RESTRICTED  
  
WT/ACC/KAZ/78  
 
 
24 September 2013  
(13-5130)  Page: 1/39  
Working Party on the Accession of Kazakhstan  Original: English  
 
ACCESSION OF KAZAKHSTAN 
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND REPLIES 
 The following submission, dated 19 September 2013, is being circulated at the request of 
the Delegation of Kazakhstan. 
_______________ WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 2 - 
 
  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES .............................................................................................. 3  
-  MONETARY AND FISC AL POLICY ............................................................................. 3  
-  FOREIGN EXCHANGE AND PAYMENTS...................................................................... 3  
-  INVESTMENT REGIME .............................................................................................. 4  
-  STATE OWNERSHIP, STATE-TRADING ENTITIES AND PRIVATIZATION ................... 7  
(A) PRIVATIZATION ...................................................................................................... 7  
(B) STATE-OWNED AND STATE-CONTROLLED ENTERPRISES, ENTERPRISES 
WITH SPECIAL AND EXCLUSIVE PRIVILEGE ..................................................................... 8  
III.  FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING PO LICIES .................................... 13  
-  POWERS OF EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL BRANCHES OF 
GOVERNMENT ................................................................................................................ 13  
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS ............................................................... 14  
-  REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPORT AND EXPORT OPERATIONS ............ 14  
A. IMPORT REGU LATIONS ......................................................................................... 15  
-  ORDINARY CUSTOMS DUTIES ................................................................................ 15  
-  TARIFF RATE QUOTAS ........................................................................................... 17  
-  APPLICATION OF INTERNAL  TAXES TO IMPORT S .................................................. 20  
-  QUANTITATIVE IMPORT RESTRICT IONS, INCLUDING PROHIBITIONS, 
QUOTAS AND LICENSING SYSTEMS ................................................................................ 21  
(A) QUANTITATIVE IMPORT RESTRICTIO NS, INCLUDING PROHIBITIONS AND 
QUOTAS ........................................................................................................................ . 21 
-  OTHER CUSTOMS FO RMALITIES ............................................................................ 24  
-  ANTI-DUMPING, COUNTERVAILING DU TY AND SAFEGUARD REGIMES .................. 24  
(B) REGIME ESTABLISHED UNDER THE AG REEMENT OF 25 JANUARY 2008 ................. 25  
B. EXPORT REGU LATION ........................................................................................... 25  
-  CUSTOMS TARIFFS, FEES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES RENDERED, 
APPLICATION OF INTERN AL TAXES TO EXPORTS ........................................................... 25  
-  QUANTITATIVE EXPORT RESTRICTIO NS, INCLUDING PROHIBITIONS AND 
QUOTAS ........................................................................................................................ . 26 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS ............................... 28  
-  INDUSTRIAL POLICY, IN CLUDING SUBS IDIES ...................................................... 28  
-  TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE, ST ANDARDS AND CERT IFICATION ................... 28  
(C) TECHNICAL REGULATIONS, INTERNAT IONAL AND NATIONAL STANDARDS, 
AND CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES .............................................................. 29  
-  TRADE RELATED INVESTMENT  MEASURES (TRIMS)............................................... 29  
-  GOVERNMENT PR OCUREMENT ............................................................................... 32  
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME ............................................. 33  
VI. TRADE IN SERVICES .............................................................................................. 38  
 WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 3 - 
 
  Unless otherwise indicated, reference in this document to "paragraph" means the paragraph 
number in WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.9, the Draf t Working Party Report; and reference to 
"question" or "response to question" means the question numbers in WT/ACC/KAZ/77, Replies to 
Additional Questions Raised by Members on the Draft Working Party Report. 
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES 
- Monetary and Fiscal Policy Question 1  
The response to Question 1 states that "I n accordance with agreements, ratified by 
three CU countries and enacted as of 1 Janua ry 2012, which form the legal framework of 
the Single Economic Space, the EEC is not en titled to exercise powers in monetary and 
fiscal policies, and that "at this stage, ther e are no regional initia tives in the area of 
monetary or fiscal policy coordination that is planned for implementation by 2015 within 
the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union." 
- Could Kazakhstan make a general stat ement about its plans for monetary and 
fiscal policy coordination and add this information be added to the text of the 
Working Party Report, e.g., at the end of the chapter? 
Answer: 
We made the following general statement at the end of the chapter: "In response to a request of a Member  to provide information on regional initiatives in the area of 
monetary and fiscal policy, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that in accordance with the agreements, ratified by three CU countries and enacted as of 1 January 2012, which formed the 
legal framework of the Single Economic Space, the EEC was not delegated a decision-making 
authority in the  area of monetary and fiscal policy.  Therefore, at this stage, there were no 
regional initiatives in the area of monetary or fiscal policy planned for implementation by 2015 
within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union". 
- Foreign Exchange and Payments Question 2  
The response to Question 2 states that "I n accordance with agreements, ratified by 
three CU countries and enacted as of 1 Janua ry 2012, which form the legal framework of 
the Single Economic Space, the EEC is not entitled to exercise powers in foreign 
exchange and payments policy", and that "at th is stage, there are no regional initiatives 
in the area of foreign exchange and paymen ts policy coordination that is planned for 
implementation by 2015 within the framew ork of the Eurasian Economic Union". 
- Could Kazakhstan make a general statem ent about its plans for foreign exchange 
and payments policy coordination in the Customs Union and the Single Economic 
Space and add this information to the text of the Working Party Report, e.g., at the end of the chapter? 
Answer: 
We made the following general statement at the end of the chapter: 
"In response to a request of a Member to provide information on regional initiatives in the area of 
foreign exchange and payments policy, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan replied that in 
accordance with the agreements, ratified by thr ee CU countries and enacted as of 1 January 2012, 
which formed the legal framework of the Single Economic Space, the EEC was not delegated a 
decision-making  authority in the area of foreign exchan ge and payments policy.  Therefore, at 
this stage, there were no regional initiatives in the area of foreign exchange and payments policy 
planned for implementation by 2015 within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union". WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 4 - 
 
  - Investment Regime 
Question 3  Paragraph 59 state that the list of strategic investment projects previously adopted by 
Government Resolution No. 1293 of 1 Septembe r 2009 had become void and that a new 
list of strategic investment projects wo uld be developed by her Government.  
The response to Question 8, however, adds th at the list of investment projects approved 
by Government Resolution No. 436 of May 2003 was amended with Government 
Resolution of the Republic of Kazakhstan  No. 1416 of 8 November 2012, and that 
Kazakhstan had updated the list of investme nt projects provided in Annex 2 of the 
Working Party Report 
- Please add this information and update Annex 2. 
Answer: 
At the request of a Member, the additional information is provided as the following: 
 "62.  The lists of priority activities and stra tegic investment projects were intended to be 
revised regularly.  The list of priority ac tivities approved by Government Resolution 
No. 436 of 8 May 2003 had been amended in 2009 by Government Resolution No. 925, and again in 2010 by Government Resolution No. 809.  Changes had been made with 
regard to types of activities, but the number of activities (93) had not been changed.  
The list of priority activities was amen ded by Government Resolution No. 1416 of 
8 November 2012.  The updated list of priority activities was attached to the Working Party 
Report (Annex 2)." 
Question 4  
The response to Question 11 states that priv ate ownership of land plots located in the 
border zone and boundary territories of the Republic of Kazakhstan by foreigners and 
foreign juridical entities as well as lease-ho lding of land plots for agricultural purposes 
adjacent to the State border of Kazakhstan for foreigners is prohibited, and defines borderland as the territory di rectly adjacent to the State border and where the State 
border passes through water, as territory direct ly adjacent to the coast of these waters.   
- Is there a minimum distance from the border that is considered prohibited for 
foreign lease or purchase? 
- Can the information from the response to  Question 11 quoted above be added to 
the text of paragraph 71? 
Answer: 
1. The minimum distance from the border that is prohibited for foreign lease or purchase will 
be defined by the Resolution of the Government, which is currently under elaboration by the 
National Security Committee of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
2. The information on definitions of borderland and border zone from the response to 
Question 11 is outlined in paragraph 70 of the revised Draft Working Party Report of Kazakhstan.   
"70. A Member sought clarification on definitions of border zone and borderland.  
The representative of Kazakhstan explained that in accordance with paragraph 29 of Article 2 of Law No. 70-V "On the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
16 January 2013, the borderland was a part of the territory directly adjacent to the State 
border on the land plot.  In the areas, wher e the State border passes through the border 
rivers, lakes and other waters, the borderland was defined as a part of the territory directly 
adjacent to the coast of these waters as well as territories located in the islands, where the 
State Border regime was established. In accordance with paragraph 28 Article 2 of Law "On the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan",  a border zone was a part of the territory of WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 5 - 
 
  the Republic of Kazakhstan adjacent to the bord erland within the territory of administrative 
districts". 
Question 5 The response to Question 12 lists the type s of property and enterprises that are 
considered "strategic objects."   
- Please add this information to para graph 76 of the Working Party report. 
Answer: 
As mentioned in response to Question 12 information on the types of property and enterprises that 
are considered "strategic objects" is provided in paragraph 85 of the Draft Working Party Report of Kazakhstan (7 paragraphs below).    
"85.  Asked about "strategic entities", the representative of Kazakhstan explained that 
Kazakhstan's legislation provided a definition of the term "strategic object", which according 
to Article 193-1 of the Civil Code, was a property  of social and economic importance for the 
sustainable development of Kazakhstan's societ y, the ownership, use or disposal of which 
would affect the national security interests of Kazakhstan.  Strategic objects consisted of 
main-line railroad networks; main-line oil pipelines; main-line gas pipelines; national electric network; main-line communication lines; national postal network; international airports; 
international sea ports; air navigation devices of the air traffic control system; devices and 
navigation signs regulating and ensuring the safety of ships; entities using nuclear energy; space industry entities; water facilities; public roads; shares (common stocks, ordinary shares) in juridical persons, which owned strategic objects; shares (common stocks, 
ordinary shares) owned by physical and juridica l persons, which could directly or indirectly 
determine decisions or influence decisions of juridical persons which owned strategic objects.  Strategic objects could be either in State or private ownership.  Strategic objects 
could be encumbered by third party rights or di sposed/sold only on the basis of the decision 
of the Government.  The Government of Kazakhstan had the priority right to purchase a strategic object at the market price, in case  the owner intended to sell such an object.  
Strategic objects were enumerated in Resolution of the Government No. 651 of 
30 June 2008."  
Question 6 Paragraph 56:  What does "full and uncondi tional protection of the rights of the 
investors" include?  Which rights are covered?   I t  i s  n o t  c l e a r  i f  t h i s  r e f e r s  t o  o t h e r  
rights, apart from those furt her mentioned (e.g. transparen cy, access to information, 
compensation).  Are contractual righ ts specifically covered by the Law 
"On Investments"? 
Answer: 
In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 4 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 373-II 
"On Investments" of 8 January 2003 (hereinafter – the Law), investor is granted full and 
unconditional protection of the rights and interests,  ensured by the Constitution of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, the Law and other legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as international agreements ratified by the Republic of Kazakhstan.   
In particular, the Law provides full and unconditional protection of the following rights of investors:  
- the rights of investors for compensation for damages suffered due to issuance by public 
officials of acts that do not comply with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
- the stability of the terms and conditions of contracts concluded between investors and state 
bodies; 
- the access to information related to investment activities (company registration, charter 
documents, licensing, etc.);  
- the rights of investor to use income at their full discretion; WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 6 - 
 
