RESTRICTED  
  
G/TFA/M/4  
 
22 October 2018  
(18-6603) Page: 1/30 
Committee on Trade Facilitation    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NGS OF THE COMMITTEE ON  TRADE FACILITATION  
2-3 MAY  2018  
CHAIR : HE MR DANIEL BLOCK ERT (SWEDEN)  
Contents  
1   REGULAR COMMITTEE SE SSION  ................................ ................................ ..................  2 
A. MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENT ATION AND ADMINISTRA TION OF THE TRADE 
FACILITATION AGREEME NT (TFA)  ................................ ................................ ...................  3 
NOTIFICATIONS BY MEM BERS  ................................ ................................ .........................  3 
Notifications under Articles 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ................................ . 3 
Notifications under Ar ticles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2, and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  .20 
STATUS OF RATIFICATI ON PROCESS  ................................ ................................ .............  23 
Update by the WTO Secretariat  ................................ ................................ ............................ 23 
B. EXPERIENCE SHARIN G/THEMATIC DISCUSSIO NS ................................ .....................  23 
NATIONAL TRADE FACIL ITATION COMMITTEES  ................................ .............................  23 
Communication from the United States (G/TFA/W/5)  ................................ .............................. 23 
Presentation by Turkey on Best Practices and Experiences with Establishing Turkey's National 
Trade Facilitation Committee  ................................ ................................ ............................... 24 
Presentation by Brazil on Experiences with Establishing Brazil's National Trade Facilitation Committee
 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......24 
Presentation by the Republic of Moldova on Moldova's National Action Plan on Trade Facilitation  ..24 
TRANSIT  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  24 
Presentation by the European Union on EU Customs Transit Procedures, Including Arrangements 
with a number of neighbouring countries under the Common Transit Convention  ....................... 24 
IMPLEMENTATION EXPER IENCES  ................................ ................................ ...................  24 
Presentation by China on China Customs' Experiences and Practices regarding the Implementation 
of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ................................ ................................ ...................... 24 
Presentation by the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on practical aspects of TFA 
implementation ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 25 
OTHER  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................  25 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 25 
2   DEDICATED SESSIO N ON ASSISTANCE AND CAPACITY BUILDING  ............................  26 
I. EXCHANGES ON ANY IMPLEMENTATION PROBL EMS ................................ ...................  27 
TFA Notifications as Tools for Demand -driven A ssistance Conversations: Contribution by the United 
States  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 27 G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 2 - 
 
  II. REVIEW OF PROGRE SS IN THE PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE AND SU PPORT FOR 
CAPACITY BUILDING TO  SUPPORT THE IMPLEME NTATION OF THE TRADE  FACILITATION 
AGREEMENT  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................  27 
United States Approach to Trade Facili tation Assistance: Contribution by the United States  ......... 27 
Commercial Law Development Program: Contribution by the United States  ............................... 27 
III. THE SHARING OF EXPERIENCES AND INFO RMATION ON ONGOING A SSISTANCE AND 
SUPPORT FOR CAPACITY  BUILDING AND IMPLEM ENTATION PROGRAM S, INCLUDING 
CHALLENGES AND SUCCE SSES  ................................ ................................ .......................  28 
Overview of USAID Technical Assistance Resource Publications: Contribution by the United  States
 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......28 
Overview of EU Approach to the Provision of Assistance: Presentation by the European Union  .....28 
Viet Nam and United States Cooperation on Trade Facilitation: Contribution by Viet Nam and the 
United States  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 28 
Colombia and United States Cooperation on Trade Facilitation: Contribution by Colombia and the 
United States  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 28 
Update on Multi -Donor Initiatives  ................................ ................................ ......................... 28 
IV. THE REVIEW OF DO NOR NOTIFICATIONS AS  SET FORTH IN ARTICL E 22 OF THE TFA
  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............................  28 
V. THE REVIEW OF THE  OPERATION OF ARTICL E 21:2 (ASSISTANCE A ND SUPPORT FOR 
LDCS)  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................  29 
Update by the WTO Secretariat on Activities of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility  ............. 29 
3   HANDOVER OF COMM ITTEE CHAIRMANSHIP  ................................ .............................  29 
Election of New Chairperson -Designate  ................................ ................................ ................. 29 
 
1  REGULAR COMMITTEE SE SSION  
1.1.  The Chair welcomed delegations and participants from the "Annex D organiz ations " to the 
meeting of the Trade Facilitation Committee (TF  Committee, Committee, or TFC). He recalled that 
the proposed agenda for the session had been circulated in document  WTO/AIR/TFA/4/Rev.1 and 
that it referred to several meetings  that would be held in back -to-back manner : (i) First, a regular 
Committee session, followed by (ii) a dedicated exchange on tec hnical assistance and support for 
capacity building. After that, (iii) Members would be invited to formally appoint a new Chairperson  
for the Committee .  
1.2.  With regard to the regular Committee session, the f irst item on the agenda consisted of matters 
relating to the implementation and administration of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
(TF Agreement, Agreement, or TFA) , starting with the notifications Members had submitted since 
the last Committee me eting. That would  be followed by a look at the current state  of the ratification 
process.  After that, delegations would  be invited to share their experiences, with a thematic focus 
on three main topics: National Trade Facilitation Committees  (NTFCs) ; transit ; and implementation 
matters more generally.  The final item of the regular session would  be "Other Business", under 
which the Chair would raise certain  logistical and procedural matters with respect to upcoming 
meetings.  
1.3.  The Chair  then asked if any delegation wished to raise an additional item under "Other 
Business".  
1.4.  The representative of Uganda  requested to report on the Fourth World Customs Organization 
Global Authorize d Economic Operation C onference , which had been held in Kampala in March  2018. 
1.5.  The agenda was adopted  with the additional item proposed by Uganda . G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 3 - 
 
