 2014. Comments were receiv ed from four delegations within the deadline, and Kazakhstan 
was consulting with these delegations. A fax would be issued to all Participants confirming the approval of the ITA schedule of Kazakhstan on ce these outstanding issues were resolved. 
6.5.  The Chairman suggested that the Committee take note of the summaries provided. 
6.6.  It was so agreed. 
7  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 7.1.  The Chairman stated that, pursuant to th e consultations by the Chairman of the Council for 
Trade in Goods, a consensus had been informally reached on the election of Mr Frederic Payot G/IT/M/60 
 
- 13 - 
 
  (Switzerland) as the new Chairman of the Co mmittee. The Chairman therefore proposed the 
election of Mr Frederic Payot as the new Chairman of the Committee. 
7.2.  The Committee elected Mr Frederic Payot as the new Chairman of the Committee of 
Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products by acclamation. 
7.3.  Mr Frederic Payot assumed his role as Chairman of the Committee. 
7.4.  The outgoing Chairman (Mr Aaron Fowler) stated that the past two years had been a quite 
interesting and enjoyable period for him. He expressed his thanks to Members of the Committee 
and the Secretariat, and to the new Chairman. 
7.5.  The incoming Chairman, Mr Frederic Payo t, expressed his apprecia tion to the outgoing 
Chairman, Mr Aaron Fowler, for his valuable contributions to the work of the Committee over the 
past two years, and wished him all the best in his future endeavours. He also expressed his sincere 
thanks to all Participants for accepting his nomination and for honouring him with the role of 
Chairman. He stated that he would do his best to facilitate the discussions and debates under this Committee impartially. And he would remain available to Participants for any matter related to the 
ITA. He would convene consultations on the different topics whenever needed. 
8  OTHER BUSINESS Date of next meeting 
8.1.  The Chairman referred to the Chair's fax to delegations of 21 May 2014. He stated that, as 
per that fax, the next meeting of the Committee had been scheduled for 31 October 2014, which 
would be back-to-back with the forthcoming workshop on NTBs for IT products. 
8.2.  It was so agreed. 
__________