  - the rights of investor for protection in case of nationalization and requisition;  
- investment dispute settlement regulations, including the possibility of international 
arbitration provided by the Law. 
The Law "On Investments" does not contain provisions specifying contractual rights, it describes 
procedures for conclusion and termination of an investment contract.  
Question 7 What is the meaning of "non-compliant no rms" that result into damages to the 
investors? (i.e. non-compliant with what?) 
Answer: 
Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article 4 of the Law, investor has the right for compensation for 
damages caused due to orders and instructions issu ed by state authorities and/or public officials 
that do not comply with legislative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan .  
Therefore, "non-compliant norms" refer to norms issued by state authorities and/or public officials 
that do not comply with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
Question 8 
What are the criteria applied in determinin g the indemnity for damages suffered by the 
investors? 
Answer: 
The Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Special Part) No. 409-I of 1 July 1999 does not 
specify criteria applied for determining the compensation for damages suffered by investors, but stipulates liabilities for damages caused by state authorities, local authorities and their officials.  
Thus, pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 922 of the Civil Code, damages caused due to orders and 
instructions issued by state authorities that do not comply with legislative acts shall be 
compensated by court decision.  The damage shall be compensated using funds from the State 
Budget.  
Question 9 The terms of Article 4 of the Law seem to imply that the State is entitled, under the 
circumstances mentioned in points (i) and ( ii), to enact legislation that may have the 
result of modifying the terms of a contract.  
- Is this correct? In addition, such circumst ances seem very broad.  What is covered 
under points (i) and (ii) as amendments to legal acts?  
Answer: 
In accordance with Article 4 of the Law "On Investments", the Republic of Kazakhstan guarantees 
stability of the terms and conditions of agreements concluded between investors and State 
agencies, except for agreements that are amende d by mutual consent of the parties.  These 
guarantees for investors do not extend to:  (i) am endments to the legal acts of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and/or their entry into force, nor to  amendments made to international agreements 
that changed the terms and conditions of import s, production, and sale of excisable goods; 
(ii) amendments and addenda to Kazakhstan's legislation introduced for national security, 
environmental safety, public health and moral purposes.  
In the exceptional cases stipulated in points (i) and (ii) of Article 4 of the Law, the stability of 
terms and conditions of concluded investment contracts are not guaranteed to investors.  Hence, 
the signed contracts can be modified if under the circumstances mentioned in points (i) and (ii) of WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 7 - 
 
  Article 4 of the Law, the State would enact a new le gislation or amendments to applied legislation.  
It is important to note that up to date Kazakhstan has not applied abovementioned exceptional cases and, consequently, has not modified th e terms of signed investment contracts.  
Question 10 
It is not clear from this paragraph if th e guarantee of legal certainty includes the 
guarantee that a change in the legislation woul d not apply retroactively, or that it would 
not apply to contracts already concluded.  
- How is the non-retroactive application guaranteed? 
Answer: 
The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 213 "On Normative Legal Acts" of 23 March 1998 
(hereinafter – the Law "On Normative Legal Acts") guarantees non-retroactive application of legal 
acts. 
In accordance with Article 37 of the Law "On Normative Legal Acts", legal act shall not apply to 
relations that arose before its enactment.  Legal acts stipulating increase in penalties and other 
forms of liabilities; imposing new obligations to citizens or negatively affecting their conditions 
shall not apply retroactively.   
Examples demonstrating non-retroactive application of legal acts by Kazakhstan are illustrated in 
paragraph 60 of the Draft Working Party Report of Kazakhstan.  When investment tax preferences 
such as full exemptions from the payment of proper ty tax, land tax and corporate income tax were 
eliminated in 2009, these tax preferences remained in force for contracts that were concluded prior to enactment of amendments to the Law "On Investments".  The Law provided that tax 
preferences granted under investment contract concluded with the authorised body on 
investments before 1 January 2009 would be effect ive until the expiration of the term of the 
contract.  
- State Ownership, State-Tradin g Entities and Privatization 
(a) Privatization Question 11 
We thank Kazakhstan for the additional inform ation provided in Tables 3(A-G) for this 
section, both in updating them and clarifyi ng the information provided in the responses 
in WT/ACC/KAZ/77. 
The response to Question 14 states that  the description of the legal basis for 
privatization and the restrictions on privat ization described in paragraphs 78-80 does 
not apply to national companies, or to firms held by the national holdings, or national 
managing holdings.  It also states that aliena tion of the property of national companies 
or firms (JSCs/LLPs) held by the national ma naging holdings or national holdings is 
performed on the basis of the regulations outlined for JSCs/ LLPs in the Laws "On Joint Stock Companies", "On Limited Liability and A dditional Liability Partnerships", "On the 
Securities Market" and the Civil Code, and th at in addition, the Law "On State Property" 
stipulates specific provisions for strategic objects.  Disposal of shares of national 
companies, transferred as a contribution to the charter capital of the national managing 
holdings, national holdings, that are strategi c objects is permitted only by the decision 
of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
- Could this information be added to the di scussion of privatization in the Working 
Party Report? 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan suggests the following edits to paragraph 80 bis. of the Draft Working Party Report: WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 8 - 
 
  "80bis.  The representative of Kazakhstan stat ed that the rules for privatization and 
restrictions on privatization outlined in Law No. 413-IV did not apply to national companies and firms (JSCs/LLPs) held by national managing holdings or national holdings i.e. to subsidiaries of national managing holdings or national holdings. Alienation of the property of 
national companies or firms (JSCs/LLPs) held by national managing holdings or national 
holdings was performed on the basis of the re gulations outlined for JSCs/ LLPs in the Laws 
"On Joint Stock Companies", "On Limited Liabilit y and Additional Liability Partnerships", "On 
the Securities Market" and the Civil Code.  In addition, Law No. 413-IV stipulated specific 
provisions for strategic objects.  Disposal of shares of national companies, transferred as contribution to the charter capital of national managing holdings, national holdings, that were strategic objects was permitted only by th e decision of the Government of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan." 
(b) State-owned and State-controlled Enterprises, Enterprises with Special and 
Exclusive Privilege 
Question 12 
The response to Question 27 gives a great deal of information on the structure and 
purpose of national companies, and enterp rises held by the national holdings and 
national management holdings.  However, it states, in part:  
"Currently there are 32 national companies, of which 10 national companies belong to 
national managing holdings, 2 national companies belong to a national holding: 
- the National Welfare Fund "Samruk-Ka zyna" includes the following national 
companies:  JSC "National Company "KazM unaiGaz", JSC "KEGOC", JSC "Kazpost", 
JSC "National Atomic Company "Kaz atomprom", JSC "National Company 
"Kazakhstan TemirZholy",  JSC "Kazakhtelecom", JSC "National Company 
"Kazakhstan Engineering", JS C"National Mining Compan y "Tau-Ken Samruk", JSC 
"National Company "Aktau Internat ional Marine Trading Port";  
- the National Managing Holding "KazAgro" includes the National Company "Food 
Product Corporation";     
- the National Holding "Zerde" includes the JSC "National Information 
Technologies", and the JSC "National Company "KazSatNet"."  
Kazakhstan states that "the abov ementioned 12 national companies are neither 
state-owned nor state-controlled enterprises , because their shareholder is not the State, 
but either a national managing holding, or a national holding".  In addition, the response 
to Question 28 states that "the companies he ld by the national managing holdings or 
national holdings are not considered as State-controlled , because juridically their 
shareholder will be either a national managi ng holding or a national holding.  To be 
State-controlled, 50 or more per cent shar es of a company must be operated by a 
government agency or a local executive body." 
- We understand that the State is the only shareholder of Samruk-Kazyna and the 
controlling shareholder of the national holding and other national management 
holdings.  Thus, we cannot agree that the firms they hold are not "state 
controlled".  They are subject to Stat e management through the boards of 
directors of their holding companies whose members are often government 
selected or actual government officials, ev en if they are not directly administered 
by the State ministries. 
- This is an important distinction, as th ese companies are ultimately controlled by 
their shareholder, and should be covere d by the commitment in this section and 
the provisions of Article XVII of the GATT 1994 and the WTO Understanding on 
that Article. 
- It will be essential to describe this  clearly in the scope of Kazakhstan's 
commitments in this chapter of the Working Party Report. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 9 - 
 
  Answer: 
The definitions of juridical persons with 50 or mo re per cent of State participation (JSCs/LLPs), 
including national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies described in this section of the Draft Working Party Report are given as defined in Kazakhstan's law.  For the 
purposes of coverage of these entities by the commitment in this section, Kazakhstan proposes 
corresponding changes into Paragraph 102 bis. proposed by a Member in Question 16 below.     
Reference:  
[102bis.  In response, a Member noted that the Government owned 100% of the shares of 
national managing holdings and national holdings, and thus exercised control of both the national 
managing holdings, national holdings and any JSCs [in] which the national managing holdings and 
national holdings owned 50% or more of the shares , [within the competence of its 
representatives in the boards of directors].   Thus, each of the forms of JSCs described in 
paragraph [94] as well as those national companies where the Government or a national managing 
holding, or a national holding owned 50% or more of the shares [for the purposes of coverage 
by the commitment in this section]  were [a State-controlled enterprise and] subject to the 
provisions of paragraph [125]]. 
Question 13  
The response to Question 35 states that the estimation of the "share of state property" 
in Kazakhstan's economy is approximately 9. 6% and that this statistic excludes the 
value of national companies and companies "held" by National Managing Holding or National Holding entities.   
- Could the share in of the national comp anies and companies "held" by National 
Managing Holdings or National Holdings be  similarly calculated and included in the 
Working Party Report text?   
Answer: 
As described in Paragraph 110 of the Draft Working Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev.9), 
the share of "Samruk-Kazyna" in GDP in 2011 wa s 7.2% and 5.3% in 2012.  According to the 
Statistics Agency of Kazakhstan, the share in GDP of other national managing holding or national 
holdings and their entities in total constitute less than 0.5%  
Question 14 Paragraph 97:  Please add the following edits to paragraph 97: 
97.  The national companies, controlling shares (50% and more) of which 
belonged to national managing holdin gs and national holdings, were not 
considered asto be State-controlled JSCs  as defined in Kazakhstan's law.   
Answer: 
Kazakhstan agrees with the proposed amendmen t into paragraph 97 of the Draft Working Party 
Report and will incorporate the proposed text in to the next revision of the Draft Working Party 
Report as follows:  
"97. A national company was a JSC, established by the decision of the Government or local 
executive bodies, controlling portfolio of shares of which belonged to the State, a national managing holding, or a national holding, and which operated in the spheres, that formed the 
core of the national economy, or establishe d for promoting development of the economy of 
regions (socio-entrepreneurial corporations).  The national companies, controlling shares 
(50% and more) of which belonged to national managing holdings and national holdings, 
were not considered to be  State-controlled JSCs as defined in Kazakhstan's law.   
The national companies, controlling shares of which did not belong to national managing WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 10 - 
 
  holdings or national holdings, but managed by the government agencies , were 
considered as State-controlled. " 
Question 15  Concerning the scope of Kazakhstan's local content requirements in the procurement of 
state owned and state controlled enterprises de scribed in this section, we seek a clear 
statement in the WP text, e.g., after paragraph 100.  We suggest the following: 
100bis.  In response to a question from a Me mber, the representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that the entities described in pa ragraphs [xx, yy-zz, aa, and bb] above and 
paragraph [cc of the section on government  procurement] are the only entities in 
Kazakhstan other than those described in th e TRIMs section of this report that must 
comply with the local content provisions wh en seeking to purchase or procure goods, 
services or works.  A list of these companies could be found in [Table xx]. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan would like to suggest including the re quested text into paragraph 124, instead of 
paragraph 100 bis., as paragraph 124 contains the information on the scope of Kazakhstan's local 
content requirements in the procurement of State-owned and State-controlled enterprises described in this section of the draft Working Party Report.    
Kazakhstan suggests the following amendments into paragraph 124: 
124. In response to a request from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
the local content requirements in the form of 20% conditional price discount were applied in procurements of national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies, as 
well as other joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships with 50% or more of 
State participation.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that the entities described in this paragraph above and 
paragraph [cc of the section on government procurement] were the only entities in 
Kazakhstan other than those described in the TRIMs section of this report that 
must comply with the local content provis ions when seeking to purchase goods, 
services or works.   
Currently the following State-controlled companies existed in Kazakhstan:   
- Three national managing holdings ("Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro", "Bayterek");  
- Two national holdings ("Zerde" and "Parasat");  
- 33 national companies (including 10 under the national managing holdings); and 
- 944 joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships managed by the government 
agencies. 
Kazakhstan requested a transitional period of th ree years from the date of accession to the WTO 
for phasing-out the local content requirements in the procurement rules of companies that belong to national managing holdings:  "Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro" and "Bayterek", and national 
holdings:  "Zerde" and "Parasat".  The transiti onal period was required for development and 
implementation of the new procurement regulation in accordance with the WTO provisions.  
Question 16  Concerning Kazakhstan's national managing holdings and national holdings, we seek 
more specific information in the Working Part y text on the nature of state-ownership.  
We suggest the following additi onal text after paragraph 102: 
102bis.  In response, a Member noted that the government owned 100% of the 
shares of national managing holdings an d national holdings, and thus exercised 
control of both the national managing holdings, national holdings and any JSCs for 
which the national managing holdings and national holdings owned 50% or more 
of the shares.  Thus, each of the forms of JSCs described in paragraph [94] as well WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 11 - 
 