  A. MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION A ND ADMINISTRATION OF  THE TRADE 
FACILITATION AGREEME NT (TFA)  
NOTIFICATIONS BY MEM BERS  
Notifications under Article s 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.6.  The Chair  noted that a  large number of delegations had submitted input since the last meeting , 
which he thought to be  a very encouraging development.  The highest number of submissions had 
been provided under Article s 15 and 16 of the  TFA – the so -called "category A, B and C notifications ".  
1.7.  Since the  last formal meeting, notifications  had been received from the following Members : 
Afghanistan (G/TFA/N/AFG/1); Angola (G/TFA/N/AGO/1);  Albania (G/TFA/N/ALB/1);  Argentina 
(G/TFA/N/ARG/1/Add .1); Kingdom of Bahrain  (G/TFA/N/BHR/1);  Bangladesh (G/TFA/N/BGD/1);  
Belize (G/TFA/N/BLZ/1);  Plurilateral State of Bolivia (G/TFA/N/BOL/1);  Botswana 
(G/TFA/N/BWA/1/Add .1); Brazil (G/TFA/N/BRA/1/Add .1); Chile (G/TFA/N/CHL/1);  China 
(G/TFA/N/CHN/1/Add .1 and G/TFA/N/CHN/1/Add .2); Colombia (G/TFA/N/COL/1);  Costa Rica 
(G/TFA/N/CRI/1);  Cuba (G/TFA/N/CUB/1);  Dominican Republic (G/TFA/N/DOM/1);  Eswatini  
(G/TFA /N/SWZ/1/Add .1 and G/TFA/N/SWZ/1/R ev.1); The Gambia (G/TFA/N/GMB/1);  Georgia 
(G/TFA/N/GEO/1);  Guatemala (G /TFA/N/GTM/1  and G/TFA/N/GTM/1/Add .1); Guyana 
(G/TFA/N/GUY/1/Add .1); Honduras (G/TFA/N/HND/1);  India (G/TFA/N/IND/1);  Lao PDR 
(G/TFA/N/LAO/1);  Macao, China (G/TFA/N/MAC/1);  Morocco (G/TFA/N/MAR/1);  The Former 
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (G/TFA/N/MKD/2);  Madagascar (G/TFA/N/MDG/1);  Malaysia 
(G/TFA/N/MYS/1);  Moldova (G/TFA/N/MDA/1);  Mongolia (G/TFA/N/MNG/1);  Myanmar 
(G/TFA/N/MMR/1);  Nepal (G/TFA/N/NPL/1);  Niger (G/TFA/N/NER/1  and /TFA/N/NER/2);  Pakistan 
(G/TFA/N/PAK/1/Add .1); Paraguay (G/TFA/N/PRY/1);  Peru (G/TFA/N/PER/1);  Philippines 
(G/TFA/N/PHL/1);  Seychelles (G/TFA/N/SYC/1/Add .1); Sierra Leone (G/TFA/N/SLE/1);  South Africa 
(G/TFA/N/ZAF/1 and G/TFA/N/ZAF/1/Add .1); Sri Lanka (G/TFA/N/LKA/1);  Thailand 
(G/TFA/N/THA/1/Add .1); Togo (G/TFA/N/TGO/1);  Trinidad and Tobago (G/TFA/N/TTO/1);  Turkey 
(G/TFA/N/TUR/1);  Ukraine (G/TFA/N/UKR/1) and Vanuatu (G/TFA/N/VUT/1).  
1.8.  The considerable number of new submissions had brought the overall number to a current total 
of 112 for category A, 62 for category B and 52 for catego ry C. Of all Members for which the TFA 
had already taken effect, only four had not yet provided any category ABC input . All of them were 
least-developed countries ( LDCs). Given the large number of notifications on the agenda, the Chair 
propose d to review  them in segments of ten, starting from the top in the order of listing in  the 
agenda.  
1.9.  The representative of the United States  said that the US had prepared comments on many of 
the notifications and want ed the opportunity to make them in an interactive manner , as was the 
case in many WTO committees . The United States request ed that the Committee  proceed ed through 
the notifications  one-by-one. Member s wishing to present th eir notifications first should be able to 
do that if they so chose . There should the n be an opportunity for an exchange of views on each of 
the notifications . 
1.10.   The Chair  asked if that proposal was acceptable to the rest of the membershi p. 
1.11.   The representative of the European Union  noted that practices between  WTO committees 
differed and that the Trade Facilitation Agreement  was a unique and novel A greement with its own 
structure . A key feature of the ABC notifications was the principle of self-determination by the 
Member submitting it . 
1.12.   For efficiency reasons and for managing the meeting  smoothly , the EU  proposed  that the 
notifications be group ed, taking into account the distinction between LDCs and developing countries . 
1.13.   The Chair  asked how the EU proposed the grouping to be organized.  
1.14.   The representative of the European Union  said that th e EU could support the initial Chair 
proposal of grouping the notifications by groups of ten, or perhaps by creating slightly smaller 
group s. G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.15.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  supported  the proposal by the European Union. 
It would  take a n exten sive amount  of time to address every single notification  one after the other 
and would exceed the available meeting time. Moldova proposed to either group  the notifications  or 
to go directly to questions raised with respect to the notifications.  
1.16.   The Chair said that he was happy to proceed with whatever approach Members could agree 
on. He observed that, if a Member  wanted to comment on each and every notification, it did not 
really matter if the notifications were grouped or not . The only remaining question  would then be 
how it could be done  in an orderly manner. He was not convinced of the efficiency of dividing them 
into notifications from LDCs and non -LDCs because that was not how the notifications had been 
listed in the airgram. He asked if Members could  agree with the proposal by the  EU and address the 
notifications in smaller groups  in a way that would allow a Member to comment on every single 
notification  if it so wished . 
1.17.   The representative of the United States  said that Members we re just getting the Committee 
started and that there would  be some trial and error as they figure d out the right process. The US 
had worked hard and reviewed the notifications and there were many that the US  wished to address 
specifically . The US also wished  to establi sh a co mmittee practic e where  Members could  present 
their notification s. The TFC  offered an opportunity to do so, and this was also an opportunity to think 
creatively about how to help Members through the process  set out in section II of the TFA . They 
were not in  a position to close the door on that . Individual attention needed to be given to the 
notifications because a lot of work had gone into them.  
1.18.   The Chair asked if there were any additional views on the matter. As this was not the case, 
he propose d to follow the US suggestion of addressing the proposals one -by-one and to see how 
that worked. If that approach did not work well, the Committee would need then to reassess how 
best to proceed. For the time being, he would begin by asking if the Member that had notified wanted  
to present their notification , without there being a ny obligation if the delegation preferred not to 
make use of that possibility. It was merely meant as an opportunity. After that, he would  invite 
comments and reactions on the notif ication  in question.  
1.19.   The first notification on the agenda had been submitted by Afghanistan (G/TFA/N/AFG/1) . 
Given that Afghanistan was not present  at the current meeting , there was no point in asking whether 
they wanted to present their notification. But he understood that the United States wished to take 
the floor  to react .  
1.20.   The representative of the United States  informed that the United States were greatly  
interest ed in the Trade Facilitation Agreem ent and the functioning of the C ommittee, and that they  
wished to ensure that Members had robust discussions o f their notifications . The US was very 
engaged on transpare ncy and  wished to ensur e that  section II of the TFA worked  smoothly  and well . 
1.21.   As far as the notification  from Afghanistan was concerned, the US appreciate d the work that 
had gone into it. They saw  it as a signal of intent regarding implementation time -frames and as a 
sign to donors and the assistance community what Afghanistan needed to implement the TF 
Agreement.  
1.22.   Turning to the details of the notification, it would be helpful if Afghanistan  could be stronger 
in indicat ing what they needed to implement in each of th ose areas where they had listed a 
requirement for capacity building. It would therefore be useful if Afghanistan could fully develop 
their notification. The United States had  ongoing bilateral programmes  by the US Agency for 
International Development (USAID) in place  in Afghanistan, lasting five year s. They encourage d 
Afghanistan  to work with US agencies and their National  Trade  Facilitation Committee and  to speak 
to donors about any needs that had not yet be en identified , and to have an ongoing conversation 
about implementation.  The US appreciate d the work that Afghanistan had  carried out on advance 
rulings with the US Commercial Law Development Program (CLDP) .  
1.23.   The representative of the European Union  recall ed that Afghanistan was an LDC , which implied 
that Afghanistan  still ha d one year to identify its needs . The EU had  reached out to Afg hanistan and 
had ongoing programmes with them. The EU was  aware that the International Trade Centre ( ITC) 
was also working on several areas and would welcome coordination  among donors . Fortunately, 
there would be a donor coordination meeting soon. G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.24.   The Chair noted that there were no further requests for the floor on the notification from 
Afghanistan and the n turned to a notification that had been received from Angola (G/TFA/N/AGO/1) . 
1.25.   The representative of Angola  informed the TF Committee that Angola had submitted a 
notification  on 9 March 2018 . Despite being an LDC, the notification was quite ambitious , as only 25 
per cent of all provisions had been p laced in category C . Most measures were designated in 
categor ies A and B.  
1.26.   The representative of the United States  congratulate d Angola on th eir work  and encouraged 
Angola to ratify the TFA as soon as possible.  
1.27.   The representative of Angola  informed the Committee that Angola was still working on the 
ratification process , which they hoped to finish as soon as possible . The notification demonstrate d 
Angola's interest in the TFA.  
1.28.   The Chair  then turned to the next notification that had been submitted by Albania 
(G/TFA/N/ALB/1) , and opened the floor  for related interventions . 
1.29.   The representative of Albania  informed the Committee that it  remain ed comm itted to fulfi lling 
its obligations under the TFA. Albania had already submitted  its notification regarding categor ies B 
and C. To their knowledge , there was nothing more to be notified.  
1.30.   The representative of the United S tates thank ed Albania  for their notification . USAID had  a 
regional economic programme that include d Albania and focused  on the National Trade Facilitation 
Committee. Albania had notified article 1.4 of the TFA as a category A  commitment , which they 
appreci ated as the US  had a large number  of traders that we re looking at article  1.4-related  
information . The US therefore encouraged Albania  to make available the relevant information 
regarding import, export, and transit procedures as promptly as possible.  
1.31.   The representative of the European Union  welcome d the revised notification from Albania and 
encourage d them to present its notification under article  1.4. The EU had several  assistance 
programmes in the context of their relationship with the Eastern N eighbourhood of the EU.  
1.32.   The Chair  proceeded to the notification from Argentina (G/TFA/N/ARG/1/Add.1) and asked if 
Argentina wished to take the floor.  
1.33.   The representative of Argentina  thanked the WTO Secretariat  for its cooperation  in preparing 
the notification.  
1.34.   The representative of the United States  appreciated Argentina's ambition in putting forward 
a robust category A notification . The US also appreciated the inclusion of definitive dates in 
Argentina's revised category B notification. Articles 1 and 11 of the TFA were now fully implemented. 
The US  also commend ed Argentina on the selected transition p eriods for full implementation.  Work 
was under way on developing a collaborative programme with the Global Alliance for Trade 
Facilitation.  
1.35.   In the absence of  any other requests for the floor, t he Chair move d to the notification from 
the Kingdom of Bahrain (G/TFA/N/BHR/1) , and asked if any delegation wished to take the floor . 
1.36.   The representative of the United States  thank ed the Kingdom of  Bahrain for its notific ation 
and noted that article  1.4of the TFA had been designated as a category A commitment. The United 
States urged Bahrain to make the relevant information under that article  available to the WTO 
Secretariat  promptly . 
1.37.   In the absence of any other request for the floor, t he Chair proceeded to  the notification from 
Bangladesh (G/TFA/N/BGD/1) and ask ed if any delegation  wished to intervene.  
1.38.   The representative of Bangladesh  informe d the Committee that Bangladesh had submitted  its 
notification on 20 February 20 18. Their capital was working on finaliz ing the implementation date s 
for categor ies B and C and the  capacity -building needs. Bangladesh wished to thank the WTO 
Secretariat  for its support . G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.39.   The representative of the United States  appreciate d the indicative dates provided in the 
notification  from Bangladesh . The US had a bilateral USAID program running in Bangladesh. While 
not yet due, the US encourage d Bangladesh to look at identifying its capacity building and technical 
assistance needs . 
1.40.   The Chair asked if there were further requests for the floor and then moved on to n otification 
from Belize (G/TFA/N/BLZ/1).  He noted that Belize was not represented at the meeting.  
1.41.   The representative of the United States  appreciate d the notification submitted by Belize. The 
US encourage d Belize  to further  clarify their needs so that the US  could be even more responsive. 
Her delegation  was not completely clear on the needs indicated in the notification - additional  clarity 
would be very helpful. For example, t hey wer e confused by the article 1.4 notification that Belize 
had made, especially by where it had been placed and what information had been provided. They 
would welcome  if Belize  could provide greater clarity.  
1.42.   The representative of the European Union  said that the EU had approached Belize and learned 
that Belize was exploring possible sources of assistance and ha d contacted  the ITC  to help them 
prepare a roadmap for technical assistance  and capacity -building  needs . There were funds that could 
be mobili zed. 
1.43.   The representative of Canada  sought a clarification  from the Chair with regard to procedure . 
Canada had understood from the instructions from the Chair at the beginning of the meeting that 
the Committee would go through the notifications as they were listed on the agenda , starting with 
the notifications under articles 15 and 16 of the TFA, followed by notifications under article s 1.4, 10 
and so forth. He had therefore  prepared to comment on notifications under the second group of 
these notifications , but had now noticed  comments about those types of notifications as they were 
going through the notifications under article s 15 and 16. The representative wished  to clarify that 
the Committee would  revert to these notifications and that an opportunity would be provided to 
discuss those notifications  later in the meeting . 
1.44.   The Chair confirmed that th at was indeed the case and urged delegations to focus on the 
issues in the order agreed a t the beginning of the meeting.  
1.45.   He then moved on to the notification from  the Plurilateral State of Bolivia (G/TFA/N/BOL/1) , 
and asked if there were any requests for the floor. He noted that Bolivia was not represented at the 
meeting.  
1.46.   The representative of the Europ ean Union  noted that, as a developing country, Bolivia was 
expected to no tify its definitive dates for implementation of its category B commitments . The EU 
noted with satisfaction  that most Members had met their obligation s and called on those that had 
not yet notified their definitive dates to do so as soon as possible . 
1.47.   The representative of the United States  thanked Bolivia for a very robust category A 
notification . It was one of the first notifications where the US  had noticed assistance needs under 
article  5.3 of the TFA . The US was confused by the scope of some of the needs  request ed, since th e 
provision related to t ransparency and not actually to laboratory testing facilities. They encourage d 
further discussion with assistance providers and perhaps also the original proponents of th e article , 
who could better clarify what they had envisaged in this article  in terms of implementation . Such an 
exchange would help guide some of the discussions on technical assistance. The US was somewhat  
troubled about th is particular article  and the needs expressed.  
1.48.   The Chair move d on to the notification  from Botswana (G/TFA/N/BWA/1/Add.1) , noting that 
the delegation was not present.  
1.49.   The representative of the United States  thanked  Botswana for the inclusion of its definitive 
implementation dates in their notification , and noted that in article  10.6.2 of the TFA, Botswana had  
notified customs brokers as a c ategory A  commitment . The US urged Botswana  to make th e 
information relevant to that article  available to the WTO Secretariat . 
1.50.   As far as the notification of article  5.3 of the TFA  was concerned, the comment made in the 
US' previous intervention was also relevant in the present context. The US noted that they had G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 7 - 
 
  engaged in significant  trade facilitation work in Botswana through their Southern Africa Trade and 
Investm ent Hub, and that Botswana ha d been an active participant in tho se efforts. In 2017, in 
addition to the regional activities, the Hub had conducted a workshop on the TFA and National Trade 
Facilitation Committees for the Botswana Technical Committee on Trad e Facilitation, and they had 
helped with work on a comprehensive work plan for TF measures, suppo rted by reforms in customs 
and e xcise provisions for Botswana. A training workshop had also helped with the issue of preparing 
for a national single window.  
1.51.   The Chair  noted that no other delegation had requested the floor and therefore moved on to 
a notification submitted by Brazil (G/TFA/N/BRA/1/Add.1) . 
1.52.   The representative of Brazil  explained that Brazil's intention  had been to revise  the 
implementation dates for its category B commitments and to ensure that Brazil had sufficient time 
and opportunity to fulfil its obligations.  
1.53.   The representative of the  United States  noted that 96 per cent of the provisions had been 
designated as category A , which was very ambitious notification and applaud able. The US had noted, 
however, that, while a rticles 1.4, 10.6.2, 10.4.3 , and 12.2  of the TFA had been designated as 
category A, not all of the information had  yet been made available . The US  therefore urged Brazil  to 
make all the relevant information known to the Secretariat  as soon as possible.  In addition, the US 
would be very much interested to hear from Brazil and other Members of MERCOSUR if they were 
coordinating TFA implementation and , if so, how. Finally, they thank ed Brazil for their interest in 
partnering with the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation.  
1.54.   The representative of Brazil  informed the Committee that, as far as MERCOSUR coordination  
was concerned , internal discussions  were ongo ing. He had no detailed information for the moment 
but could try to provide it at a later stage.  
1.55.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification that had been submitted by Chile 
(G/TFA/N/CHL/1) . 
1.56.   The representative of Chile informed the Committee that, on 14 February  2018, Chile had 
published  a notification that followed up on its initial notification of  July 2014  and designed the 
remaining article that had not already been listed as category A under that category. With that 
notificat ion, Chile had committed to all notifiable provi sions falling under category A.  
1.57.   The representative of the United States  appreciate d Chile's ambitious notification . The US 
noted that a rticles 1.4, 10.6.2, 10.4.3 , and 12.2  of the TFA had been designated as category A, and 
urged Chile to make all the relevant information available to the WTO Secretariat  as soon as possible.  
1.58.   The Chair opened the floor for interventions on notification s from China  
(G/TFA/N/CHN/1/Add.1 and G/TFA/N/CHN/1/Add.2) . 
1.59.   The representative of China  informed the Committee that as far as addendum 1 was 
concerned, article 10.9 of the TFA  had been moved to category A as the provision had been 
implemented in 2016 ahead of schedule. In 2014, when China had been  one of the first WTO 
Members to submit  a notification , this had not yet been the case.  
1.60.   As far as article 12 of the TFA was concerned , reference  was made  to the practi ces of most 
other Member s who had  submitted their notification. Consequently, China had divided article 12 into 
more specific sub -article s. With the except ion of article 12.2 and article 12.6, all parts of article 12 
had been designated as falling under category A . As far as addendum 2  was concerned , China  had 
provided the definitive dates for implementation of  category B provisions , as stipulated in the TFA . 
1.61.   The representative of the United States  thank ed China for an ambitious notification. Originally , 
over 94  per cent of the provisions had been put into category A . The US appreciate d the definitive 
dates for China's category B commitments. It provide d great  certainty for their traders to know when 
all article s would  be implemented . The US commend ed China on its work and note d that they  
appreciate d China's ambition in the area of trade facilitation . The US looked forward to their 
continued collab oration.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 8 - 
 
  1.62.   The representative of the European Union  thank ed China for a very good notification and also 
welcome d the additional notifications that ha d recently  been submitted . 
1.63.   The representative of Canada  thank ed the Chin ese delegation for their comments . Canada 
commend ed China for having revised its notification to move provisions that ha d already been 
implemented into category A. It was very helpful to understand the progress  made towards 
implementation of the A greement on the ground , which was very important for businesses and 
companies . Canada  saw the TFC as an important venue for understanding progress being made 
towards implementation , as well as for understanding the needs required to fully i mplement the 
Agreement. C anada was also interested in hearing from those Members who had notified , for 
example , indicative implementation dates in 2017 , and whether or not they had succeeded in 
implementing those measures . There was  benefit in being able to communicate clearly to 
stakeholders, businesses , and tra ders, what wa s happening  on the ground in terms of 
implementation  of the TFA .  
1.64.   The representative of China  thank ed all delegations that had commented positively on China's 
work. It  would be helpful to more clearly understand the status of the  notification process . Perhaps 
the WTO Secretariat  could brief Members on the current state of notification of implementation 
commitments. It would also be interesting to learn about the difficulties faced by Members in the 
process and what obstacles they had encountered . That might allow to see if there was a positive 
solution to these problems , which in turn could improve the implementation process.  
1.65.   The Chair  recalled th at the agenda included an item under which the WTO Secreta riat would 
brief Members on relevant matters, with a focus on the status of the ratification process . This was  
in fact  foreseen to take place right after the current item. As he had previously mentioned , the 
Committee was still fairly young, a nd the agenda had been designed on the basis of the discussion s 
that had taken place during  the informal , open -ended meeting in March , and what Members had 
said they w ished the Committee to do. If there wa s a preference for the next meeting to have a 
repor t on the status of the notification and ratification process before addressing the notifications, 
then this appeared to him to be a p erfectly reasonable proposal. If agreed upon by Members , the 
WTO Secretariat  could be invited to d eliver s uch a briefing.  
1.66.   The representative of the European Union  considered it a good idea to proceed along th ese 
lines. There w ere a large number  of notificati ons on the agenda and  it would be easy to lose sight 
of the bigger picture . As Members knew, th e TFA was an Agreement à-la-carte for LDCs and 
developing countries . It was important to know what was happening  and, to that end,  it would be 
useful to have a "stock -taking " briefing delivered by the WTO Secretariat  if Members  could agree on 
that. This could take place, for example, at the beginning of the next meeting . In this way, Members  
would all be up to date  and on the same page. T ransparency wa s crucial with regard to Members ' 
commitments in the WTO , and in particular with regard to the implementation o f the TFA. It was 
also important to know where Members stood  with respect to category B commitments for 
developing co untries , given that the deadline had  passed  for notifying information. It was equally 
important to know w here LDCs st ood and, although ther e was still time with regard to submitting 
their notifications, at least the category designations should be known by now. The agenda for the 
meeting reference d seven  LDC notifications (Afghanistan, Angola, Bangladesh, Lao PDR,  
Madagascar, Nepal,  and Togo)  but there were others that had not yet notified.  
1.67.   The EU urged all Members that had already provided a category C notif ication , and who ha d 
done their preparatory work , to participate either during the first or the second day of the current 
meeting s, when Members would be exchang ing their  experiences . This would allow  everyone to 
benefit and to move forward in preparation for the next session in identifying implementation needs.  
1.68.   The Chair took note of the suggestion and considered that the WTO Secret ariat would be very 
flexible  in this regard . At the same time, he wished to recall that at previous meetings, there  had 
been requests f rom Members that the Committee process should be driven by Members as opposed 
to the WTO Secretariat . That had been the r eason why, for the first time, the current meeting had 
not started with a status report  by the Secretariat . However, if th ere now was a preference for the 
Secretariat  to give a brief at the next meeting , he was certain that the Secretariat  would be  available  
to do it.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 9 - 
 
  1.69.   If there were no further requests for the floor, he would return to the agenda for the current 
meeting and address the next notification on the list, which was a notification submitted by Colombia 
(G/TFA/N/COL/1) .  
1.70.   The representative of  Colombia  informed the Committee that, although Colombia was still 
going through the long process  of changing its constitution , the government had submitted their 
notification  as a sign of Colombia's commitment to the TFA . It followed up on t he notificatio n made 
on 13 June 2014 , which had set out the obligations and commitments Colombia had designated as 
belonging to c ategory A , where all but two provisions had been placed into that category . The recent 
notification provided information on the two remaining  provisions, articles 5.3 and 7.9 of the TFA, 
designating them both under category B and indicating both indicative and definitive implementation 
dates. The transitional period requested for implementation was 22 February 2022 .  
1.71.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Colombia for their notification  and noted that 
Colombia had designated over 96 per cent  of its commitments as belonging to c ategory A. The US 
and Colombia ha d a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) that ha d very strong TF provisions . There 
was an alignment between those provisions, the FTA practice and the TFA. The US was pleased to 
see the level of ambition in Colombia's notification.   
1.72.   The US was also pleased to have Colombia as a development partner, both bilaterally and in 
the con text of the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitat ion, which was  dedicated to supporting 
implementation of the TFA.  They noted that Colombia had a new emerging program with the  US 
Department of A griculture . The US would share more details on this under the appropriate agenda 
item. They appreciate d that Colombia had given an update on the status of its domestic process , 
which was something the US had been wondering about . 
1.73.   The representative of  Colombia  informed the Committee that the treaty wa s currently under 
review by Colombia's constitutional court , which wa s still deliberating on how the treaty could f it in 
with the constitution , in keeping with the rules of that constitution. The process was still ongoing.  
1.74.   The Chair then opened the floor for comments on the next notification, which had been 
submitted by Costa Rica (G/TFA/N/CRI/1) . 
1.75.   The representative of Costa Rica  highlight ed that most of Costa Rica's commitments had been 
listed under  category A . Only a small number of provisions had been designated as category C 
commitments. For those two provisions , Costa Rica was already working on their full implementation 
with the support of the World Bank.  
1.76.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Costa Rica for its a mbitious notification and 
the limited use of transition periods for article s that were not designated as category A.  She recalled 
that Costa Rica and the US ha d worked together on tr ade facilitation for many years  and that the 
trade facilitation provisions of thei r plurilateral free t rade agreement we re closely aligned with the 
provisions of the TFA , which  was reflected in the robust category A notifications. Costa Rica was also 
a participant in the World Bank Trade Facilitation Support Program  (TFSP) . The use of that support 
had been identified in the category C notifications for articles 10 and 10.1 of the TFA. The  US looked 
forward to receiving Costa Rica's  definitive dates for implementation of category B  provisions in the 
near future . 
1.77.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification from Cuba (G/TFA/N/CUB/1) and 
asked if Cuba wished to take the floor.  
1.78.   The representative of Cuba noted that, after a very demanding internal p rocess that involved 
many  domestic institutions and an intensive  exchange with the WTO Secretariat , Cuba had submit ted 
a notification for categories B and C, as well as Cuba's ratification instrument on 13 March  2018. It 
had been a very arduous task and Cuba wished to thank  the WTO Secretariat  for its support . Cuba 
was very satisfied with the result.  
1.79.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Cuba for notifying both their indicative and 
definitive dates for category B . The US looked forward to future notifications.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 10 - 
 
  1.80.   The Chair  observed that many of the delegations whose notifications were about to c ome up 
in the meeting were not represented at the meeting, such as the ones of the Gambia, Georgia and 
Guyana. He therefore proposed that , if acceptable to Members , he would open the floor 
simultaneously for the notifications from the Gambia, Georgia and Guyana  (G/TFA/N/GMB/1, 
G/TFA/N/GEO/1 and  G/TFA/N/GUY/1/Add.1 , respectively ). 
1.81.   The representative of the United States  noted that Georgia had included  article s 1.4, 10.6.2, 
10.4.3, and 12.2 of the TFA in its category A  notifications  and urge d Georgia to make  the relevant 
information available to the Secretariat  as soon as possible. In addition, they thanked the Gambia 
for their notifications.  
1.82.   The Chair proceeded to the notification from the Dominican Republic (G/TFA/N/DOM/1) and 
asked if the  Dominican Republi c wished  to make an initial comment . 
1.83.   The representative of the Dominican Republic  emphasised the Dominican Republic's 
commitm ent to the TFA . The  Dominican Republic had submitted a category A notification in July 
2014 and had then followed up with additional input in February 2018.  
1.84.   The representative of the United States  thank ed the Dominican Re public  for submitting its 
notification. The  Dominican Republic was another free trade a greement partner of the US. The United 
States had noted that the  Dominican Republic  had put over three -quarters of its commitments as a 
category A  commitment . That included articles 1.4, 10.6.2, 10.4.3, and 12.2  of the TFA. T he US 
urged the Dominican Republic to make the relevant information available to th e Secretariat as s oon 
as possible.  
1.85.   The Dominican Republic and the United States had worked together on trade facilitation for 
many years, and the trade facilitation provisions of their plurilateral free trade agreement were 
closely aligned with the provis ions of the TFA . The US was pleased to see the Dominican Republic  
put forward such robust category A notifications. There were still so me questions outstanding 
concerning the notification, but the US would address them bilaterally,  especially  regarding the  
Dominican Republic 's category C priorities.  
1.86.   The representative of the Dominican Republic  said that the Dominican Republic looked forward 
to a bilateral engagement  with the United States on the matters raised .  
1.87.   The Chair  opened the floor for interventions  on notification s from Guatemala (G/TFA/N/GTM/1 
and G/TFA/N/GTM/1/Add.1).  
1.88.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Guatemala for their notification and note d 
that over two thirds of th e commitments were notified as belonging to  category A.  Guatemala  had 
played an important role in negotiating the TFA and had helped move the Agreement across the 
finish line . They were also an important FTA partner for the United States. The US  looked forward 
to working with them on trade facilitation for many years to  come.   
1.89.   Many of the t rade facilitation  provisions were very similar to those in the their plurilateral 
Agreement . The US appreciated the robust notifications  and the definitive implementation dates  
provided . The United States would also welcome a conversat ion on the implementation needs that 
had been e xpressed , which were somewhat  general . The US looked forward to learning more about 
what Guatemala's specific needs were. Guatemala engaged in work with the World Bank  and there 
were also several USAID programs i n the region , which  included the Commercial Law Development 
Program and the US D epartment of Agriculture.  
1.90.   The representative of Guatemala  said that her delegation would be open to meet bilaterally 
with any dono r that wished to understand Guatemala's assistance  and capacity building  needs  in 
greater detail . Guatemala would be glad to provide even further information than what was 
presented in the notification.  
1.91.   The Chair move d to the notification from Honduras (G/TFA/N/HND/1) and asked if Honduras 
wished to  make an initial comment.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 11 - 
 