  as those national companies where the government or a national managing 
holding, or a national holding owned 5 0 %  o r  m o r e  o f  t h e  s h a r e s  w e r e  a  
state-controlled enterprise and subject to  the provisions of paragraph [125]. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan agrees with the proposed additional Paragraph 102 bis. of the Draft Working Party 
Report and will incorporate the proposed text in to the next revision of the Draft Working Party 
Report with slight additions: 
[102bis.  In response, a Member noted that the Government owned 100% of the shares of 
national managing holdings and national holdings, and thus exercised control of both the national managing holdings, national holdings and any JSCs [in] which the national 
managing holdings and national holdings owned 50% or more of the shares , [within the 
competence of its representative s in the boards of directors].   T h u s ,  e a c h  o f  t h e  
forms of JSCs described in paragraph [94] as well as those national companies where the Government or a national managing holding, or a national holding owned 50% or more of 
the shares [for the purposes of coverage by  the commitment in this section]  were [a 
State-controlled enterprise and] subject to the provisions of paragraph [125]]. 
Question 17 
Paragraph 124:  Kazakhstan states that it re quires national companies, and enterprises 
held by the national holdings and na tional management holdings, such as 
Samruk-Kazyna to give price preferences to local goods in procurement contracts, even 
those related to governmental use.   
- We seek a separate commitment in this section that Kazakhstan will remove these 
requirements when procurement is not intended for governmental use, i.e., for 
government procurement as defined by WTO agreements. 
- We seek a commitment along the following lines:  
125.  [The representative of Kazakh stan confirmed that Kazakhstan had 
State-owned and State-controlled enterpri ses that operated in the commercial 
sphere.  She further confirmed that, expect as otherwise provided in this section, 
from the date of accession of Kazakhstan  to the WTO, such enterprises, when 
engaged in commercial activity, would make  purchases, which were not intended 
for governmental use, and sales in international trade in a manner consistent with 
applicable provisions of the WTO Agreemen t.  She confirmed in particular, that 
such enterprises would make such purc hases and sales in accordance with 
commercial considerations, including price, quality, availability, marketability, and 
transportation, and would afford enterp rises of other WTO Members adequate 
opportunity in conformity with custom ary business practice, to compete for 
participation in such purchases or sales.  She also confirmed that within the scope 
of the services commitments of Kazakhstan , including the limitations, set-out in its 
Schedule of Specific Commitments on Se rvices, the rights and obligations of 
Kazakhstan under the GATS, and the regula tory measures of Kazakhstan covered 
by the WTO Agreement, including pricing regulations, and without prejudice to 
such commitments, rights, obligations, an d measures that are consistent with 
these commitments, rights and obligations , Kazakhstan would ensure that such 
enterprises would act in accordance with the provisions set-out in this paragraph.  
She also confirmed that, upon accession, Kazakhstan would notify enterprises 
falling within the scope of the Understand ing on Article XVII of the GATT 1994.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
125bis.  [The representative of Kazakhst an confirmed that with respect to 
Stated-owned and State-controlled enterprises which were national companies, 
national managing holdings (Samruk-Kazyn a, KazAgro, and Bayterek), or national 
holdings (Zerde and Parastat), and the subs idiaries of the three national managing 
holdings or the two national holding companies for which a national managing WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 12 - 
 
  holding or national holding owned 50% or more of the shares of the subsidiary, 
[from xxx date certain] purchases of good s and services by such enterprises, 
which were not for governmental purposes, but with a view to commercial re-sale 
or with a view to use for production of goods and supply of se rvices for commercial 
sale, would not be subject to local cont ent requirements of any kind, including 
application of price preferences, and th at from [same date as above] these 
enterprises would be subject to the commi tments set out in paragraph [125].  
She further confirmed that these commi tments were without prejudice to 
Kazakhstan's participation in negoti ations on joining the Agreement on 
Government Procurement or its offer on co vered entities in such negotiations.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
Answer: 
In order to bring the language of the commitment in line with the commitment in paragraph 125, 
and also in accordance with the language used in other accessions, Kazakhstan suggests the 
following version of the commitment text: 
125bis.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confir med that with respect to Stated-owned and 
State-controlled enterprises which were national companies, national managing holdings 
(Samruk-Kazyna, KazAgro, and Bayterek), or na tional holdings (Zerde and Parasat), and the 
subsidiaries of the three national managing holdings or the two national holding companies 
for which a national managing holding or national holding owned 50% or more of the shares 
of the subsidiary, from 1 January 2018 purchases, which were not intended for 
governmental use, and sales in international trade of these enterprises would be subject to 
the commitments set out in paragraph [125].  She further confirmed that these 
commitments were without prejudice to Kazakhstan's participation in negotiations on joining 
the Agreement on Government Procurement or  its offer on covered entities in such 
negotiations.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
Question 18 
As regards the request for a transitional peri od to phase out local content requirements, 
referred to in paragraph 124, we understand that this request concerns procurement by 
companies when operating in the commerc ial sphere and not for governmental 
purposes.  We also note that there does not seem to be precedents in this respect.  
We would ask Kazakhstan to redraft the paragraph as follows: 
In response to a request from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
the local content requirements in the form of 20% conditional price discount were 
applied in procurements of national managing  holdings, national holdings and national 
companies, as well as other joint stock compan ies and limited liability partnerships with 
50% or more of State participation.  Curr ently the following State-controlled companies 
existed in Kazakhstan:   
- Three national managing holdings ("Sa mruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro ", "Bayterek");  
- Two national holdings ("Zerde" and "Parasat");  - 32 national companies (including 10 under  the national managing holdings); and 
- 538 joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships managed by the 
government agencies. 
Kazakhstan requested a transitional period of  three years from the date of accession to 
the WTO for phasing-out the local content requirements in the procurement rules of 
companies operating in the commercial sphe re that belong to national managing 
holdings:  "Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro" and "B ayterek", and national holdings:  "Zerde" 
and "Parasat".  The transitional peri od was required for development and 
implementation of the new procurement re gulation in accordance with the WTO 
provisions.  Members noted that such a request was unprecedented. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 13 - 
 
  Answer: 
Kazakhstan will amend the text of the para graph 124 of the Draft Working Party Report 
accordingly as follows: 
 124.  In response to a request from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
the local content requirements in the form of 20% conditional price discount were applied in 
procurements of national managing holdings, national holdings and national companies, as well as other joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships with 50% or more of 
State participation.  Currently the following State-controlled companies existed in 
Kazakhstan:   
- Three national managing holdings ("Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro", "Bayterek");  
- Two national holdings ("Zerde" and "Parasat");  
- 33 national companies (including 10 under the national managing holdings); and 
- 944 joint stock companies and limited liability partnerships managed by the government 
agencies. 
Kazakhstan requested a transitional period of three years from the date of accession to the 
WTO for phasing-out the local content requirem ents in the procurement rules of companies 
operating in the commercial sphere that belong to national managing holdings:  
"Samruk-Kazyna", "KazAgro" and "Bayterek", and national holdings:  "Zerde" and "Parasat".  The transitional period was required for development and implementation of the new procurement regulation in accordance with the WTO provisions.  [Members noted that such 
a request was unprecedented]1. 
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
- Powers of Executive, Legislative an d Judicial Branches of Government 
Question 19  
The response to Question 46 states that:  "At the meeting of the Supreme Eurasian 
Economic Council on 29 May 2013, which took place in Astana, Heads of States decided 
to start the process of codification of international treaties that form the legal 
framework of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space and on this basis to 
proceed with the development of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union." 
- Please add this to the text of this section in the Working Party Report. 
- We would appreciate additional informat ion in the Working Party Report text on 
the major changes contemplated in current structure or operations of the Customs 
Union when it becomes the Eurasian Economic Union. 
Answer: 
We added at the end of paragraph 189 the followi ng requested information:  "At the meeting of 
the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council on 29 May 2013, which took place in Astana, Heads of States decided to start the process of codification of international treaties that form the legal 
framework of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space, and on this basis to proceed with 
the development of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union".   
- Legislative implementation by Kazakhstan of WTO provisions 
Question 20  
Please provide information on Kazakhst an's plans for enacting the necessary 
implementing legislation during the accession  negotiations, including but not limited to 
that listed in the legislative action plan, WT/ACC/KAZ/73/Rev.2. 
                                               
1 Language proposed by a Member of the Working Party. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 14 - 
 
  - Kazakhstan should prioritize important dr aft WTO legislation and enact it prior to 
conclusion of the negotiations, even if actual implementation is delayed until 
Kazakhstan's accession. 
Answer: 
Currently, Kazakhstan has started to elaborate a Road Map for adoption of legislation 
implementing the results of accession negotiat ions based on the Legislative Action Plan. 
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
- Registration Requirements for Import and Export Operations 
Question 21  Question 48:  We note that the request contained in this question for a draft 
commitment to be included in the Working Part y Report text has not been acted upon.   
- We are interested in knowing what is eventually agreed upon and request an 
update on the disposition of this issue. 
Answer: 
As stated in our answer to Question 48, issues re lated to employment of natural persons, such as 
individual entrepreneurs, are not regulated by th e WTO Multilateral Trade Agreements.  Within the 
framework of the WTO accession negotiations, as any other acceding country, has made 
commitments under the GATS in its Services Schedule on regulation of entry and stay of foreign 
qualified personnel such as Intra-Corporate Transferees and Business Visitors.  Kazakhstan's national legislation, as of any other WTO Member's, does not provide national treatment to employment of foreign natural persons.  
Furthermore, according to the "Rules on Entry and Temporary Stay of Foreign Natural Persons in 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, and their Departure fr om the Republic of Kazakhstan", approved by 
the Resolution of the Government of the Repub lic of Kazakhstan No. 148 of 21 January 2012, all 
foreign natural persons are required to register within five calendar days from the date of crossing 
the state border of the Republic of Kazakhstan  at the place of their temporary residence.  
The only exception was made in the framework of the Single Economic Space Agreement 
"On Legal Status of Natural Persons and Members of their Families" as of 19 November 2010, 
according to which citizens of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation are allowed to stay in Kazakhstan for a period of 30 days without registration.  
In conclusion, registration requirements applied to foreign visitors are not governed by 
WTO Agreements and none of the WTO Members has made commitment on this issue.  
Therefore, Kazakhstan is not ready to includ e the proposed commitment text into the Draft 
Working Party Report.  
Question 22  
A Member proposes to add to draft commitment paragraph 252 the following wording:  
"…The representative of Kazakhstan confir med that Kazakhstan would not make the 
procedures or overall requirements to regi ster as a juridical person more burdensome 
than necessary, would not discriminate be tween foreign and domestic applicants in 
approving requests for registration [would not apply procedures and requirements in a 
disguised restrictive manner] and would also co mply with other applicable provisions of 
the WTO Agreement [including transparency pr inciple].  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments." WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 15 - 
 
  Answer: 
The commitment "… not to discriminate  foreign and domestic applicants in approving 
requests for registration",  as stipulated in the present commitment text, is broader and covers 
"non-application of procedures and requir ements in a disguised restrictive manner" . 
Concerning the transparency principle, the commitment texts in the section "Transparency" of the 
draft Working Party Report cover transparency principle stipulated in the WTO Agreement: 
878.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, all laws, 
regulations, decrees, decisions and administrative  rulings of general application pertaining to 
or affecting trade in goods, services, or intellectual property rights, whether adopted or issued in the Republic of Kazakhstan  or by a competent body of the CU, would be 
published promptly in a manner that fu lfils applicable requirements of the 
WTO Agreement, including those of Article X of the GATT 1994 , GATS, and the WTO 
TRIPS Agreement.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession, the Republic of Kazakhstan and th e competent bodies of the CU would update 
published resources, including websites, containing such measures, on a regular basis and 
make them readily available to WTO Members, individuals and enterprises …]   
Therefore, Kazakhstan believes that the amendmen t proposed by a Member is already covered in 
the commitment text provided in paragraph 878.  
A. IMPORT REGULATIONS - Ordinary Customs Duties Question 23 
Paragraph 267:  Please expl ain how Kazakhstan interprets the wording "maintain a 
rational proportion of imported and expo rted goods on the territory of the common 
customs area"?  What is mean t by "rational proportion", ho w to identify and assess it  
(is there any criteria)?  What is its impl ementing/measurement instrument to ensure 
this objective is met? 
Answer: 
The objective for the Common Customs Tariff of the Customs Union "to maintain a rational 
proportion of imported and exported goods on  the territory of the common customs area" was 
stipulated in the Agreement on Common Custom Tariff Regulation of 25 January 2008 due to the 
importance of establishing customs duty rates in accordance with economic development interests 
of CU Parties and based on the tariff commitments undertaken by CU Parties within the framework 
of international agreements, including the WTO commitments. 
In this regard, the import custom duty rates are established based on the following criteria:  the 
availability of domestic production of the goods;  volume of their production and consumption on 
the territory of the Custom Union; compliance with  technical, quality and price characteristics of 
foreign analogues; priorities for industrial development, as defined by government programmes. 
The decision-making process for establishing import duty rates is as follows: 
1. the Ministry of Economy and Budget Planning of the Republic of Kazakhstan carries out the 
analysis on changes in customs duty rates and coordinate with the concerned government agencies; 
2. the Inter-Agency Commission on Trade reviews the findings of the analysis;  
3. the proposal based on the findings of the analysis, is sent to the Eurasian Economic 
Commission (hereinafter – the EEC); 
4. the EEC circulates the proposal to the Repu blic of Belarus and the Russian Federation for 
review;  
5. the proposal is reviewed and discussed at the EEC level based on the comments received 
from the CU Parties;  
6. the EEC Collegium/the EEC Council  adopts the relevant decision. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 16 - 
 
  Question 24 
While we understand that further work on ve rification of Kazakhstan's consolidated 
Goods Schedule will require furt her progress on "adjustment", we think it is time that 
the issue of the headnotes for that schedule was addressed. 
- Kazakhstan did not circulate the full scope of necessary headnotes for the 
preliminary consolidation, WT /ACC/SPEC/KAZ/10/Rev.3.  We  believe that this is a 
mistake and that work to revise the pa rtial headnotes provided for as soon as 
possible, taking as a guide the headnotes approved for the Goods Schedule of the 
Russian Federation. 
Answer: 
The first part of headnotes (to:  Part I – MFN Tariff. Section I – Agricultural Products. Section I – 
A.  Tariffs) drafted based on the results of bilateral goods market access negotiations between 
Kazakhstan and WTO Members were submitted to the WTO Secretariat on 26 December 2012.  
The remaining headnotes based on the WTO Goods Schedule of the Russian Federation, including 
tariff rate quotas and high quality beef, are currently being reviewed by the concerned government 
agencies of Kazakhstan and will be reflected in the final Goods Schedule of Kazakhstan along with the results of the "tariff adjustment". 
Question 25  
Paragraph 277 states:   
[The representative of Kazakhstan confir ms that upon accession to the WTO, the 
CU CET will be brought into compliance with Kazakhstan's tariff commitments, 
with regard to the entire commodity nome nclature, in accordance with the results 
of the ongoing "adjustment" negotiat ions aimed at unification of tariff 
commitments of the Russian Federation  and the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
- We seek retention of this commitmen t paragraph in the Draft Working Party 
Report, in brackets, to establish in the Working Party Report a draft basis for the 
characterization of the outcome of the "adjustment negotiations". 
Answer: 
Given that the tariff adjustment negotiations have not been yet finalized, Kazakhstan believes that 
it would be premature to include the proposed commitment in the Draft Working Party Report. 
Question 26 
Paragraph 282:  Per the exchange in Qu estion 22 of WT/ACC/KAZ/75, we seek 
confirmation that Kazakhstan will complete  the formalities for ITA Committee approval 
of its ITA Schedule prior to the verification  and finalization of Kazakhstan's WTO Goods 
Schedule. 
- To do so, Kazakhstan should submit its draft ITA Schedule as soon as possible to 
the ITA Committee.   
- Please update this part of the Work ing Party Report and begin the formal 
ITA Committee approval process so that this  aspect of your goods schedule and 
commitments can be completed. 
Answer: 
As stipulated by paragraph 282 of the Draft Workin g Party Report, Kazakhstan confirms that it will 
submit its Information Technology Agreement (ITA) Schedule to the ITA Committee for verification 
by the time of its accession to the WTO, in accordance with ITA procedures, in order to enable WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 17 - 
 
  Kazakhstan to join the ITA when it becomes a WTO Member.  With this purpose, Kazakhstan has 
finalized its draft ITA Schedule and submitted it to the WTO Secretariat for verification on 30 May 2013.  The WTO Secretariat will send Kazakhstan's ITA Schedule to the ITA Members for verification soon. 
- Tariff Rate Quotas 
Question 27  
For three years, we have been unable to se ll products under TRQs to Kazakhstan under 
the "in quota" tariff rate because Kazakhstan  has failed to allocate the quotas until half 
the year is gone.  
- This "barrier by administration" must en d and we expect Kazakhstan to indicate, 
concretely, how it will do this prior to the conclusion of the negotiations. 
- We also note that we remain in negotiations on TRQ volumes. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan has drafted the new rules for allocation of tariff rate quotas among participants of 
foreign economic activity.  The draft Rules explicitly provide the specific dates and deadlines for 
collection, submission, publication of the required information as well as for subsequent preparation of the Government resolution.  The time-frames were established for each concerned 
government agency involved in TRQ allocation process:  the Ministry of Economy and Budget 
Planning, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Committee of Customs Control of the Ministry of Finance.  These amendments were introduced in order to avoid further delays in allocation of tariff rate quotas and in adoption of the Government resolution in future.  Currently, the draft Rules are 
undergoing the internal approval procedures by th e concerned government agencies.  As soon as 
the approval is completed, the draft Rules will be  submitted to the Government for signing by the 
Prime-Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
Question 28 
Paragraph 309 of the Working Party Report ment ions that according to Article 3.2 of the 
Agreement on TRQs, the TRQ volume establis hed by the Eurasian Economic Commission 
on imports of goods into the common custom s territory could not exceed the difference 
between the volume of consumption and production of the like product on the common customs territory.  If the production volume of the like product was equal to the volume 
of consumption on the common customs territ ory, or exceeded it, TRQs could not be 
established.  However, if the production volume of the like product was equal to the 
volume of consumption of the product or exc eeded it in one of the CU Parties, such 
difference was not considered when allocating the TRQ volumes for the common 
customs territory of the CU. 
We would like Kazakhstan to confirm that it will consolidate a fixed volume for each 
tariff rate quota, and that such consolidated volume will remain unchanged, irrespective 
of the consumption and production levels  in Kazakhstan for a specific year. 
Answer: 
As part of its WTO accession commitments, Kazakhstan is planning to establish fixed volume of 
tariff rate quotas that will remain unchanged, irre spective of consumption and production volumes. 
Question 29  
Paragraph 312 of the Working Party Report indicates that Members expressed concern 
that the TRQ regime that Kaza khstan applied under the CU, did not appear to allocate 
any in-quota volume to new entrants.  We share that concern.  We understand, however, 
that Kazakhstan is working on a mechanism for the allocation of TRQ volumes to new 
entrants.  WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 18 - 
 
  - If this is correct, could Kazakhstan conf irm which will be the percentage allocated 
to new entrants? 
Answer: 
As stated in the previous replies to questions, Ka zakhstan is planning to allocate 10% of the total 
established volume of tariff rate quotas for "new entrants".  With this purpose the draft new Rules 
for Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas for Imports of Certain Kinds of Meat among Participants of Foreign Economic Activity (hereinafter – the draf t Rules) have been developed by Kazakhstan.  
Currently, the draft Rules are undergoing through the internal approval procedures by the 
concerned government agencies.  As soon as the approval is completed, the draft Rules will be 
submitted to the Government for signing by the Prime-Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
Question 30 
We would like to request that Kazakhstan consider the establishment of a mechanism 
for the reallocation of non-utilized in-quota volumes.  
- Is Kazakhstan considering such mechan ism?  If so, please provide details. 
Answer: 
The Rules Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas for Imports of Certain Kinds of Meat among Participants 
of Foreign Economic Activity, approved by Govern ment Resolution No. 269, do not provide for the 
mechanism for re-allocation of unused volumes of tariff rate quotas. 
The final volumes of meat imported under tariff rate quotas are determined at the end of the first 
quarter of the year following to the year of TRQ allocation.  In this regard, it is not possible to introduce the mechanism for re-allocation of TRQ vo lumes not utilized during the preceding year.  
According to the current practice, the allocated volumes of tariff rate quotas are fully utilized 
during the quota year. 
Question 31 
Paragraph 309:  Kazakhstan reported that th e quota allocation is determined by the 
consistency of the production and consumpt ion of CU, including Members.  However, 
such an approach may be a prob lem with the disparity of data. 
- How Kazakhstan administers to achieve th e timely allocation of import quotas?  
And please inform the period of quota allo cation announcement of each product as 
well.  
Answer: 
The Agreement on Conditions and Mechanism of Alloca tion of Tariff Rate Quotas stipulates that the 
volume of tariff rate quotas is determined based on the difference between the volumes of production and consumption, according to data pr ovided by the Ministry of Agriculture of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  
The volume of tariff rate quotas for CU Parties is established by the decision of the Eurasian 
Economic Commission (hereinafter – the EEC). Ka zakhstan develops the Government Resolution 
on allocation of tariff rate quotas based on the EEC decision.  The volumes of tariff rate quotas, 
which are annually established for Kazakhstan, are fully used by importers. 
Pursuant to Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 269, tariff rate quotas are allocated 
in two Stages:  Stage 1 – by 31 December and Stage 2 – by 1 April.  In addition, taking into 
account periodic delays in allocation of tariff rate quotas, Kazakhstan has developed the draft 
Rules, which sets a timeframe for review and approval by each concerned government agency of the Government resolution on allocation of tariff rate quotas. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 19 - 
 
  Upon accession to the WTO, Kazakhstan will establish the fixed volumes of tariff rate quotas in its 
Schedule of Tariff Concessions and Commitments based on which the EEC will be adopting its decision on the volume of meat to be  imported under tariff rate quotas.  
Question 32  
Paragraph 311:  Kazakhstan informed that a "new entrant" who had no historical 
suppliers will not have been allocated quot a.  So, they had to import product under 
out-of-quota duty rate until they met the requirement.  However, document 
WT/ACC/KAZ/77, Question 53, Kazakhstan has stated that they are in the process of 
drafting new rules for the allocation of quotas.  
- Please report the progress and details of those new rules.  
Answer: 
Pursuant to Resolution of Government of Kazakhstan No. 269, allocation of tariff rate quotas on 
certain kinds of meat among participants of foreign economic activities is conducted based on the "historical" principle.  
In order to be included to the list of historical suppliers, the "new entrants" shall import beef, pork 
and poultry under the out-of-quota rates during the year preceding the year of allocation of tariff rate quotas.  
In addition, Kazakhstan has developed the draft new Rules for Allocation of Tariff Rate Quotas for 
Imports of Certain Kinds of Meat among Participants of Foreign Economic Activity (hereinafter – the draft Rules), which envisages that 10% of annually established volume of tariff rate quotas will be allocated to "new entrants" and determines the Method for allocation of tariff rate quotas 
among new suppliers (hereinafter – the Method).  T hus, tariff rate quotas shall be allocated among 
new suppliers in the order of submission of applications for licence.  Licenses for imports will be issued by the authorised body until the volumes of tariff rate quotas established for new suppliers 
would be fully distributed.  The licence can be i ssued, provided that the volume of declared goods 
is not less than "commercially viable quantities" and does not exceed 25% of the total volume of tariff rate quotas established for new suppliers .  The authorised body  will publish weekly 
information on the volumes of tariff rate quotas for which licenses were issued as well as on the 
volumes which have not been allocated on the following web-sites: www.minplan.gov.kz, 
www.comtorg.kz, www.trade.gov.kz.  
According to recent amendments introduced into the Method, new suppliers shall apply for licence 
using the web-portal "E-Licensing" www.e-license .kz.  The web-portal "E-Licensing" is an 
information system, which is used to submit application and related set of documents for receiving a licence.  The information system contains data on issued, suspended, renewed and terminated 
licenses, as well as on licensee's branches, representative offices engaged in activity subject to 
licensing, and centrally generates the identification number of licenses issued by licensors. 
Currently, the draft Rules are undergoing through the internal approval procedures by the 
concerned government agencies.  The new mechanism for allocation of tariff rate quotas is 
expected to be introduced as of 1 January 2014.  
Question 33  Paragraph 311:  The report implied that that  the allocation of quotas under WTO does 
not include counties that already had Free Tr ade Agreements with the CU Parties.  
Please clarify principle of such allocation as follows:  1. For the countries that CU parties alread y had FTA, whether Kazakhstan established 
specific quota for those countries or imported under CU quota.  
2. For the countries that Kazakhstan already had FTA, whether Kazakhstan 
established specific quota for those countries or imported under CU quota. 
3. For among CU parties, how each party allocated the quota for each other?  WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 20 - 
 