  1.92.   The representative of Honduras  informed the Committee that Honduras had submitted their 
notification for categories B and C on 28 February 2018. They thank ed the WTO Secretariat  for its 
support provided  in that context . 
1.93.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Honduras for their robust category A 
notification. Honduras was also a  FTA partner of the US and they saw the ambition in their category 
A notification as reflecti ng the comm itments that they had made to each other in their Free Trade 
Agreement . The US also appreciate d the inclusion of defini tive implementation dates in the 
notification. The timeline wa s very helpful  to understand the pace at which Honduras was see king 
to full y implement the T rade Facilitation Agreement  and it provide d a great deal of transparency and 
predictability .  
1.94.   Honduras had  included articles 1.4, 10.6.2, 10.4.3, and 12.2 of the TFA in category A . The 
US urged Honduras to make the relevant related information available to the WTO Secretariat as 
soon as possible.  Honduras engaged in programs with the World Bank also had also regional 
programs with USAID, the US Commercial L aw Development Program and the US Department of 
Agriculture  – regionally , and sometimes also bilaterally.  The United States was interested in further 
conversation s about how to align the se programs with the needs expressed in Honduras' category 
C notifications .  
1.95.   The representative of Honduras  said that Honduras  stood ready to discuss these issues 
bilaterally with the US .  
1.96.   The Chair moved the meeting to the notification from India (G/TFA/N/IND/1) , noting that 
India was not present at the meeting.  
1.97.   The representative of the United States  noted that India had submitted a very ambitious 
notification. They thank ed India for their work  in that area. The U nited States had noted that India 
had included articles 1.4, 10.6.2 , 10.4.3 and 12.2 of the TFA in its list of category A commitments 
and urged them to make the relevant related information available to the WTO Secretariat  as soon 
as possible.   
1.98.   The representative of the European Union  noted that a number of comments ha d been made 
under article s 1.4, 10.4.3, 10.6.2 and 12.2  of the TFA, although this was an area that was meant to 
be covered under a la ter agenda  item. Perhaps at the next meeting , the area could be grouped 
under the heading of " transparency notification s" as a separate item.  
1.99.   The Chair  recalled that there alrea dy was a separate item on the agenda for the review of 
transparency notifications  (articles 1.4, 10.4.3, 10.6.2 , and 12.2 .2 of the TFA). It seemed, however, 
that some Members had chosen to comment on these article s under the currently addressed agenda 
item. That was not an issue of failure of the agenda. He hoped that when the Committee  reached 
the agenda item dedicated t o this area, those issues would be addressed as foreseen, as Canada 
had also requested.  
1.100.   The representative of the United States  said that  the first agenda item  dealt with article s 15 
and 16  of the TFA , and therefore clearly cover ed notifications for categories A, B and C. But if a 
Member had not  submitted a notification , it did not appear on the agenda. The only items that were 
on the agend a corresponded to  the notifications that Members ha d already submitted . The US would 
like to find a space to raise questions about any commitments that ha d not been met , and t he best 
place seemed to be under the agenda item for article s 15 and 16 . The US  would welcome more 
Committee discussion on how to structure the agenda in a way that created space. Members needed 
to have a conversation about how to raise questions about category A, B , or C commitments which 
had been implemented  technically , but which had not yet been fulfilled.  
1.101.   The Chair  recalled his earlier remarks about the agenda still being a work in progress . If 
there were any suggestions on how to improve it for the next meeting , Members should  feel at 
liberty to share those suggestions with the WTO Secretariat  and the incoming Chair. He also wished 
to recall that the Committee would  still address the matter at the current meeting, if there we re any 
Members that w ished to make comments specifically under those article s.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 12 - 
 
  1.102.   With there not being any fu rther requests for the floor on the matter , he proposed to return 
to the notifications on the current agenda and drew the Committee's attention to a  notification from 
the Lao People's Democratic Republic (G/TFA/N/LAO/1) . 
1.103.   The representative of the Lao People's Democratic Republic  thank ed the WTO Secretariat  for 
having assist ed with the  prepar ation of Lao PDRs' category B and C  commitments . The notification 
had been submitted on 21 February 2018 . 
1.104.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Lao PDR for submitting its notification . They 
particularly appreciat ed the admirable efforts to include article 1 in its entirety in c ategory A . The 
US believe d that it sen t an importan t signal when an LDC like Lao  PDR was able to  make such a 
statement about the importance of ensuring that trade -related information was available and easily 
accessible to all traders. They looked forward to receiving Lao PDRs' transparency notification under 
article 1.4 of the TFA . 
1.105.   The United States had provided significant  assistance to the ASEAN Secretariat for  work on  
Trade Facilitation and had both regional and bilateral missions that offer ed assistance . The US looked 
forward to continuing  discussions about Lao DPR's assistance needs for category C commitments . 
Lao PDR was a World Bank TFSP participant and there was work going on with respect to a number 
of articles of the TFA. The US looked forward to coordinating all that work for a robust 
implementation . 
1.106.   The representative of the European Union  congratulat ed Lao PDR on its notificati on and 
mention ed that the EU wa s about to finaliz e a €5 million program with the ITC that would contribute 
towards  support ing Laos with re gard to their category C needs. The EU  insisted on donor coordination 
to avoid duplicat ion and to optimize the use of available funds . 
1.107.   The representative of the Lao People's Democratic Republic  said that Lao  PDR was ready to 
engag e in bilateral discussions on the implementation of Lao PDR's category C commitments and 
looked forward to that  exchange.  
1.108.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a  notification from Macao, China 
(G/TFA/N/MAC/1).  
1.109.   The representative of the United States  appreciat ed the fact that Macao , China had 
submitt ed its notification and had listed 98 per cent o f its commitments under category A , which 
was very ambitious. The US had noted that Macao, China had included a number of the transparency 
article s as category A , and look ed forward to seeing those submitted as soon as possible.  
1.110.   The Chair turned t he Committ ee's attention t o a notification that had been submitted by 
Morocco (G/TFA/N/MAR/1) . 
1.111.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Morocco for submitting its notification and 
for including 91  per cent of its commitments under category A . The US looked forward to the 
provision of the definitive implementation dates and hope d that Morocco would make them available 
soon. They also encourage d Morocco to ratify the TFA as soon as possible. In terms o f bilateral 
assistance or multi -donor fund assistance , the US underst ood that Morocco was in the early stages 
of discussions with the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation and look ed forward to hearing about 
related progress in the future.  
1.112.   The representative of Morocco  informed the Committee that more informatio n from capital  
would be forthcoming . 
1.113.   The Chair turned to a notification  from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 
(G/TFA/N/MKD/2).  
1.114.   The representative of the United States  appreciated that 99 per cent of the commitments  
had been designated  as category A, including a number of transparency article s. The US urged the 
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia t o make the notifications on those provisions available a s 
soon as possible.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 13 - 
 
  1.115.   The representative of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia  said that the comments of 
the United States would be forwarded to capital.  
1.116.   The Chair turned to a notification from Madagascar  (G/TFA/N/MDG/1) and asked if the 
delegation wished to make an initial comment.  
1.117.   The representative of Madagascar  remarked that the majority of the  notifications were on 
category C.  
1.118.   The representative of the United States  appreciate d the work that Madagascar ha d done, its 
category B and C commitments , and the indicative dates  that they ha d provided. The US understood 
that Madagascar was a partner in the World Bank Trade Facilitation Support Program and was 
working on their National Committee. There was also an ongoing validation of a gap ana lysis to help 
prioritiz e the TFA implementation . Significant efforts  had already been made on article 6.1 of the 
TFA. 
1.119.   The US urged Madagascar to identify what assistance was needed for different articles  and 
looked  forward to future developments.  
1.120.   The representative of the European Union  said that the EU would welcome  if Madagascar 
could report to the EU on a donor meeting  that had taken place in April of the current year to ensure 
that there wa s no duplic ation of aid , and that the programs we re correctly allocated to the different 
donors . 
1.121.   The delegate of Madagascar  said that work would be carried out on this issue.  
1.122.   The Chair turned t he Committee's attention t o a notification that had been submitted by 
Malaysia (G/TFA/N/MYS/1).  
1.123.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Malaysia for having submitt ed a robust 
notification , and t ook positive note of the fact that Malaysia had submitt ed 94 per cent of it s 
commitments as falling under category A.  Malaysia had been a long-standing leader in the area of 
trade facilitation . 
1.124.   The US had noted that Malaysia had provided some indicative implementation dates for 
category B and look ed forward to receiving t he definitive implementation dates for category B.  
Articles 1.4, 10.6.2, 10.4.3 and 12.2 of the T rade Facilitation Agreement  had been notified as 
category A  and the US urged Malaysia to make the relevant related information available to the 
Secretariat  as soon as possible.  
1.125.   The representative of the European Union  support ed the US comments on the final 
implementation dates for Malaysia's category B commitments , as well as on the transparency -related  
information.  
1.126.   The representative of Malaysia  said that t hey would work on the comments.  
1.127.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification that had been submitted by the 
Republic of Moldova (G/TFA/N/MDA/1).  
1.128.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  informed the Committee that Moldova's 
category A notifications were included in twenty  actions , which represent ed almost 60  per cent of 
all measures regarding the TFA. These  commitments  had already been fully implemented . Regarding 
the notification of category B  commitments , they included nine actions and needed additional time 
for their proper implementation. Tho se nine actions represented almost 19  per cent of all TFA 
measures. Moldova only had seven actions included in category C, which represented almost 18 -19 
per cent of all TFA measures. Moldova had included all  of these actions within a national action plan 
for trade facilitation, which  had been adopted in Dec ember 2017. The plan included actions divided 
into thematic chapters and 35 articles. More information  would be provided during the presentation 
by the Moldovan delegation under item 2 of the agenda.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 14 - 
 
  1.129.   The representative of the European Union  commented that the transparency notifications 
were still outs tanding , if she w ere not mistaken. The EU wo uld like t o hear more from Moldova. T he 
EU had a number of workshop s and programs on trade facilitation as well as  a series of seminars , 
in particular training projects , to prepare for the common transit convention and the conv ention on 
trade facilitation , as well as other programs with Moldova.  
1.130.   The representative of the United States  thanked Moldova for their notification and expressed 
interest in seeing the transparency  information captured in articles 1.4, 10.6.2 , and 12.2  of the TFA , 
which had been notified under  category A . The US was working with Moldova in the context of its 
Commercial Law Development Program and look ed forward to its continuing engagement  with 
Moldova in that context . 
1.131.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  looked forward to providing additional 
information . Some of the referenced articles had been designated under category A , but others, 
such as article 10.6.3 of the TFA , had been classified as falling under category B . Descriptions had 
been provided not only for category C , but also for category B. Moldova was available to provid e 
further information bilaterally . 
1.132.   Moldova appreciated the activities offered by the E U in Mold ova. More information w ould be 
provided in the context of a presentation that Moldova would give later in the meeting .  
1.133.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a n otification from Mongolia 
(G/TFA/N/MNG/1).  
1.134.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Mongolia for submitting its notification . She 
noted that article 1.4 of the TFA had been notified as a category A commitment , and urged Mongolia 
to make the relevant related information available to the Secretariat  as promptly as possible.  
1.135.   The repr esentative of Mongolia  took note of the comment and said that Mongolia would 
proceed with a response.  
1.136.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification from Myanmar 
(G/TFA/N/MMR/1).  
1.137.   The representative of Myanmar  indicated that , despite numerous supply -side constraints and 
other challenges , Myanmar had completed its ratification process in December 2015. Under articles 
15 and 16 of the TFA, Myanmar had also submitted its notificati on on category A, B and C on  22 
February 2018 . Myanmar wished to thank UNCTAD and the World Bank for their support on 
categoriz ation work, USAID for helping Myanmar with its notification strategy , and th e EU for a 
future program . 
1.138.   The representative of the United States  appreciat ed Myanmar's notificatio n and the 
information provided. The US looked forward to continued work together as they refine d the 
notifications and move d the process forward.  
1.139.   The Chair turned  the Committee's attention to a notification that had been submitted by 
Nepal (G/TFA/N/NPL/1).  
1.140.   The representative of Nepal  said that Nepal h ad notified all categ ories on 15 February  2018. 
Most of their notifications we re under categories B and C. Regarding the implementation of category 
B, and technical assistance need s for the implement ation of category C  provisions , capital continued 
to work on it. 
1.141.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Nepal for their notification and note d that 
Nepal had included article 10.6.2 as a category A  commitment. It would be helpful if Nepal could 
make the r elevant information available  to the WTO Secretariat . The US would be interested in 
hearing about developments regarding Nepal's technical assistance needs . Gaining a better 
understanding of their needs would help them to contribute to the process of techni cal assistance 
and w ould also help other donors to more clearly understand what the needs were.  The US was 
aware that Nepal participated in a World Bank lending program and that there ha d been support for 
some TF -related measures. The US would be interested in being kept up to date on how the technical G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 15 - 
 
  assistance conversations were going , where gaps had  been identified,  what donors we re working  
on, and where needs remained.  
1.142.   The representative of Nepal  said that she had taken note of the statements made and that 
she would inform capital.  
1.143.   The Chair turned to notifications that had been submitted by Niger (G/TFA/N/NER/1 and 
G/TFA/N/NER/2).  
1.144.   The representative of Niger  recalled  that Niger had been one of the first WTO Members to 
ratify the Tra de Facilitation Agreement and also to notify the three categories. The first notification  
related to category A  and had been submitted in January 2018 . The second referred to categor ies B 
and C and had been  submitted in February 2018. Niger wished to thank all partners that had offered 
assistance in assessing  Niger's needs.  
1.145.   The representative of the United States  thanked Niger  for its efforts . 
1.146.   The Chair  turned to a notification that had been submitted by Pakistan 
(G/TFA/N/PAK/1/Add.1).  
1.147.   The representative of Pakistan  said that Pakistan was fully c ommitted to the T rade 
Facilitation Agreement  and had  notified its definitive implementation dates for category B obligations 
under Article 16.1(b)  of the TFA . Indeed, m ost of thei r category B obligations would  be fulfilled 
during the current year. Pakistan was actively engag ed with donor agencies like the World Bank and 
USAID for thei r category C obligations.  
1.148.   The representative of the United States  appreciat ed the notification from  Pakistan and the 
identification of additional definitive dates that had been circulated in the addendum. The US noted 
that some of the dates had already passed and congratulate d Pakistan on advancing its 
implementation efforts so quickly. They also  apprec iated the acknowledgment of the capacity - 
building efforts that were under way and looked forward to additional details on those in the future . 
The US Commercial Law Development Program appreciated the opportunity to provide Pakistan with 
technical assista nce for advanced rulings, customs appeals and other areas relevant to the TFA as 
part of previous work programs.  
1.149.   The Chair turned  the Committee's attention  to a notification from Paraguay 
(G/TFA/N/PRY/1).  
1.150.   The representative of the United States  thanked Paraguay for their notification . She noted 
that Paraguay  had included article 10.6.2 of the TFA as a category A  commitment and urged 
Paraguay to make the relevant information available to the WTO Secretariat  as soon as possible. 
The US appreciated  the details that Paraguay had provided regarding their implementation needs. 
This would  help the US  to understand what needs  were being fulfilled and how.  
1.151.   The United States had a question on the input provided with re gard to article 5.3 of the TFA. 
She wo ndered whether  Paraguay ha d any updates to share on how the Members of MERCOSUR or 
the Latin American Integration Association (ALADI) were  working together in the area of TFA 
implementation.  
1.152.   The U nited States thanked Paraguay for its leadership on transit provisions. Paraguay had 
all of these listed as a category A  commitment . This was important for traders and highly 
appreciated . 
1.153.   The representative of Paraguay  indicated that Paraguay would revert to the questions as 
soon as possible.  
1.154.   The Chair  turned the Committee's attention to a notification from Peru (G/TFA/N/PER/1).  
1.155.   The representative of Peru stated that , on 22 February  2018,  Peru had added to the  
notification of July  2014 and had submitted  commitments in different categories under the TFA . Peru 
was a developing country , but firmly comm itted to promoting trade for  development. Consequently, G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 16 - 
 
  the majority of Peru's commitments we re in category A . There were, however, three commitments 
in categ ory B and two in category C. With regard to the category B commitments , the date s of 
implementation were 2020 and 2022 . For category C , the implementation date was 2023.  
1.156.   The representative of the United States  said that m ore than the majority of the TFA a rticles 
had been notified as category A  - over 87  per cent  - for which the United States wished to t hank 
Peru. The bilateral FTA between the US and Peru include d high quality trade facilitation provisions 
that were closely align ed with the TFA. The US was  pleased to see that the notification from Peru 
has reflect ed that high level of ambition . The United States noted that Peru had included articles 
1.4, 10.6.2, and 12.2 of the TFA in c ategory  A and urged them to make the relevant information 
available to t he Secretariat  as soon as possible.  
1.157.   The representative of Peru said that Peru had taken good note of the comments made.  
1.158.   The Chair turned to a notification that had been submitted by the Philippines 
(G/TFA/N/PHL /1/Add.1).  
1.159.   The representative of the Philippines  said that the Philippines had submitted their updated 
notification on 30 January 2 018, which was a follow -up to an earlier notification. They had re-
categori zed some measures from category B to category A, and notified the four remaining 
provis ions under categor ies B and C , with defin itive dates for implementation.  
1.160.   The representative of the United States  thank ed the Philippines for their high level of 
ambition with respect to the Trade Facilitation Agreement and its implementation. Over 93  per cent 
of the commitments had been  notified as category A . The US also appreciate d the definitive dates 
that had been notified by the Philippines.  
1.161.   They had noted that the Philippines had included articles 1.4, 10.6.2, and 12.2 of the TFA in 
their category A  commitments and urged them to make the relevant related information available 
to the Secretariat  as soon as possible. The United States  looked forward to continu ing its w ork with 
the Philippines in the area of trade facilitation , building on the many years of significant support for 
the Philippines in the area of customs reforms and with respect to the Philippines' modernization 
efforts . 
1.162.   The representative of the Philippines  took note of the comments made and informed the 
Committee that they would be forwarded to capital. The Philippines looked forward to discussing  the 
matter bilaterally . 
1.163.   The Chair  turned to notifications from the Seychelles (G/TFA/N/SYC/1/Add.1) , Sierra Leone 
(G/TFA/N/SLE/1) , and Eswatini  (G/TFA/N/SWZ/1/Add.1 and G/TFA/N/SWZ/1/Rev .1), noting that all 
three WTO Members were not represented at the current meeting . 
1.164.   The representative of the United States  thanked the Seychelles for submitting their 
notification and for their definitive implementation dates for ca tegory B . They noted that the 
Seychelles had included a rticles 10.6. 2 and 12.2 of the TFA in c ategory A and urged them to make 
the relevant  related  information available to the WTO Secretariat  as soon as possible.  
1.165.   The United States also appreciated the indicative dates provide d by Sierra Leone and noted 
that Sierra Leone was a participant in the World Bank's Trade Facilitation Support Program , in 
conjunction with the WCO and UNCTAD. It appeared that technical assistance was being provided in 
a number of areas, and that the WCO was active in that area . The US would be interested in 
continuing to hear about developments in the field in order to better understand what  needs were 
still to be met . 
1.166.   The Chair turned to a notification from South Africa (G/TFA/N/ZAF/1 and 
G/TFA/N/ZAF/1/A dd.1) . 
1.167.   The representative of South Africa  said that the notification dated 28 February 2018 wa s an 
addendum to an earlier notification , which had been  submitted on 1 December 2017. The latest 
notification provided  definitive dates for implementation of category B provisions. Changes had also G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 17 - 
 
  been made regarding some provisions that had been design ated as category B commitments but 
that we re now listed under category A . 
1.168.   Regarding the request for more information relating to articles 1.4, 10.4.3, 10.6.2 and 12.2  
of the TFA, South Africa e nquired if the C ommittee had decided on a format for submission of such 
information . Should  it be provided in a separate document , or by e-mail, or in some other way ? 
Clarification was also sought on how the information would be ma de available to other Members . 
1.169.   The Chair  informed  the Committee  that the WTO Secretariat  would answer the  question s 
under the following item on the agenda , which wa s dedicated to notifications on the TFA a rticles that 
had just been mentioned . 
1.170.   The representative of the United States  thank ed South Africa for its notification  and noticed 
that over 90  per cent o f the TFA provisions had been design ated as category A  commitments , that 
definitive implementation dates had been provided for category B , and that certain provisions h ad 
been moved from category B to category A. They appreciate d the high level of ambit ion and  the 
work that South Africa wa s carrying out on trade facilitation. The US also appreciated that 
South  Africa had taken  note of their comments on articles 1.4, 10.6.2, and 12.2  of the TFA.  
1.171.   The representative of the European Union  thank ed South Africa for the efforts  South Africa 
had invested in th eir notification. This had  led to changes in category designation from category B 
to category C for a number of South Africa's commitments . The EU welcome d the level of South 
Africa's ambition.  
1.172.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention a notification from Sri Lanka  
(G/TFA/N/LKA/1/Add .1). 
1.173.   The representative of Sri Lanka  informed the Committee that Sri Lanka had notified its 
category A commitments on 31 July 2014 and its category B and C commitments on 8 February 
2018. In th e second notification , Sri Lanka had indicated definitive dates for implementation of 
category B commitments as well as for its category C  commitments . There were two category B 
commitments under article 7.1 and under article 10.5 of the TFA to be completed by 31 December 
2019.  The definitive dates for implementation for category C provisions were to be determined with 
expected donor assistance.  
1.174.   Sri Lanka wished to inform the Committee  of donor assistance that Sri Lanka had received 
so far - or that had been agreed upon - for the implementation of selected category commitments.  
The implementation of commitments under article 1.2  of the TFA had been assisted by the World 
Bank Group , through the Australian Agency for International Development ( AUSAID ) and ITC , and 
through an EU-funded trade capacity building programme. The trade information portal would be 
completed by June 2018. With regard to advance ruling s under article 3  of the TFA , training for 
officials of Sri Lanka Customs had  been facilitat ed by USAID in July 2017. Regar ding Article  7.4 of 
the TFA,  risk m anagement , training for staff of Sri Lanka n customs had been assisted by the World 
Bank Group through AUSAID in November 2017.  Establishment and publication of average release 
times under Article 7.6 of the TFA would  be completed by June 2018 , indicatively , with the technical 
assistance of ITC through an EU-funded programme.  The establishment of a single window under 
Article 1 0.4 of the TFA had been  facilitated by the  World Bank Group through A USAID. The 
development of a related blue print wa s to be completed in June 2018. ITC w ould also support 
familiarization of officials and  a public -private dialogue on  the single window under an EU-funded 
programme.  The World Bank Group , through the AUSAID programme , would  continue to assist Sri 
Lanka in terms of overall technical support and  with regard , in particular , to amendments required 
through the customs ordinance. Further technical assistance and planning of activities of the National 
Trade Facilitation Committee h ad been assisted by the World Bank Gr oup and ITC under  funding 
assistance from AUSAID and the EU. 
1.175.   Although Sri Lanka had  achieved considera ble progress in implementing its  TFA 
commitments, Sri Lanka still require d technical and funding assistance , particul arly relating to legal 
expert support, the building of necessary technical infrastructure, capacity building for technical 
staff, laboratory and testing equipment , strengthening the National Trade Facilitation Committee , 
and for a public-private sector dia logue. P recise information was outlined in notification 
G/TFA/N/LKA/1 . G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 18 - 
 