  Answer: 
The volumes of tariff rate quotas are allocated among participants of foreign economic activity 
importing goods from third countries that have not concluded a free trade agreement (hereinafter – FTA) with Kazakhstan and have exceptions from free trade regime on bovine meat, pork and 
poultry. 
Goods from third countries, which concluded th e FTAs with Kazakhstan, and CU Parties are 
imported on a "duty-free" basis without being subject to tariff rate quotas. 
Currently, the Republic of Kazakhstan applies duty -free trade regime with the CIS member-States:  
Azerbaijan Republic; the Republic of Armenia; Kyrgyz Republic; Republic of Moldova; Republic of Tajikistan; Republic of Turkmenistan; Republic  of Uzbekistan; the Ukraine and Georgia.  
The current FTAs concluded between Kazakhstan and the above-mentioned countries do not 
contain exemptions from free trade regime with regard to goods subject to tariff rate quotas.  
Therefore, trade in goods with the CIS countries is conducted on a "duty-free" basis and no tariff rate quotas are applied with regard to goods originated thereof.   
Within the process of unification of the trade regi me of the Republic of Kazakhstan towards third 
countries with the trade regimes of the Repu blic of Belarus and the Russian Federation, 
Kazakhstan concluded FTA with the Republic of Serbia.  According to this agreement, imports of 
poultry from Serbia were subject to tariff ra te quotas in the Customs Union member-States. 
- Application of Internal Taxes to Imports Question 34 Concerning exemptions from VAT for fa rmers and processors:  We appreciate 
Kazakhstan's statement that it  will eliminate its discriminato ry application of the VAT for 
farmers and some agricultural pr ocessors by 1 January 2018.   
- We think that this is an excessive amount  of time to remove the measure, as we 
have been discussing for some time now, and Kazakhstan seeks nearly an 
additional 4 years to eliminate the disc rimination.  That process should have 
started earlier. 
- In addition, we cannot fully evaluate the request for such a delay in the removal of 
this discrimination until we have a clea rer view of Kazakhstan's intentions to 
expand other subsidies and how this can be  managed in light of its responsibilities 
to cap agricultural supports. 
- We look forward to further information th at will allow us to make progress on this 
part of the report. 
Answer: 
1. The VAT preferences for agricultural producers and processors, as indicated in 
paragraph 321, play an important role in addre ssing challenges of the agricultural sector and 
ensuring food security.  
Taking into account that elimination of these preferences could cause negative consequences for 
Kazakhstan's agricultural sector, Kazakhstan requested a 3-year transitional period from the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO.   
2. According to the Supporting Table DS:9 of the revised Agricultural Support Tables 
(WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/Rev.11), the total amount of non-product-specific support, which includes 
direct subsidies intended to replace the VAT preferences, is below de minimis  level, therefore, is 
not included into the AMS calculations. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 21 - 
 
  - Quantitative Import Restrictions, incl uding Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing 
Systems 
(a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas Question 35  
The response to Question 62 and paragraph 396 (concerning EEC Decision No. 103 
amending the CU regulations on the import lic ensing of encryption products) states that 
"the CU Encryption Regulation had been am ended by the Decision of the Collegium of 
the EEC No.103 "On Amendments to the Regulations on the Application of Restrictions" 
of 14 May 2013 with the purpose to include th e definition of "mass market goods" as 
defined in Annex 15 (c) of this Report."  Th is information was added to the text of the 
WP report. 
-  W e ha v e rev i ew ed t he Dec i s i o n c lo s el y a nd c o mpa red i t  t o  bo t h t he l a ngua ge in 
Annex 15(c) and to the Wassenaar Arrang ement language on which the Working 
Party Report language is based and note that there are some significant 
differences.  The language in Decision No. 103 narrows the definition of "mass 
market goods" and introduces additional hur dles for products that qualify for mass 
market treatment.   
- We are providing Kazakhstan with de tailed comments on these discrepancies. 
- We request that the CU definition of "m ass market goods" be amended to bring it 
into conformity with Kazakhstan's WTO commitments.   
- In addition, we note that the definition  of "mass market goods" in the Customs 
Union's regulations is meant to reflect the definition of "mass ma rket goods" in the 
Wassenaar Arrangement.  The Wassenaar Arrangement has been updated to expand the definition of products consider ed "mass market" to include products in 
which the encryption functionality is ancillary to the core function.    
- Can the representative of Kazakhstan tell us when the CU regulations will be 
amended to reflect the updated Wassenaar definition? 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan believes that the text in Annex 15(c) of the draft Working Party Report of Kazakhstan 
fully corresponds to the text of Decision of the Collegium of the EEC No. 103 "On Amendments to the Regulations on the Application of Restrict ions" of 14 May 2013 (hereinafter – Amendment).  
For instance, cash sales in paragraph (a) of the Amendment imply any available means of 
payments stipulated by the legislation, including credit card sales.  The definition of "other products that contain encryption (cryptographic) means", as stipulated in the Amendment, is much 
broader than the definition "mass market goods".  The term "other products" covers a broad 
category of goods as opposed to "mass market goods". 
With regard to the Wassenaar Arrangement, it  should be noted that Kazakhstan is not a 
participating state of the Wassenaar Arrangement.   Therefore, the text of the Working Party 
Report is the only legal framework for Kazakhstan. 
Question 36  Paragraph 410:  Please add the following text to the Working Party Report: 
410.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan 
explained that the importation of STDs (Section 2.17 of the Common List) was 
regulated by the CU Agreements and Decisi ons listed in the first paragraph of this 
section, including the List of Goods Subject to Bans and Restrictions on 
Importation and Exportation by Parties of the Customs Union of the Eurasian 
Economic Community in Trade with Thir d Countries, approved by the Decision 
No. 134 of Commission Collegium "On Normative Legal Acts in the Area of 
Non-tariff Regulation" of 16 August 2012, an d in particular the Regulation "On the 
Order of Importation to the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and 
Exportation from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of the Special WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 22 - 
 
  Technical Devices Designed for the Clande stine Interception or Extraction of 
Information".   
Note:  Kazakhstan has placed these issues in the TBT section of its Questions and 
Replies document, WT/ACC/KAZ/77, but we consid er them to be non-tariff barriers, i.e., 
discrimination. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan will include the proposed text as following because references to the documents 
stipulated above have already been made in paragraph 350 of the Draft Working Party Report: 
410.  In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that the importation of STDs (Section 2.17 of the Common List) was regulated by the CU Agreements and Decisions listed in the first paragraph of this section, including the 
Common List approved by Co llegium Decision No. 134, and in particular the Regulation 
"On the Order of Importation to the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and Exportation 
from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of the Special Technical Devices Designed 
for the Clandestine Interception or Extraction of Information".   
Question 37 Question 84 addresses what we consider to be a non-tariff barrier, i.e., the 
discriminatory application of automobile emissions standards vis-à-vis  used 
automobiles.  Kazakhstan re ports that from 1 July 2013, Euro-4  emissions standards will 
be applied to all imports (new and used)  and to all domestically-produced new 
automobiles  in Kazakhstan.  The requirement will not apply for used automobiles which 
are already in operation within Kazakhstan.   
- This effectively discriminates against im ported used automobiles, which would be 
required to meet the new technical regula tions but that similar goods already in 
circulation in Kazakhstan would not be requ ired to meet the new TR when re-sold. 
- We do not object to equal application of  the new emissions standards, but we seek 
non-discriminatory application to all used  automobiles, not just those that are 
imported. 
- Imports of used automobiles should not be placed at a comp etitive disadvantage 
by being subject to technical regulations that are not applied to used automobiles 
already in circulation in Kazakhstan. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan believes that this issue relates to technical barriers to trade, as technical regulations 
were introduced in accordance with Resoluti on of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1372 
"On Approval of the Technical Regulation on Requirements for Emissions of Harmful Substances 
(Pollutants) of Vehicles Released for Circulation2 on the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
29 December 2007 (hereinafter:  the technical regulation). 
The Euro-4 standard requirements will not apply for vehicles produced in or imported into 
Kazakhstan prior to enforcement of the new ecological norms.  Thus, the requirement will not apply for used automobiles which are already being circulated within Kazakhstan.  Such automobiles shall be used up to their physical deterioration, as in accordance with Article 4 of 
the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan civil legislations do not apply retrospectively but apply 
to situations arising after their entry into force. 
It should be noted that introduction of ecological standards for vehicles is widely used practice all 
over the world.  Ecological standards do not apply to vehicles than were being circulated, but apply 
                                               
2 Vehicles released for circulation — vehicles manufa ctured in the Republic of Kazakhstan and previously 
not been in operation, and also vehicles  imported for a period of more than six months to the territory of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan for its intended use or for placing on the market in order to sell. 
 WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 23 - 
 
  to both new and used vehicles which will be released for circulation on the market.  Moreover, 
many WTO Members have already introduced Eu ro-4 or other similar ecological norms.  
Accordingly, if these ecological standards were applied to used vehicles introduced into circulation, imported used vehicles from those countries would comply with ecological norms established in 
Kazakhstan.  Therefore, in countries where ecological norms Euro-4 or similar standards were 
implemented, vehicles previously introduced into  circulation and those vehicles, which are not in 
compliance with Euro-4 standards, are used up to their physical deterioration, as corresponds to 
the practice established in Kazakhstan.  
Thus, Kazakhstan's practice is in full compliance with WTO norms and rules and based on 
international experience.  
Question 38 
Question 85 addresses the new requirement that starting from 1 January 2017, all 
newly-produced and imported vehicles will be mandatorily equipped  w i t h  P N D s  a n d  
emergency call devices connected to GLON ASS in accordance with Customs Union 
technical regulations. 
-  W e ha v e t he s a me c o n c erns  a s  w e ha d w i t h t he a ppl i c a ti o n o f  E uro - 4 emi s s i o ns 
standards, i.e., no objection to the technica l requirement, but a concern that it will 
not be applied evenly.   
- We seek a clear commitment to non-discriminatory treatment of all vehicles, 
imported and domestically produced, with emphasis on how this will be 
accomplished with respect to imported used vehicles. 
- Specifically, as the response to the questi on states that vehicles which are already 
in operation on the territory of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan will be equipped in a 
manner and within the time-frame, establishe d by the legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, we want assurances that the deadlines for domestic used vehicles will 
not be more flexible that for imported ones. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan believes that this issue should be addressed under the section "Technical Barriers to 
Trade, Standards and Certification" of the Draft Working Party Report, as the measure is introduced in accordance with technical regulation of the Customs Union "On Safety of Wheeled Vehicles" adopted by Decision of the Customs Union Commission No. 877 of 9 December 2011, as 
amended by Decision of the EEC Council No. 6 of 30 January 2013 (hereinafter:  the technical 
regulation).  
Paragraph 1 of the technical regulation provides that starting from 1 January 2017, the 
requirement on installation of emergency services call device (system) shall be applied to all 
wheeled vehicles regardless of their origin, when they are issued into circulation or being in operation on the common customs territory of the Customs Union.  Therefore, any further 
commitment on this issue is redundant. 
The even application of the technical regulation with regard to all vehicles which will be released 
for the circulation on the territory of the Republic  of Kazakhstan, i.e. for imported (new and used) 
and produced vehicles on the territory of Kazakhstan is provided in the deadlines established in 
the technical regulation for the equipment of the vehicles with emergency services call device 
(system).  For instance, starting from 1 January 2015, the requirement on installation of 
emergency services call device (system) shall be applied for all new types of automobiles, buses, 
trolleybuses and cargo vehicles, while for passenger vehicles, trolleybuses, and lorries with the 
weight of 2.5 tonnes – starting from 1 January 2016.  WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 24 - 
 
  - Other Customs Formalities 
Question 39  A Member would like Kazakhstan to explain its how its risk management system is 
operating, how release of low risk consignm ent is ensured?  What trade facilitating 
schemes exist in Kazakhstan? 
Answer: 
The risk management system is described in Chap ter 23 of the Customs Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  As stipulated in Article 216 of the Customs Code, one of the purposes of the risk 
management system is to ensure creation of fa vourable conditions for the movement of goods 
through the customs territory of the Customs Union for foreign trade participants.  In particular, the system is aimed at facilitating the customs cl earance procedures.  The Rules of Application of 
the Risk Management System approved by Gove rnment Resolution of Kazakhstan No. 1149 of 
3 November 2010 elaborates on that mandate.  For instance, when the customs official conducts customs control using the risk management system during customs clearance process, he/she 
shall follow established rules:  verification of submitted documents by a foreign trade participant 
with the information available in the risk manage ment system.  If the system does not highlight 
high risk consignment, the goods fall into low risk consignment and are processed under normal 
customs procedures ensuring a smooth and speedy process.   
The Customs Code of the Customs Union and the Customs Code of Kazakhstan are based on 
generally accepted international rules, including the Revised Kyoto Convention.  For instance, with the purpose to facilitate the trade flow Article 291 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan stipulates 
the right of a foreign trade participant for preliminary customs declaration of goods.  According to 
Article 65 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan, an authorised economic operator is entitled to 
simplified and expedited customs procedures, including those for goods in transit.  
In addition, the Concept on Shifting Emphasis of Customs Control from Customs Clearance Stage 
to Post Customs Control for the Period 2013-2015 was adopted by Order of the Chairman of the Customs Control Committee under the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 57 of 
9 February 2013.  The implementation of th e Concept will accelerate customs clearance 
procedures of goods, simplify customs requirements for foreign trade participants, and enhance the efficiency of the risk management system.  
- Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duty and Safeguard Regimes 
Question 40  
Paragraph 487, page 152:  As indicated in the Report, Kazakhstan stated that an 
anti-dumping investigation would be termin ated in cases when the CU investigating 
body determined that the dumping margin was considered to be less or equal to 
de minimis  (i.e., 2%). 
- Could Kazakhstan please confirm wh ether this statement means that the 
CU investigating body shall terminate an investigation of a foreign company whose 
margin of dumping is de minimis ? 
Answer: 
According to the Article 31.1 of the Agreement on  Application of Safeguard, Anti-dumping and 
Countervailing Measures to the Third Countries of 25 January 2008 and Article 5.8 of the WTO 
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994, an anti-dumping investigation is 
terminated without the imposition of anti-dumping  measure if the investigating body determines 
that the margin of dumping is less than the minimally acceptable margin of dumping ( de minimis ), 
which is 2%.  In this regard, anti-dumping investigations in the CU would be terminated in any cases if the CU investigating body determines that margin of dumping is de minimis .  
As provided in paragraph 493 of the draft Workin g Party Report, Kazakhstan has confirmed that WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 25 - 
 
  from the date of accession to the WTO, compliance with the provisions of the Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994,  the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures, and the Agreement on Safeguards, whether by the competent authorities of Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU, would be ensure d.  Therefore, anti-dumping investigations in 
the CU are carried out by the CU investigating body in full compliance with the relevant WTO 
provisions. 
(b) Regime established under the Agreement of 25 January 2008 
Question 41  
We support the commitment paragraphs 491 and 492 and their continued inclusion in 
the draft Working Party Report text. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan agrees to remove brackets from the commitment text in paragraph 491 in the final 
version of the Draft Working Party Report along with the brackets of other commitment paragraphs. 
Question 42  
A Member would like brackets be re moved from commitment language in 
paragraph 491. 
Answer: 
As stated above, Kazakhstan agrees to remove brackets from the commitment text in 
paragraph 491. 
At the same time Kazakhstan considers all the measures applied on the territory of the 
Customs Union on the basis of the expedited review s to be in conformity with the WTO rules.  
In the Working Party Report it is ensured by th e following provision of draft paragraph 493:  
"The representative of Kazakhstan further conf irmed that any trade remedy measure applied on 
the date of WTO accession of Kazakhstan and any trade remedy measure procedure launched 
before the date of accession as well as any trade remedy measure resulting therefrom, whether by the competent authority of Kazakhstan or the co mpetent bodies of the CU, would be consistent 
with the relevant WTO Agreement, as of the date of accession".  
However, in case any interested party asks Kazakhstan to bring any such measure in conformity 
with the WTO rules, this party will be able to put such a request in accordance with sentence 6 of paragraph 493 of the draft Working Party Report.  Th erefore, in light of the provisions of the draft 
paragraph 493, Kazakhstan considers the commi tment in paragraph 492 of the draft Working 
Party Report to be redundant. 
B. EXPORT REGULATION 
- Customs Tariffs, Fees and Charges for Serv ices Rendered, Application of Internal 
Taxes to Exports 
Question 43  
The bracketed text in paragraph 495 has to be un-bracketed and remain in the Report.  
It is a statement of fact and therefore th e arguments provided as a justification to 
refuse its inclusion (uncertainty on the fore seeable future of common export duty policy 
of the CU and inability to undertake commitmen ts on behalf of another CU member) are 
irrelevant. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 26 - 
 
  Answer: 
It should be noted that currently, there is no agreement in force that provides for application of 
unified export duties within the framework of th e Customs Union and the Single Economic Space.  
The CU Parties conduct their own policies in the sphere of export regulation and have the 
autonomous right to apply export duties at the na tional level, determine the coverage of products 
subject to export duties and levels of export duties.  
The proposed text describes also other CU Parties' sovereign policy. Kazakhstan does not believe 
that its Working Party is an appropriate fora for the discussion on how the commitments of other 
CU members are fulfilled.  
Given that the CU Parties have differences in the production base of goods subject to export duties 
in Kazakhstan and other CU members as well as differences in policy objectives pursued through 
application of export duties, and the terms of tran sportation to the world markets, the CU Parties 
are not planning to unify their policy in the sphere of application of export duties in the foreseeable future. 
Against the above background, Kazakhstan is not ready to accept the proposed text.  
Question 44  As regards the two options of bracketed text in paragraph 505, the one to be retained is 
the following: 
Kazakhstan shall notify to the WTO any chan ges of its duties, taxes, fees and charges 
applied to exports on the day of their publicat ion and in any case at least 30 days before 
any such changes enter into force, providin g all relevant information and motivation.] 
Answer: 
The commitment text is proposed to be amended as follows: 
 505.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan would implement, from 
the date of accession, its tariff concessions and commitments contained in Part V of the 
Schedule of Concessions and Commitments on Goods of Kazakhstan.  Accordingly, products described in Part V of that Schedule would, subject to the terms, conditions or qualifications 
set-forth in that Part of the Schedule, be ex empt from export duties in excess of those 
set-forth and provided therein, except as justified by the relevant WTO Agreements, including Articles XX and XXI of the GATT 1994.  The representative of Kazakhstan further confirmed that Kazakhstan would not apply other measures having an equivalent effect to 
export duties on those products.  She confirmed that, from the date of accession, 
Kazakhstan would apply export duties in confor mity with the WTO Agreement, including with 
Article I of the GATT 1994.  Accordingly, with respect to export duties and charges of any 
kind imposed on, or in connection with exportation, any advantage, favour, privilege or 
immunity granted by Kazakhstan to any prod uct destined for any other country shall be 
accorded immediately and unconditionally to the like product destined for the territories of 
all other WTO Members. [Kazakhstan shall notify to the WTO any changes of its 
duties, taxes, fees and charges applied to exports on the day of their publication, 
providing all relevant information].   The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
Kazakhstan would, from the date of accession to the WTO, administer export tariff rate 
quotas (TRQs) in a manner that is consistent with the WTO Agreement and in particular the 
GATT 1994 and the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
- Quantitative Export Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas 
Question 45  Paragraph 510 states that "Kazakhstan currently  imposed prohibitions on the export of 
lumber, saw timber, certain wood products , reusable paper, cardboard, raw paper WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 27 - 
 
  materials and paper waste that were included  into the Common list of Goods Subject to 
Non-Tariff Measures".  However, we underst and that a Government Resolution recently 
extended a ban on the export from Kazakhst an of certain types of petroleum products 
(including light oils, kerosene, gas oil an d other petroleum products, but excluding 
special gasoline, light distillates for motor gasoline with an octane rating of 80, and 
consumer heating oil) from 1 July 2013 to the end of the year. 
- Please update the draft Working Party re port so that it accurately indicates the 
scope of Kazakhstan's export restrict ions.  Please include information by 
HS number on what products have been restricted, on when these restrictions 
were first applied, on how many times th ey have been extended, and on for how 
long Kazakhstan foresees these restrictions being kept in place? 
- Are these products subject to export licensing, as provided for in paragraph 517? 
- Please and explain why Kazakhstan, a petroleum exporting country, finds it 
necessary to restrict exports of petr oleum products rather than expanding 
production capacity or import ing them from other sources. 
- Are petroleum products included in the CU common list of Goods Subject to 
Non-tariff Measures?  In addition, please ex plain under what provisions of CU legal 
authority Kazakhstan restrict s exports of these products. 
- Are these products listed in Annex 14 as under licensing requirement or restriction 
by Kazakhstan? 
- Given the provisions of Article XI of  the GATT of 1994, which would seem to 
prohibit such quantitative restrictio ns, under what WTO provisions does 
Kazakhstan justify these restrictions? 
Answer: 
- The Resolution of the Government of Kazakh stan No. 652 of 1 July 2013 established the ban 
on exports of certain types of light distillates, kerosene, gas oils and export restriction on light distillates (HS 2710 12 410 0, for motor gasoline with an octane rating of 80) which 
remains in force until 31 December 2013. 
- The measure was introduced in accordance with the Agreement on Common Measures of 
Non-Tariff Regulation of 25 January 2008, which stipulates that the CU Parties can unilaterally apply a temporary measure for a period no more than 6 months in order to 
prevent or reduce a critical shortage of food or other goods essential for the domestic 
market.  In this regard, it should be noted that this measure is introduced during high farming seasons, i.e. cultivation and harvesting months of the year. 
-  K a z a k h s t a n  i s  a n  e x p o r t e r  o f  c r u d e  o i l .   H o w e v e r ,  d o m e s t i c  o i l  r e f i n e r i e s  d o  n o t  h a v e  
sufficient capacity to produce and fully meet the domestic needs in petroleum products. Therefore, Kazakhstan established a temporary ban on exports of certain kinds of petroleum 
products in order to prevent their critical shortage in the domestic market.  
According to the Government Resolution No. 652, export restriction is imposed on light distillates 
(HS 2710 12 410 0, for motor gasoline with an oc tane rating of 80) when exporting from the 
territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  In this case, the volume of export quota is established at 
the level of 100,000 tonnes.  The measure will be applied until the end of 2013.  
Petroleum products subject to export restrictions ar e exported from the territory of the Republic of 
                                               
3 Except for petroleum solvent (HS 2710 12 210 0 -2710 12 250 0), light distillates (HS 2710 12 410 0, 
for motor gasoline with an octane ra ting of 80) and home heating oil. Name of the item HS code 
Ban3 
Light distillates 2710 12 
Kerosene 2710 19 210 0 – 2710 19 250 0 
Gas oil 2710 19 420 0 – 2710 19 480 0, 2710 20 110 0 – 
2710 20 190 0  
Other petroleum products 2710 20 900 0 
Restriction 
Light distillates 2710 12 410 0 (for motor gasoline with an octane 
rating of 80) WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 28 - 
 
  Kazakhstan based on licenses.  
Given that the measure is temporary and has been introduced by Kazakhstan unilaterally, the 
above-mentioned goods are not covered by the Common List of Goods Subject to Non-Tariff Regulation, which includes goods subject to the long-term bans or restrictions on imports into or 
exports from the CU Parties in trade with third countries.  
Temporary measures applied by Kazakhstan are in full conformity with Paragraph 2(a) of Article XI 
of the GATT 1994. 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECT ING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS 
- Industrial Policy, including Subsidies Question 46 We continue to have concerns that certain programmes in Kazakhstan's industrial policy 
regime appear to constitute prohibited expo rt subsidies.  In light of the recent WTO 
Appellate Body Report that ruled that a progra mme is a prohibited export subsidy if it is 
"geared to induce the promotion of future export performance by the recipient," we are 
concerned about some of these programmes. 
- The central focus of Government Resolutio n No. 1017 - is to increase exports, and 
therefore, would appear to be "gea red to induce" future exports.   
- Business Map 2020 - establishes a specific ta rget to increase exports, outside of 
the oil sector.   
- We seek Kazakhstan's review of th is legislation and amendment prior to 
conclusion of the negotiations to remove the problematic aspects of the legislation. 
- We continue to work with Kazakhstan on these issues. 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan is currently reviewing Government Resolution No. 1017 and Programme Business Road 
Map 2020 and ready to amend them in order to remove problematic aspects of the legislation.  For 
example, Kazakhstan is ready to remove export performance targets from the Programme Business Road Map 2020. 
- Technical Barriers to Trade, Standards and Certification 
Question 47  Paragraph 595:  We maintain our reserve on  this commitment, in light of changes. 
Answer: 
A WTO Member proposed the following commitment language:   
"The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that upon accession to the WTO, relevant 
international standards or relevant parts thereo f would be used for development of technical 
regulations, unless they were ineffective or inappropriate means for the fulfillment of 
legitimate safety objectives".  In accordance  with Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreement "where 
technical regulations are required and relevant international standards exist or their 
completion is imminent, Members shall use them, or the relevant parts of them, as a basis 
for their technical regulations except when such international standards or relevant parts would be an ineffective or inappropriate means for the fulfilment of the legitimate 
objectives pursued" .  
In accordance with Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement,  such legitimate objectives could be, 
inter alia :  national security requirements; prevention of deceptive practices; protection of human 
health or safety, animal or plant life or health, or the environment.  Thus, WTO Members may WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 29 - 
 