  1.176.   Sri Lanka was confident that don or countries would be able to fi ll the se gaps in order to 
ensure  Sri Lanka's  effective implementation  of all commitments. Sri Lanka wished to convey sincere 
thanks to the donor agencies that had already extended their support to Sri Lanka . A special private 
public p artnership had been initiated in Sri Lanka by the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation. Th e 
project had been named  "Multi Cargo Co nsolidation Hub". The objective wa s to facilitate trade by 
establishing value chain operations in Sri Lanka,  taking into account the country's advantageous 
geographical location.  Sri Lanka was thankful for the initiative. The project wa s expected to be 
completed in three phases over a period of three years.  
1.177.   Sri Lanka  hoped th at the  TFA would boost  cost-effective cross - border trade. They 
underst ood that it would improve the com petitiveness of their small and medium -sized enterprises 
(SMEs ). However, such ho pes could  only be achieved throug h the effective implementation of thei r 
commitments through require d technical assistance and funding from  donors. At the same time , 
they had the responsibility of gearing up both the public and the private sector to embrace  the 
required changes and to get use d to the new digital/online bord er procedures. C hanging the mind -
set of people from human interactions to online process es was a daunting task.  
1.178.   The representative of the European Union  thank ed Sri Lank a for the in formation  they ha d 
provided and looked forward to the coordination among donors which they hoped would lead to the 
successful provision of assistance . The EU  had an assistance program implemented by ITC and 
partners , which bega n in 2017 , and which sought t o help Sri Lanka and other  LDCs with their 
competitiveness . 
1.179.   The representative of the United States  appreciat ed Sri Lanka's notification and the 
information provided. It show ed that they were working hard on  implementation , and that there 
were early results being harvested. The US saw it as a model and acknowledge d the efforts that Sri 
Lanka had put in . The United States looked forward to continued cooperation , bilaterally and 
regionally , as well as to hearing success stories from the partner ship addressed . 
1.180.   The representative of Sri Lanka  said that Sri Lanka looked forward to  working closely with 
the US and the EU on implementi ng future category commitments.  
1.181.   The Chair turned to a notification that had been submitted by Thailand 
(G/TFA/N/THA /1/Add.1).  
1.182.   The representative of Thailand  inform ed the Committee that Thailand had started work on 
additional notifications, especi ally on article 1.4 of the TFA.  
1.183.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Thailand for their notification , noting that 
over 94  per cent of the TFA provisions had been designed as category A  commitments. The US also 
appreciate d the rapid implementation of the TFA and the definitive implementation dates provided 
under category B.  The update on the article  1.4 notification wa s appreciated as well . The US 
Commercial Law Development Program welcomed the opportunity to provide  support for Thailand 
as part of a regional workshop on technical assistance for cross -border management and best 
practi ces in customs procedures . The US lo oked forward to future opportunities to work together.  
1.184.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a noti fication that had been submitted from 
Togo (G/TFA/N/TGO/1) . 
1.185.   The representative of Togo stated th at Togo had submit ted its notification of category A, B 
and C commi tments in December 2017. Around 4 3 per cent of the provisions had been designed as 
category A commitments , 33 per cent as category B , and 24 per cent as category C. With regard to 
the measures designated as category C , Togo had marked down the type of assistance it was looking 
for with regard to capacity building for imple mentation.  
1.186.   The representative of the United States  appreciate d the notification from  Togo, which 
includ ed indicative dates and details of the assistance they we re seeking to help them implement 
the TFA provisions. The US looked forward to seeing the definitive category B dates.  Togo was a 
participant in the World Bank TFSP Program . The US looked forward to the discus sion on the 
assistance provided in that context. T he International Finance Corporation and the World Bank Group G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 19 - 
 
  had ongoing programmes . The US would appreciate upd ates on those programmes and any  related 
efforts.  
1.187.   The delegate of Togo said that T ogo would follow up in capital.  
1.188.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification from Trinidad and Tobago 
(G/TFA/N/TTO/1).  
1.189.   The representative of Trinidad and Tobago  thanked the WTO Secretariat  for assistance with 
the preparation of the notification that it  had been submitted on  27 November 2017 . Their i nput was 
appreciated.  
1.190.   The representative of the United States  appreciated the n otification and the indic ative dates 
for category B and C commitments. The US looked forward to seeing the definitive dates for catego ry 
B. 
1.191.   The Chair turned the Committee's attention to a notification from Turkey  (G/TFA/N/TUR/1).  
1.192.   The representative of Turkey  stated that Turkey had submitted its category A commitments 
on 16 July 2014. A fter a review of  internal procedures  by all coordinating stakeholders , Turkey had 
submitted another notification on 15 March 2018 , which moved a rticle 7.9 of the TFA into category 
A. As a result of th at process,  all provisions of  Section I of the TF Agreement were now designated 
as fallin g under category A.  
1.193.   The representative of the United States  appreciated the fact that Turkey had designated 100 
per cent of its commitments  as category A  commitments  and Turkey's robust ambitious approach to 
trade facilitation. They noted  that articles 1.4, 10.6.2, 10.4.3 and  12.2 of the TFA were listed as 
category A provisions and urged Turkey to make related information available to the Secretariat as 
soon as possible.  
1.194.   The representative of Turkey  informed the Committee that Turkey was preparin g its 
notification under other article s of the TFA . 
1.195.   The Chair  turned to a notification  that had been submitted by the Ukraine (G/TFA/N/UKR/1).  
1.196.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Ukraine for their notifications and for their 
work on  trade facilitation. The US had an ongoing USAID bilateral mission in the area and work wa s 
ongoing with the US Commercial Law Development Program to provide technical assistance to 
Ukraine on a number of the article s of the TFA. Th e US appreciate d the opportunity of working with 
the Ukr aine and looked forward to continuing the work.  
1.197.   The representative of  Ukraine  appreciated the work with donors.  
1.198.   The Chair turned to a notification from Vanuatu (G/TFA/N/VUT/1), informing that Vanuatu 
was not represented at the meeting.  
1.199.   The representative o f the United States  thank ed Vanuatu for their notification and looked 
forward to seeing them a ccept the TFA as soon as possible.  
1.200.   The Chair informed the Committee that the end of the notifications listed under the current 
agenda item had been reached and opened the floor for m ore general statements that were not 
connected to a specific notification . 
1.201.   The representative of Jordan  inform ed the Committee that Jordan was in an advanced stage 
of preparing  its notification.  
1.202.   The representative of Switzerland  thank ed all Members for their notifications and their efforts 
towards transparent progress with the implementation of the Trade Facilitati on Agreement . The 
notifications we re valuable instruments to give guidance regarding technical assistance offers. To be  
as effective as possible, it was  essential that notifications contain ed detailed information on specific 
needs for the implementation of the pro visions concerned. There were still a number of notification s G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 20 - 
 
  that did not contain the definitive implementation da tes required  by the TFA. Switzerland  encourage d 
Members to determin e the timelines as soon as possible. They  believe d that transparency was crucial 
to ensure targeted technical assistance for an efficient and comprehensive implementation of the 
TFA and to provide predictability regarding the trading environm ent for all economic operators.  
1.203.   The representative of Ghana  inform ed the Committee that Ghana ha d notified its category 
A measures and wa s in an advanced stage of preparation for the  notification of category B and C 
measures , which  they would share  it with Members in due course.  
Notifications under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2, and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  
1.204.   The Chair turned to the second group of notifications, relating to a rticles 1.4, 10.4.3, 1 0.6.2 
and 12.2  of the TFA . All of them had  transparency objectives, either in a broader context such as by 
calling for information on publication sources, or in relation to particular areas such as single window . 
The agenda contained a list of the Members that had  provided a related notification since the 
Committee’s last meeting. They we re circulated in the G/TFA/N document series . With  recent 
additions, the current overall number of notifications stood at 50 for notifications under a rticle 1.4, 
33 for article 10.4.3, 35 for article 10.6.2 and 45 for article 12.2.2. Before turning to the newly 
submitted notifications, he invited the WTO Secretariat  to reply to the earlier question from 
South  Africa.  
1.205.   The representative of the WTO Secretariat  informed the Committee that there was no 
particular template for th ese notifications . This was largely due to the fact that, unlike in the case 
of notifications of category ABC commitments, the notification of input under articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 
10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the TFA were less of a standard process in that there was a greater degree of 
variation in what Members were prepared to provide . It was worth recalling that the transparency  
notification s include d information on aspects such as details of the operation of a single window  
where the underlying obligation was prescribed in a way that allowed for a considerable degree of 
flexibility . Article 10:4:1 of the TFA require d that "Members shall endeavour to establish o r maintain 
a single window (…)" . As a r esult, Members were at different stages of work in some areas, which 
seems to have an impact  on their notification process.  
1.206.   At the same time, guidance was available, both  from the example of  already existin g 
notifications , and from the WTO Secretariat  being happy to provide support. T here now existed a 
good amount of input on all the transparency notifications , which should all ow a Member working 
on its notification  to find a suitable model that fitted its particular needs. T he Secretariat remained 
open to assist if there was interest in such support. That included input on  notification  format ting 
and editing.  
1.207.   Once the process had been  finalised and a Member was prepared to submit its notification  
formally , the information wa s made available in the way infor mation on all notifications  was 
circulated. T his typically began with informal distribution via  the TFC e-mail distribution list, and 
then proceeded to  disseminat ion through the official channels , including availability on the vario us 
WTO websites.  
1.208.   The Chair reiterated that the WTO Secretariat  was always open if Members wished  to 
approach  them about assistance with notifications . Given that Members had already made comments 
on many of the transparency notifications under the previous agenda sub-item, he wondered 
whether it would be acceptable to group the notifications and to address them in a package in stead 
of going through them one after the other.  
1.209.   The representative of the United States  stated they had gone through the notifications th at 
were received and had prepared comments on th em. The earlier US interventions had referred to  
notifications  that did not a ppear  in the agenda . The United States asked the Committee to take up 
each of the notifications individually.  
1.210.   The Chair  stated that , since thi s had been the practic e under  the first sub-agenda item, there 
was no reason to change that during the second stage . Before looking at specific notifications, he 
indicated that he would give the opportunity to delegations to make general statements on the 
notifications under  the second  agenda sub-item. G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 21 - 
 
  1.211.   The representative of the European Union  said that transparency wa s key to  the functioning 
of the  TFA, as it was for all other  WTO commitments. The EU was aware that  measures such as 
making available relevant  legislation and customs procedures on the internet and  creating or 
managing a single window could not be done overnight and that those initiatives  were quite 
demanding. Th at explained why many countries ha d not included  those article s as a commitment 
under category  A. 
1.212.   At the same time, r egarding article 1.4 of the TFA , the EU was of the view that a number of 
Members we re bound to publish information, either because they were developed Members or 
because they had  included  this article  in their category A commitment s. The EU urged Members that 
had not already provided the information to notify it to the Committee as soon as possible.  
1.213.   Regarding article 12.2.2  of the TFA , it was essential for customs to cooperate and to 
exchange information on specific transactions. The EU  noted that at least 30 WTO Members , in 
addition to the EU , had categoriz ed this article as a category A  commitment . Among those  were de 
facto all developed countries , but also several LDCs and d evelopin g countries. However, few 
Members had  sent their contact details and the  EU encountered difficulties with c ertain Members as 
a result. The EU  therefore urge d all WTO Members  to provide the contact details of their authorities 
in charge of implementing th at article without delay . 
1.214.   The representative of Canada  encourag ed Members that  had not already done so to submit 
their transparenc y notific ations. Canada believed that the se provisions we re an integr al part of the 
TFA and th at they had great potential to help lower the trade costs for businesses. T he return on 
investment of tho se provisions could  be quite significant, most importantly for article 1.4 of the TFA 
regarding the notification of import, export procedures , particu larly for mi cro, small  and medium 
sized enterprises who lack ed the resources to track down th at information. Based on Canada's 
experience, preparing, completing and submitting th e notification could also be helpful for internal 
purposes in terms of developing a better  understanding of the vari ous procedures that a Member 
had in place. For example, whilst Canada' s import and export procedures we re all freely a vailable 
on the internet, they were admittedly sprea d across multiple websites maintained by various 
Canadian mi nistries or agencies involved in trade. Now that Canada had prepared the notification , 
they had  a comprehensive listing they did not  have before of all the various sources of information . 
That could be helpful to a company looking to export from or to impo rt into Canada. Keeping the 
information up to date was of course a challenge , but they we re hopeful that this challenge could be 
discussed and ultimately overcome.  
1.215.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  said that, a fter the TFA had  entered into force more 
than one year  ago, only 50 Members had  submitted the transparency notific ations. Transparency 
under the TFA wa s particularly important and information on Members' import and ex port procedures 
directly affected  the participation of SME's in international trade. Moreover , the TFA had  a unique 
design in that its implementation, f or example in Section II  of the TFA , hinged  on Members' 
notifications.  Hong Kong, China encourage d Members to accord priority to the important task relating 
to notification s and to share any difficulties regarding the preparation of the notifications. Hong 
Kong, China underst ood that the variety and the different timelines of TFA notifications we re new to 
all Members  and the efforts required could  be much bigger  than those for the submi ssion of a 
notification under other WTO Agreements. Nevertheless, if Members  could identify th e challenges, 
they could jointly explore the best ways to overcome them.  
1.216.   In 1996 , to give an example,  after the conclusion of the Uruguay  Round, technical 
cooper ation handbooks had been prepared under individual Agreements, and some Committee s had  
subsequently developed their own notif ication guides on specific A greements, which could include 
real examples and best practices. In some cases, workshops had been organised for capital officials 
responsible for the preparation of no tifications. For the very new  Agreement , Members could develop 
their own way to improve notification pe rformance. Hong Kong, China stoo d ready to contrib ute 
constructively  to the discussion.  
1.217.   The representative of Japan  underline d the importance of enhancing transparency , which 
would  be beneficial to  traders. A  useful workshop on quantitative restrictions had been held on 24 
April relating to the Committee on Market Access . Some of the takeaways from th at workshop c ould 
also be useful for Members in preparing notifications under the TFA . For example, one of the biggest 
challenges Members had  reported when talking about the prepar ation of notification s was how to 
coordinate with different authorities and how to identify necessary information on laws and G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 22 - 
 