  adopt technical regulations not only for safety purposes, but also for other purposes , such 
as the prevention of deceptive practices.  
Based on the above, in order to bring the commitment language in accordance with the 
TBT Agreement, Kazakhstan modified the text in the following way: 
[In response to a request from some Members for Kazakhstan to bring its standards and 
technical regulations system into compliance with WTO requirements prior to WTO accession, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that upon accession to the WTO, 
relevant international standards or relevant parts thereof would be used for development of 
technical regulations, unless they were ineffective or inappropriate means for the fulfillment of legitimate safety objectives pursued, as stipulated in the TBT Agreement.  The Working 
Party took note of this commitment.] 
Therefore, the proposed commitment text is in full compliance with the WTO TBT Agreement.  
(c) Technical Regulations, International and National Standards, and Conformity 
Assessment Procedures 
Question 48  
A Member requests Kazakhstan to provide ex planations concerning objectives, rationale 
and implementing mechanism of the Law "On State Regulation of Production and 
Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol and Alcoholic Bevera ges (Spirits)" No. 429-1 of 16 July 1999";  
- How can Kazakhstan justify the application of the prohibition for sales of alcoholic 
beverages (spirits) and beer in PET packaging? 
This Member requests Kazakhstan to eliminat e this prohibition and to bring the Law of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan "On State Regula tion of Production and Turnover of Ethyl 
Alcohol and Alcoholic Beverages (Spirits)" No. 429-1 of 16 July 1999 in full conformity with the provisions of the GATT and TBT and SPS Agreements. 
Answer: 
The prohibition of both production and sales , including imports, of ethyl alcohol beverages 
(beer) in plastic and polymeric packaging (including  beer in PET packaging) stipulated in the Law 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol 
and Alcoholic Beverages (Spirits)" had been es tablished in 1999 due to the public health and 
environmental safety reasons. 
First, plastic and polymeric packaging does not decompose on the ground, and in case of burning it 
emits carbon dioxide.  Therefore, increasing output of products in PET packaging will lead to 
deterioration of the environment.  To date there is no technology for processing and utilization of 
PET packages in Kazakhstan.   
Second, technology of filling alcohol in PET packaging significantly reduces its production cost, 
and, thus, reduces the retail prices of alcohol products. This, in turn, will make alcohol products more affordable and will inevitably lead to increase in alcohol consumption among the population.  
- Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) 
Question 49  Paragraph 655 and the response to Question 90:  We prefer that the transition 
requested by Kazakhstan be expressed as [a date certain]  rather than [x years from the 
date of accession] .  However, we do not want to lose the concept of expiration of local 
content requirements as the investment contracts expire.   WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 30 - 
 
  Specifically, we do not want the entire ex piration commitment in brackets removed and 
replaced, as another Member has suggested in  Question 90.  Rather, we would see it 
edited to include a date, as follows: 
655.  [The representative of Kazakhstan  confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent 
measures applied under investment contra cts concluded prior to [the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 De cember 2012] under the provisions of 
the Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced [by xxxx] [as of the date of 
expiration of the initial duration of the contracts or by xxxx as of the date of 
expiration of the [X]-year transitional  period starting from the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO, whichever takes place sooner]. . ." 
Answer: 
With respect to indication of grandfathering period for energy contracts in the form of specific date 
by retaining [by xxxx], Kazakhstan agrees to put th e specific date as soon as the agreement is 
reached on the length of the transitional period for phasing-out the TRIMs-inconsistent local 
content requirements from investment contracts in oil and gas, and mining sectors. 
The proposed amendment has been made in the commitment text of the TRIMs Chapter of the 
Draft Working Party Report as follows: 
 655.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures 
applied under investment contracts concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012] under the provisions of the Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced [by xxxx
4] or [ as of the date of expiration  of the initial duration of 
the contracts or by xxxx, whichever takes place sooner5].  She further confirmed 
that all WTO-inconsistent measures applied in accordance with industrial assembly 
agreements concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] 
[31 December 2012] under the provisions of the Order No. 113 would be eliminated by 
[1 July 2018].  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that with respect to the measures applied under the industrial assembly agreements pursuant to the Order No. 113 
and under the investment contracts pursuant to the Law No. 291-IV concluded prior to 
[the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012], Kazakhstan would engage in consultations with interested WTO Members no later than [1 July 2016] and [[X Date], respectively], regarding WTO consistent measures that could be applied, and 
notify WTO Members of any measures planned to replace WTO-inconsistent measures at 
least six months prior to the adoption of any new measures.]  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
Question 50 
We reiterate the following requests on paragraphs 654 and 655: As cut-off date for contracts to be gran dfathered from TRIMs obligations, retain 
[31 December 2012] instead of [the date of  Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO], and 
As end of the grandfathering pe riod for energy contracts, to indicate a specific date by 
retaining [by xxxx] instead of [as of the date of expiration of the initial duration of the contracts or as of the date of expiration of the [X]-year transitional period starting from 
the date of Kazakhstan's accession to th e WTO, whichever takes place sooner] and to 
select that date without going beyond existi ng precedents for temporary derogations to 
the TRIMs obligations.  
Answer: 
1. Taking into account the strategic importance of the oil and gas and mining sectors for 
Kazakhstan's economic growth in general and the importance of application of the local content 
                                               
4 In accordance with the proposal of a Member of the Working Party. 
5 In accordance with the proposal of another Member of the Working Party. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 31 - 
 
  requirements for diversification of the national economy and political sensitivity of the issue, the 
Government plans to remove the TRIMs-inconsistent local content provisions in the course of ratification of Kazakhstan's WTO accession documents by the Parliament.  
2. With respect to indication of grandfathering period for energy contracts in the form of 
specific date by retaining [by xxxx], Kazakhstan ag rees to put the specific date as soon as the 
agreement is reached on the length of the transitional period for phasing-out the TRIMs-inconsistent local content requirements from investment contracts in oil and gas, and 
mining sectors. 
Due to the above, Kazakhstan proposes the following changes in the commitment text:   655. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that all WTO-inconsistent measures 
applied under investment contracts concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to 
the WTO] [31 December 2012] under the provisions of the Law No. 291-IV would cease to 
be enforced [by xxxx
6] or [as of the date of expiration of the initial duration of the 
contracts or by xxxx, whichever takes place sooner7].  She further confirmed that all 
WTO-inconsistent measures applied in accordance with industrial assembly agreements 
concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012] under the provisions of the Order No. 113 would be eliminated by [1 July 2018].  
[The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that with respect to the measures applied 
under the industrial assembly agreements pursuant to the Order No. 113 and under the investment contracts pursuant to the Law No. 291-IV concluded prior to [the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO] [31 December 2012], Kazakhstan would engage in 
consultations with interested WTO Members no later than [1 July 2016] and [[X Date], 
respectively], regarding WTO consistent measures that could be applied, and notify WTO Members of any measures planned to replace WTO-inconsistent measures at least 
six months prior to the adoption of any new measures.]  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments.] 
Question 51  
A Member is seeking to get clarif ications concerning the following: 
- In what way is Kazakhstan going to provide the elimination of all measures, 
inconsistent with TRIMs? 
This Member requests Kazakhstan to  undertake the following commitment: 
[The representative of Kazakhstan conf irmed that from the date of accession, 
Kazakhstan would apply its investment re gime in compliance with Trade-Related 
Investment Measures (TRIMs) without reco urse to any transition period in a 
non-discriminatory manner – to imports fr om all WTO Members and to domestically 
produced goods.  The Working Part y took note of this commitment.] 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan requests a transitional period due to strategic importance of the local content 
provisions for the national economy. Kazakhstan's economy is dominated by the production of hydrocarbon and mineral resources, and the oil sector is the most attractive sector for both foreign and local investors.  Forecasts show that the volume of foreign investments in oil production was 
continuously increasing, while other sectors of the economy remained underdeveloped.  Hence, 
the Government introduced the local content requirement to encourage the use of domestically produced goods in order to:  (i) ensure the rational restructuring of subsurface use; (ii) achieve 
sustainable economic development through economic diversification and reduction of the 
economy's high dependence on volatile world prices for exports of mineral resources; and (iii) create an environment conducive to development of processing industries and production of 
high value-added goods.   
                                               
6 In accordance with the proposal of a Member of the Working Party. 
7 In accordance with the proposal of another Member of the Working Party. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 32 - 
 
  In addition, during the period of economic adversity in the early 1990s, in order to attract foreign 
direct investments and to develop Kazakhstan's unexplored oil fields, her Government had signed long-term (up to 40 years) investment contracts with major multinational oil companies, on terms which granted VAT and customs duty exemptions for imported goods used in oil operations.  Since 
the terms of signed contracts could not be changed retroactively (i.e., pursuant to a contract 
stability clause), the provisions of Law No. 291-IV aim at offsetting the discriminatory effects of 
those earlier investment contracts which create a disadvantage for domestically produced goods, 
which remain subject to the payment of VAT. 
Upon expiration of the requested transition al period, as described in paragraph 647 of 
WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/9/Rev/9, the WTO-inconsistent me asures applied in existing subsurface use 
contracts under the provisions of Law No. 291-IV would cease to be enforced through:  
(i) introduction of the amendments to Law No. 291-IV aimed at removing measures inconsistent 
with the WTO TRIMs Agreement with regard to proc urement of goods by the date of Kazakhstan's 
accession to the WTO; and (ii) signing supplemen tary agreements with subsurface users, which 
would remove from investment contracts WTO TRIMs Agreement inconsistent measures with 
regard to procurement of goods.  
- Government Procurement 
Question 52  
Paragraph 698:  The third-to-last sentence in this paragraph states:  "The conduction of 
government procurement by auctions had to  be provided by single operator in 
government procurement." 
- We suggest that it be rephrased as either " Conducting  government procurement 
by auction ..." or " The conduct of  government procurement ...". 
Answer: 
We rephrased the above mentioned sentence as fo llows:  "Government procurement by auctions 
had to be conducted by single operator in government procurement." 
Question 53  
Paragraph 707:  Given the scope of government  ownership, control, and management in 
Kazakhstan's economy, we seek reduction of  the transition noted in paragraph 707 in 
brackets from four years to two years from the date of accession. 
707.  [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed the intention of Kazakhstan to 
join the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement and to notify the Committee 
on Government Procurement to this effect at the time of accession of Kazakhstan 
to the WTO and to ensure that from the da te of accession, its Government agencies 
would award contracts in a transparent manner according to published laws, 
regulations and guidelines.  She also confirmed that Kazakhstan would request observership in the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement at the time of its 
accession to the WTO and would initiate  negotiations for membership in the 
WTO Agreement on Government Procurem ent by tabling an Appendix 1 offer 
within [four] [two] years after accession.  She confirmed that, if the results of the 
negotiations were satisfactory to the interests of Kazakhstan and the other 
Members of the Agreement, Kazakhstan would accede to that Agreement.  
The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
Answer: 
We should mention that the proposal to reduce a time from the date of accession to the WTO for 
initiating the GPA Membership negotiations from four to two years as part of package deal on transitional period for STE/SOEs.  The decision will be made by Kazakhstan based on the outcome 
of negotiations on transitional period for removal of local content requirement from SOE/STEs. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 33 - 
 
  Question 54  
Paragraph 708:  In order to align the language in this paragraph with the language in 
paragraph 705, we suggest the following additional text: 
708.  The Government of Kazakhstan was developing amendments to the 
legislation on government procurement wi th the purpose to exclude procurements 
made by state enterprises and enterpri ses with state participation, i.e., 
State-owned and state controlled enterprise s, procuring goods and services for the 
purpose of commercial sale (resale) fr om the coverage of Law No. 303 "On 
Government Procurement" of 21 July 2007.  The relevant amendments to the legislation of Kazakhstan regulating gove rnment procurement would be enacted by 
the date of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. 
Answer: 
We aligned the language of the paragraph 708 with the language of the paragraph 705 as follows: 
 708:  The Government of Kazakhstan was developing amendments to the legislation on 
government procurement with the purpose to ex clude procurements made by state enterprises 
and enterprises with state participation, i.e., State-owned and state controlled enterprises, procuring goods and services for the purpose of commercial sale (resale) from the coverage of 
Law No. 303 "On Government Procurement" of 21 July 2007.  The relevant amendments to the 
legislation of Kazakhstan regulating government  procurement would be enacted by the date of 
Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. 
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME 
Question 55 
Paragraph 736 refers to the "Agreement on Common Principles of Regulation in the 
Sphere of Protection of IPR".  
- Please confirm that this is the same  agreement as the "Agreement on Unified 
Principles of Regulation in Protection IPR". 
Answer: 
Kazakhstan confirms that the "Agreement on Commo n Principles of Regulation in the Sphere of 
Protection of IPR" is the same agreement as the "Agreement on Unified Principles of Regulation in 
Protection IPR". 
Question 56  
Paragraph 738 states that Kazakhstan plan s to conclude an Agreement on Uniform 
Procedure for Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights with its 
Customs Union partners.   
- Please provide information on the contents of the draft Agreement for the Working 
Party Report and provide a copy of the ag reement to the Working Party when it is 
available.   
- Please explain, and add to the Workin g Party Report text, how the copyright 
protections of these agreements relate to and interact with the Kazakh national law On Copyrights and Related Rights. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 34 - 
 