  regulations in the government. Th e workshop had also highlighted the importance of establishin g 
better coordination among the parties  concerned . If other Membe rs would consider it useful, Japan 
was willing to share its experiences with preparing the transparency notification under the  Trade 
Facilitation Agreement . Japan encouraged  the remaining Members to make their notifications as 
soon as possible.  
1.218.   The Chair  observed that there were no further requests for the floor for general statements  
and therefore turned  to the specific notifications listed in the airgram. Given that Belize, Guyana, 
Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz Republic were not represented  at the current m eeting , he proposed to 
first open the floor on those notifications (G/TFA/N/BLZ/2, G/TFA/N/GUY/2, G/ TFA/N/KAZ/1 and 
G/TFA/N/KGZ/1).  
1.219.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Belize for the ir transparency  notification . 
With respect to the notification  under article  1.4 of the TFA, the US wondered if Belize had the 
uniform resource locators or the links for subparagraphs (a) through (j) under article 1 of the TFA . 
The United States had noted that there wa s only a link to the general customs homepage , which 
was useful,  but it would be even more helpful if they could provide the links for subparagraphs (a) 
through (j). 
1.220.   The United States also had a  question on customs broker s. It was their understanding that 
Belize d id not mandate the use of customs brokers . However, since a rticle 10.6.2 of the TFA require d 
that relevant customs broker information was made available , it would be helpful of Belize could 
provide a link to their broker information  or indicate where it  was found in their national gazette.  
1.221.   With r espect to the notification from Guyana , the US wished  to thank them for their 
notification under articles 1.4, 10.6.2 and 12.2.2  of the TFA . They inquired as to whether Guyana 
had transit procedures or specific links to perishable goods and , if they did , if they could provide 
them to the WTO Secretariat . 
1.222.   With respect to the notification from Kazakhstan , the US considered the information very 
practic al for the importing community.  
1.223.   The US further wished to thank the Kyrgyz R epublic for their notification.  
1.224.   The Chair then turned the Committee's attention to a notification from Argentina 
(G/TFA/N/ARG/2).  
1.225.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Argentina for its transparency  notification. 
The transparency notifications were useful , especially  for small and medium -sized enterprises . It 
was important to have the information in a manner that made it easily accessible to traders . 
1.226.   The US had noted that  Argentina provide d a number of homepages and websites for their 
major agencies . They  wondered if Argentina  could provide additional information to the direct pages 
for some of the information. For example , regard ing fees and charges, if there wa s a customs fee or 
charge, it would be more helpful to provid e a link to a page on the fee or change than to merely 
give a link to the homepage of customs . That also applied to subparagraphs (a) through (j) of article 
1 of the TFA. Consequently, it would be helpful if Argentina  could consider  supplementing the 
provided information with additional  uniform resource locator s or websites, including for paragraph 
2.1 of the TFA . The US also expressed interest in the description or practical steps for importation , 
exportation and transit. They looked forward to seeing  an increase in the accessibility of the 
publication of th at information . It would a ssist small businesses in fully benefiting from the TFA. 
1.227.   The representative of Argentina  took note of the suggestions made by the United States, 
which would be conve yed to capital . Argentina wanted information to be readily available to small 
operators.  
1.228.   The Chair noted that there were no requests for the floor on a notification from Australia 
(G/TFA/N/AUS/1) . He therefore turned the Committee's attention to a notification from China 
G/TFA/N/CHN/2/Rev.1) . G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 23 - 
 
  1.229.   The represent ative of China  indicated that i n March  2018, China had submitted a revision of 
its original notification, G/TFA/N/CHN/2 . The new notification covered all notification requirements 
under articles 1.4 and 10.6.2  of the TFA. The p reparation of th e notificatio n had required a high 
degree of consultation a nd cooperation, as it involved  14 separate ministries. China did not s ee the 
notification as a onetime exercise . They would continue to update thei r notification as appropriate, 
taking into account new developm ents and also for the purpose of improving t he official websites.  
1.230.   The Chair noted that there were no requests for the floor for notifications from Costa Rica 
(G/TFA/N/CRI/2) , Iceland (G/TFA/N/ISL/1) , Lichtenstein  (G/TFA/N/LIE/1) , the Former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia G/TFA/N/MKD/1/Rev.1) , Singapore (G/TFA/N/SGP/1) and the European 
Union ( G/TFA/N/EU/1/Add.1 and G/TFA/N/EU/1/Rev.1) . He observed that Members seemed to have 
concluded th eir discussions under the current agenda  item and turned to the next matter – the 
status of the ratification process . 
STATUS OF RATIFICATI ON PROCESS  
Update by the WTO Secretariat  
1.231.   The representative of the WTO Secretariat  informed the Committee that, at the moment  of 
reporting , ratifications currently  stood  at an overall number of 136, which roughly corresponded  to 
83 per cent of the total of acceptance instruments expected  at the end of the process. The input 
came from  all parts of the world  with some regions being better  represented than others, as could 
be seen on the displayed chart. In the first five months of 2018 alone, ten new ratification 
instruments  had been deposited . A look at the indicated timeline showed a steady inflow. There had 
not been a dive off after the TF Agreement had entered into force. Rather, the instruments continued 
to come in , tracing a smooth curve.  
1.232.   At the time of reporting, 27  instruments remained pending . The difference between  the 
overall number of Members ' instruments that had been  received and the numb er listed on the slide 
displaying the outstanding business was the result of the way in which Members had decided to 
count the acceptance by the EU and its member states.  
1.233.   The WTO Secretariat  remained available to assist any Member seeking support or looking 
for information . When getting ready to deposit an accepta nce instrument, it was  helpful if the 
Member in question submit ted a draft to the Secretariat  in advance of  finalizing the notification 
process. This allowed  for the conduct of a legal review, which coul d be done very quickly and would 
ensure that the actual deposit could take place smoothly and without any delay. Such a draft would 
ideally be shared before the instrument was signed by the responsible domestic authorities . The 
turnaround time was usually very short. In virtually all cases, the Secretariat had been able to get 
back to the Member in question within less than 24 hours of receiving a draft instrument. In most 
cases, only  a few hours had been required.  
1.234.   The Committee took note  of the statements made  under agenda item A . 
B. EXPERIENCE SHARING /THEMATIC DISCUSSIONS  
1.235.   This part of the meeting was conducted in informal mode , with the understanding that 
information Members are willing to share would be made available on a website 
(https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_tradfa_e.htm ) with related links being 
included in the minutes o f the meeting.  
1.236.    Members addressed the following issues:  
NATIONAL TRADE FACILIT ATION COMMITTEES  
1.237.   Discussions under this item  included the following issues:  
Communication from the United States (G/TFA/W/5)  
1.238.   The United States presented a paper o n the structure and role of the US N ational Trade 
Facilitation Commi ttee (G/TFA/W/5). The US s tatement can be found following this link: G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 24 - 
 
  1.239.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet26june_usa_statementAr ticl
e2_e.pdf  
1.240.   The paper can be found  following  this link: 
1.241.   https://docs.wto.org/dol2festaff/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/G/TFA/W5.pdf   
Presentation by Tu rkey on Best Practices and Experiences with Establishing Turkey's 
National Trade Facilitation Committee  
1.242.   Information on the presentation can be found under the following link:  
1.243.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -3may_ntfc_turkey_e.pdf  
Presentation by Brazil on Experiences with Establishing Brazil's National Trad e Facilitation  
Committee   
1.244.   Information on the pre sentation can be found  following this link: 
1.245.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -3may_nt fc_brazil_e.pdf  
Presentation by the Republic of Moldova on Moldova's National Action Plan on Trade 
Facilitation  
1.246.   Information on the pre sentation can be found  following this link: 
1.247.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -
3may_ntfc_moldova_e.pdf  
TRANSIT  
1.248.   Discussions under this it em included the following issue : 
Presentati on by the European Union on EU Customs Transit Procedures, Including 
Arrangements with a number of neighbouring countries under the Common Transit 
Convention  
1.249.   The pre sentation can be found  following this link: 
1.250.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet26june_union_common_tra
nsit_e.pdf  
1.251.   An EU non -paper on the subject can be found  following this link: 
1.252.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet26june_eu_nonpaper_2_e.p
df 
IMPLEMENTATION EXPER IENCES  
1.253.   Discussions under this item  included the following issues:  
Presentation by China on China Customs' Experiences and Practices regarding the 
Implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.254.   Information on the pre sentation can be found  following  this link: 
1.255.    https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -3may_ie_china_e.pdf  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 25 - 
 
  Presentation by the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on practical aspects of TF A 
implementation  
1.256.   Information on the pres entation can be found following this link: 
1.257.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -
3may_ie_macedonia_e.pdf  
OTHER  
The Committee took note  of the statements made under agenda item B.  
C. OTHER BUS INESS  
1.258.   The representative of Uganda  reported on  the World Customs Organization's Authori zed 
Economic Operator (AEO) Conference that had taken place in Kampala, Uganda in March 2018.  
1.259.   The Conference had aimed at promoting mutual recognition of AEO's  and at strength ening 
and secur ing global trade . It had concluded on 16 March . AEO's were offered preferential treatment , 
such as fast clearance at borders or ports  by compliance institutions . The C onference brought 
together more than 1100 participants from 95 countries and provided a platform for 125 speakers. 
During the C onference , a total of four  panel sessions, three  round tables , and 49 workshops were 
organized, together with live demo nstrations, focusing on operational practices directly related to 
international trade, such as the 17 - point trailer instruction and track - and - trace systems. 
Participants engaged in discussions on how AEO programmes and Mutual Recognition Arrangement s 
(MRA s) could provide a secure business environment for economic development, enhance 
compliance level s, increase revenue collection and trade facilitation, and obta in more benefits with 
coordinated border management , covering MRAs both at the bi lateral and plurilateral level.  
1.260.   Cross -cutting issues included  the need to build trust , not only between c ustoms and private 
secto r companies but also among c ustoms authorities , the need to standardize and harmonize AEO 
programmes around the world, different ways of harnessing upcoming technology solutions, the 
importance of promoting AEO programmes to SMEs, and the increasing role of intermediaries, 
among other topics.  The Conf erence also saw presentations on the successful implementation of 
AEO programmes in the East African Community (EAC) region and inspired other regional blocks to 
implement such programmes and to learn lessons from acquired experience . Participants were als o 
interested in learning how to involve the private sector and how to consolidate the partnership with 
customs and other government agencies.  
1.261.   Uganda had  a total of 51 companies as AEOs which account ed for 28  per cent of the tax 
revenue generated. Of these , 30 were imp orters and exporters, while 21 we re clearing agents. 
Uganda remained  committed to facilitating trade locally and regionally and to creating a safe 
environment for business . 
1.262.   The Chair  addressed the date of the Committee's next regular meeting. R equests had been 
made by Members for a proper lead  time, expressing the need to prepare for Committee  sessions 
and for internal coordination. When discussing the matter at the open -ended informal meeting in 
March  of the current year , a call had been made for a minimum of 2 -months prior notice. The Chair 
recogniz ed the interest in ensuring that as many capital -based officials as possible could participate 
in Committee meetings and that many Members  needed time to organize  themselves . He therefore 
propose d to hold the next TFC meeting on Tuesday, 9 October.  
1.263.   The representative of the United States  stated that , while lead time for meeting preparations 
was needed and appreciated, the proposed date meant that the Committee would meet twice in 
2018. It was disapp ointing for the United States for the Committee to meet  less than other regular 
committees. They would be pleased to have this conversation with the next Chair person , possibly  
through consultations . 
1.264.   The representative of the European Union  acknowledged the referenced constraints and the 
fact that Members  needed  adequate time to prepare for meetings correctly. At the same time, she 
would ideally have liked to hold at least three sessions of the TF  Committee  in the year . Perhaps G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 26 - 
 