  Answer: 
Members of the Single Economic Space have not yet reached an agreement on the content of the 
draft Agreement on Uniform Procedure for Collecti ve Management of Copyright and Related Rights. 
Kazakhstan will provide the draft text of this  Agreement as soon as it is available.  
Agreement on Uniform Procedure for Collective Mana gement of Copyright and Related Rights is an 
international agreement that, upon its ratification in Kazakhstan, will have a priority over the national legislation of Kazakhstan. 
Comments and Questions on Amendment to Article 11 of the "Patent Law". 
Question 57 Exclusive right and obligations of patentee. The text of Article 11 of the Patent Law refe rs to "industrial property" items and, once, 
to "industrial design".  While the industrial  designs are a form of industrial property, 
along with patents, utility models and tradem arks, these terms are not interchangeable.  
- We suggest redrafting Article 11 to  clarify what is being dealt with. 
Answer: 
The term "industrial design" in subparagraph 4 of paragraph 2 of Article 11 is used not in order to 
interchange the term "industrial property".  Paragr aph 2 of subparagraph 2 refers to the products 
that are recognized as containing the protected invention or utility model, while subparagraph 4 of 
the paragraph 2 refers to products that are reco gnized as containing the protected industrial 
design.  
Question 58 
Article 11.2 refers to "introduction into ci vil turnover or storage" as "use" for the 
purpose of the law.  
- Use of the word "storage" is confusing.  Is this a translation issue?  Please clarify 
what is meant by "storage." 
Answer: 
The term "storage" in Article 11.2 means storage (i.e. depositing in a warehouse) of a product 
containing protected item of industrial property for such purposes as manufacturing, application, 
imports, offer to sale, sales, and any other introduction into civil turnover. 
Question 59 Article 11.4 refers to "acce ptable commercial terms."  
- It is unclear what is meant by "acceptab l e " .   W h a t  s e e m s  t o  b e  a c c e p t a b l e  t o  a  
potential licensee might not be acce ptable to a licensor/patent owner. 
- We suggest either (1) clarifying the st andard for acceptability or (2) using the 
TRIPS terminology "reasonable commercial terms." 
Answer: 
In this case the term "acceptable commercial terms" is used as a synonym to the term 
"reasonable" and understood as acceptable for both sides – licensee and licensor.  WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 35 - 
 
  Question 60  
Further, Article 11.4 states:  "The right to us e the indicated industrial property item may 
be assigned by the person to whom the co mpulsory licence was granted to other person 
only together with the relevant produc tion in which this item is used." 
- The term "relevant production" is confusing.  Is this a translation issue?  
Please clarify what is mean t by "relevant production." 
Answer: 
Indicated provision should be understood in the meaning of Article 31(e) of the TRIPS.  It means 
that the right to use the indicated industrial property item may be assigned by the person to whom the compulsory licence was granted to other person only together with the part of the enterprise 
or goodwill which enjoys such use.  More specifically, "relevant production in which this item is 
used" means "part of the enterprise or  goodwill which enjoys such use".  
Additional Comments and Questions 
 on the 2012 Law "On Copyright and Related Rights": 
Question 61  
Changes to Article 47-1:  The version of th is Article provided in July 2013, which 
addresses withdrawal of accreditation of co llective management organizations, uses the 
term "royalties" whereas the text of the 2012 amendments used the term 
"remuneration".  We agree that both royalt ies and equitable remuneration should be 
included.   
- Please explain the basis for this change in terminology, and use of the word 
"royalties" in this context includes equitable remuneration. 
Answer: 
In legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan the terms "royalties" and "remuneration" are used as 
synonyms and understood as payments for each use of the work under author's agreement or in 
other cases foreseen by the Copyright Law. 
Question 62  
Changes to Article 48:  The version of this ar ticle provided in July 2013, which addresses 
infringement of copyrights and related righ ts, appears to be limit ed to infringements 
"foreseen in the present law", but the 2012 amendments do not appear to have been limited in this way.  Infringements enable d by technological advances are often not 
"foreseen" when a law is enacted, yet those  infringements should  be covered (rather 
than requiring constant amendments to the law as technology advances).   
- Please explain the basis for the change. 
Answer: 
Versions of Article 48 provided in July 2013 and in the 2012 amendments are the same but have 
slightly different translation. 
July 2013:  1. Infringement of copyright and (or) related rights foreseen in the present Law shall 
entail responsibility in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
2012 amendments:  1. For infringement of protec ted under this Law copyright and (or) related 
rights there shall be a responsibility in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 36 - 
 
  The word "foreseen" in the version of July 2013 re lates not to the infringement but to copyright 
and (or) related rights that are foreseen in the Law.  Therefore, Article 48 is not limited to certain infringements because we understand it is not possible to foresee all infringements in this sphere. 
Additional Comments and Questions on the 2012 Amendments to the Law "On 
Copyrights and Related Rights." 
Question 63 The response to Question 99, in WT/ACC/ KAZ/77 discussed vari ous 2012 amendments 
to the Copyright Law. We had reviewed the law you provided previously (the 1996 Law 
as amended on 10 July 2009), and then we reviewed the 2012 Legislative amendments that you provided.   Please advise if the 2012 amendments that you provided account for 
all the changes incorporated in the current la w or if there have been other changes to 
the original law that you provided.   
Specifically, please advise whether the law was amended between 7 October 2009 and 
2012.   
- If it was amended, please describe the amendments which took place between 
7 October 2009 and the enactment of the 2012 amendments. 
Answer: 
There were no amendments made into the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" between 
October 7, 2009 and 2012.  
Question 64 Concerning the 18 January 2012 amendmen t to Article 2, paragraph 45-1 of the 
Copyright Law, which refers to " analogue  on-air, multichannel broadcasting ( digital , 
on-air, satellite, cable tele- and radio broadcasting):"   
- Please clarify the extent to which any digital or analogue cable broadcasting 
organizations are excluded from this definition.   
- In addition, please elaborate on the scope of  "on-air" broadcasting in this context?   
- Does this definition include persons pr oviding both digital and analogue on-air 
broadcasting?   
- Are there persons providing certain digital cable or on-air communications that 
would not fall under this definition?  
- Are there persons providing certain analogue cable or on-air communications that 
would not fall under this definition? 
Answer: 
- Definition does not exclude any digital or analogue cable broadcasting organizations. 
- Definition includes persons providing both  digital and analogue on-air broadcasting. 
- There are no persons providing certain digital cable or on-air communications that would not 
fall under this definition. 
- There are no persons providing certain analogue cable or on-air communications that would 
not fall under this definition. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 37 - 
 
  Question 65 
Part 3), Addition of Article 9- 1:  9.1-1 has not been deleted, and is now duplicative of 
9-1.10.   
- What is the difference in these provisions? 
- What benefits, if any, does registration provide?   
- What is the difference, if any, in th e way registered works and non-registered 
works are treated? 
- Under the last paragraph of 9.1, is Co pyright registration required to prove 
personal non-property rights for undisclose d works and for rights owners to prove 
possession of exclusive property rights to  the work?  How does this affect the 
earlier sentence in 9.1 that "Registration of  a work or special legalization of a work 
or following formalities shall not be re quired for the copyright to emerge and 
enforce"?   
- Under 9-1(18), what is meant by "re-registration" of a work? 
Answer: 
According to the 2012 amendments (subparagraph 2 of part 6 concerning amendments to Article 9 
of the Copyright Law) paragraph 1-1 of Article 9 was deleted.  
- There were no difference in provisions 9.1-1 and 9-1.10 and that was the reason why 
paragraph 9.1-1 was deleted. 
- Registration of copyright is not required in Ka zakhstan. Works of since, literature and art are 
protected without any registration.  However, in order to make it easier for authors to prove 
their copyright in case of conflict situation the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights 
provides authors with the right to register their works.  
- There is no difference in treatment of registered and non-registered works. 
- Copyright registration is not required in Kaza khstan and can be done depending on the will 
of author.  
- Re-registration means issuance of a duplicate of the document certifying registration of 
rights on works protected by copyright in a ccordance with the laws of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan in cases of loss or damage of the document.  
Question 66  Part 6), Changes to Articles 16.1 and 40.2:   The language in these provisions was 
changed from "the Government of Kazakhstan  may establish" to "the Government of 
Kazakhstan sets...". 
- Does this change create a change in practice?   
- Can rates be negotiated if the parties reach agreement?   
- Finally, please explain how the Govern ment of Kazakhstan sets the rates. 
Answer: 
- Amendment of the language of the provision does not create any change in practice.  WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 38 - 
 
  - Rates that are set by the Government are minimum rates and can be negotiated by the 
parties. 
- In order to set the rates, the Government of Kazakhstan studies an international experience 
and requests an opinion of the parties, including collective management organizations, right 
holders, users and representatives of business.   Based on these data, the Government of 
Kazakhstan sets the minimum rates of remuneration. 
Question 67 
Part 9), Changes to 46-2.7:   
- Does a collective management organizati on (CMO) have to represent a certain 
number or proportion of rights holders/au thors in order to become accredited?   
- Does the Commission on Accreditation consider the amount of rights 
holders/authors represented by a CM O in the accreditation process? 
Answer: 
- There is no a direct requirement on certain number or proportion of right holders for 
collective management organization in order to become accredited.  
- However, the Commission on Accreditation considers information on the number of right 
holders confirmed by the number of agreements that were concluded by collective 
management organization.  
Question 68 Part 12), Changes to 48.1:  The un-amended la w provided that, for infringement, "civil, 
criminal and administrative liability shall emerge in compliance with the laws of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan".  The new law provides  that for infringement, "there shall entail 
responsibility in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan".   
- Please explain what this change means. 
Answer: 
Amendments made to Article 48.1 have not changed the meaning but made the provision more 
general.  Responsibility in accordance with the la ws of the Republic of Kazakhstan includes civil, 
criminal and administrative responsibility provided in the Civil Code, the Criminal Code and the 
Code on Administrative Violations of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
VI. TRADE IN SERVICES Question 69  
The response to Question 11 in WT/ACC/KAZ/ 77 reaffirms that, pursuant to Article 23 
of the Land Code No. 442-II of 20 June 2003, private ownership of land plots located in 
the border zone and boundary territories of the Republic of Kazakhstan by foreigners 
and foreign juridical entities as well as le ase-holding of land plots for agricultural 
purposes adjacent to the State border of Kazakhstan for foreigners is prohibited.  The concept of "borderland" is further defined in accordance with paragraph 29 Article 2 
of the Law No. 70-V "On State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 
16 January 2013, which states that the borderla nd is the "part of the territory directly 
adjacent to the State border on the land pl ot; in the areas where the State border passes 
through the border rivers, lakes and other waters, the borderland is defined as a part of 
territory directly adjacent to the coast of th ese waters as well as territories located in 
the islands, where the regime of State Border  is established".  Paragraph 28 Article 2 of 
the Law further states that border zone is a part of the territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan adjacent to the borderland within  the territory of administrative districts. WT/ACC/KAZ/78 
 
- 39 - 
 
  Unfortunately, this description does not prov ide a usable definition for the purposes of 
establishing Kazakhstan's services commitments, which include the right to own and lease land and, therefore, have implications  for the rights of services establishments 
located, or that may someday be located, wi thin proximity of Kazakhstan's border.   
- We ask Kazakhstan to provide more inform ation on these issues.  Ideally, we seek 
a more specific definition of the restri cted space on Kazakhstan's border.   
- We also seek a statement concerning the national security implications of the 
current definition. 
Answer: 
Currently, the National Security Committee is elaborating the draft resolution of the Government 
which will specifically define the distance of the border zone and border land.  
__________