  Members  could try to find a solution by reducing the number  of items on the agenda  for each 
meeting , even just to one issue,  the sharing of practices. Limiting the number of items on the agenda 
would allow Members to go into greater depth in their discussions.  
1.265.   The Chair  recalled that committees in the WTO were very different , and that they had 
different meeting practices . There we re committees that me t less often than the TF  Committee. It 
should also not be forgotten that there had already been an open -ended meeti ng in March, in 
addition to the current meeting and to the proposed meeting in the autumn. Locking in  9 October 
as a meeting date would not preclude any  additional meeting option, but it would give Members 
proper preparation time  and predictability for the ir planning . He proposed that the Committee agree  
on the suggested date, October  9, and that delegations w ishing  to hold one additional meeting  
contact the incoming Chair to evaluate  that possibility.  
1.266.   It was so agreed . 
1.267.   The Chair informed the Committee of a change in the way in which  Members would be 
informed of future meetings, both with respect to the TFC and of other WTO committees, as the new 
practice was of a cross -cutting nature and affected WTO committees in gene ral. 
1.268.   As Members were already aware  of, the Secretariat had  been asked t o avoid paper whenever 
possible. The Director -General of the WTO had therefore informed Members at the Heads of 
Delegations ( HODs ) meeting of 23 February 2018, that the notes convening future HODs and TNC 
meetings would  be only sent by e -mail to delegations.  Other Committees had adopted the same 
practice.  
1.269.   It was therefore propose d to use th at practice in the TF Committee as well. As a result, all 
official note s convening TF Committee meetings would  be sent by e -mail, rather than  fax. The 
Secretariat would  use the general email address of Members' Permanent Missions. It would also 
keep the specific email mailing list that had been established for trade facilitation -related 
communications as an additional, informal channel.  To make sure that the information contained 
therein remained  accurate, the Secretariat  invite d Members  to indicate if the current ly available data 
required  updating. The Secretariat had prepare d a data sheet for that purpose that had been handed 
out and e mailed to Members  on the existing list. If Members  wished  to update their information , 
they should  contact the Secretariat. If there were  questions regarding  the general mailing lists, 
Members should contact Mr. Victor do Prado and his team from the Council and TNC Division of the 
WTO Secretariat . 
1.270.   Another issue concerned the participatio n by other international organiz ations at the next 
meeting of the TFC. He ask ed Members if they were prepared to invite representatives o f the so 
called "Annex D -organiz ations" (IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, WCO and World Bank) to take part, as they 
had done in the past and irrespective  of the date of the next  meeting.  
1.271.   It was so agreed . 
1.272.   The representative of Brazil  wished to raise another matter, relating to the agenda for the  
October 9 meeting . Brazil proposed contributions on the issues of (i) single window and (ii) 
authoriz ed economic operator s, when Members woul d be sharing their experiences.  
1.273.   The Chair observed that the Committee had taken go od note of that proposal and recalled 
that there had also been a proposal from Paraguay to address transit matters, to which the issues 
of single window and authorized eco nomic operators could be added.  He invited Members to indicate 
if there were any addit ional issues that they would like to discuss  at that session . 
1.274.   The Committee took note  of the statements made under item C.  
1.275.   The regular Committee meeting wa s adjourned . 
2  DEDICATED  SESSION ON ASSISTAN CE AND CAPACITY BUIL DING  
2.1.  The Chair welcomed delegations to the Committee's dedicated session on assistance and 
capacity building.  G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 27 - 
 
  2.2.  The topic of the meeting ha d been a long -standing focus of Members' work on Trade 
Facilitation. Aspects had a lready been discussed at  previous meetings and formed a standing item 
in the work of  earlier TF-related committees and bodies as well. The Trade Facilitation Agreement 
had added a new focus to the se exchanges by mandating  in article 21:4  the T rade Facilitation 
Committee  hold at least one dedicated session on assistance and  support per year . It also list ed the 
specific items that the Committee was meant to address, which had consequently been reflected in 
the airgram.  
2.3.  As in the case of the experience -sharing session  of the previous day and in line with the 
practices of previous meetings on the matter , he would like Members' discussions to be frank and 
interactive  and for delegations to feel free to raise any issue without wo rrying about everything they 
said appear ing in print . He also understood that  there was interest in avoidin g exchanges that would 
be limited to the exchange of pre -prepared  statements that were read only for  the record. He 
therefore asked if it were  agreeable to Members to have this  segment of the meeting take place in 
informal mode.  
2.4.  It was so agreed . 
2.5.  The subsequent  part of the discussions under item 2 took place in informal mode  under  the 
understanding that information Members were  willing to share would be made available on a website 
(https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_tradfa_e.htm ) with related links being 
included in the minutes of the meeting . 
2.6.  Members addressed the following issues:  
I. EXCHANGES ON ANY IM PLEMENTATION PROBLEM S 
2.7.  Discussions under this item inclu ded the following issue:  
TFA Notifications as Tools for Demand -driven A ssistance C onversation s: Contribution by 
the United States  
2.8.  The contribution by the Unit ed States can be found  following this link: 
2.9.  https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -
3may_ntfc_usa_tfa_notification_e.pdf  
II. REVIEW OF PROGRESS IN THE PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE AND SUPPO RT FOR 
CAPACITY BUILDING TO  SUPPORT THE IMPLEME NTATION OF THE TRADE  FACILITATION 
AGREEMENT  
2.10.   Discussions under this item included the following issues:  
United States Approach to Trade Facilitation  Assistance: C ontribution by the United States  
2.11.   The contribution can be found  following  this link: 
2.12.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/co mm_e/meet2 -
3may_ntfc_usa_overview_usaid_e.pdf   
Commercial Law Development Program : Contribution by the United States  
2.13.   The cont ribution can be found following this link: 
2.14.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -
3may_ntfc_usa_commerical_law_e.pdf   G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 28 - 
 
  III. THE SHARING OF EXPE RIENCES AND INFORMATION  ON ONGOING ASSISTAN CE AND 
SUPPORT FOR CAPACITY  BUILDING AND IMPLEM ENTATION PROGRAMS, I NCLUD ING 
CHALLENGES AND SUCCE SSES  
2.15.   Discussions under this item included the following issues:  
Overview of USAID Technical Assistance Resource Publications: Contribution by the 
United States  
2.16.   The con tribution can be found  following this link:  
2.17.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -
3may_ntfc_usa_overview_usaid_e.pdf   
Overview of EU Approach to the Provision of Assistance: Presentation by the European 
Union  
2.18.   Discussions included a contribution by Germany,  which can be found  following this link:  
2.19.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e /comm_e/meet2 -
3may_dsacb_germany_e.pdf  
2.20.   A contribution was also made by Sweden, which can be found under the following link:  
2.21.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -
3may_dsacb_sweden_e.pdf  
Viet Nam and United States Cooperation on Trade Facilitation: Contribution by Viet  Nam 
and the United States  
2.22.   The contribution by Viet  Nam can be found following this link: 
2.23.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -
3may_dsacb_us_vietnam_e.pdf  
2.24.   The contribution by the Unit ed States can be found  following this link: 
2.25.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -3may_us_vietnam_e.pdf  
Colombia and United States Cooperation on Trade Facilitation: Contribution by Colombia 
and the United States  
2.26.   The con tribution can be found  following this link: 
2.27.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/m eet2-
3may_dsacb_us_colombia_e.pdf  
Update on Multi -Donor Initiatives  
2.28.   There were no interventions on this agenda item.  
IV. THE REVIEW OF DONOR  NOTIFICATIONS AS SE T FORTH IN ARTICLE 2 2 OF THE TFA  
2.29.   This segment of the meeting saw the presentation of a notification submitted by Australia 
(G/TFA/N/AUS/2 ). G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 29 - 
 
  V. THE REVIEW OF THE O PERATION OF ARTICLE 21:2 (ASSISTANCE AND  SUPPORT FOR 
LDCS)  
2.30.   The discussions under this item included a contribution by the United States . It can be found 
following this link: 
2.31.   https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/comm_e/meet2 -3may_art21_ldcs_e.pdf  
Update by the WTO Secretariat on Activities of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facil ity 
2.32.   The Committee took note  of the statements made under agenda item 2.  
2.33.   The dedicated session was adjourned . 
3  HANDOVER  OF COMMITTEE CHAIR MANSHIP  
Election of New Chairperson -Designate  
3.1.  The outgoing Chair recalled that at its meeting of 26 March 2018, the Council of  Trade in Goods 
(CTG) had approved a list of Chairs for its subsidiary bodies that report to the CTG, of which th e TFC 
was one. He  had been pleased to note that A mbassador Dalia Kadišiene from L ithuania had been 
chosen for the TF Committee . He invited Member s to formally elect h er, by acclamation, as the new 
Chair of the T rade Facilitation Committee . 
3.2.  Ambassador Kadišiene  was elected by acclamation . 
3.3.  The outgoing Chair congratulated the newly elected Chair and invited her to come to the 
podium. He thank ed everybody for the excellent cooperation over the past year. I t was no 
exaggeration to say that, collectively, Members had been able to get the new Committee off to a 
good start.  
3.4.  It had  been an honour to be the first Chair of the Tra de Facilitation Committee. It was not often 
that new committees were created in the WTO. The TF Committee was still in its initial phase and 
would continue to develop. The current meeting ha d demonstrated that it was becoming a real 
committee. There had been quite a bit  of progress, but the nature of the work w ould change . At the 
beginning, there would naturally be a focus on notificatio ns but in a few years, the Committee would 
concentrate o n other matters, as it should , and as the trajectory of all  WTO committees  had been . 
The WTO Secretariat  and the incoming Chair were open to any ideas Members might have on how 
to make the work of the C ommittee even more efficient.  
3.5.  Looking at th e meetings that had taken place during the current week, the regular Committee 
session and the dedicated session, many delegations had noted that there had been an element of  
overlap . It might be interesting for Members to think about what was going to be discussed in what 
session and whether they wished to introduce the dedicated issues into the regular agenda  of the 
Committee . The issue of rules of procedure  was another matter that Members might wish to think 
about  further . 
3.6.  He thanked all Members as well as the WTO Secretariat , in particular the secretary of the TF 
Committee for having made the TFC an exci ting and interesting Committee.  
3.7.  The newly elected  Chair thanked the outgoing Chair and noted that she was pleased and 
honoured to have been selected as Chair of the  Trade Facilitation Committee . It was a really 
important C ommittee and a really signif icant A greement. Coming from a small Member with an open 
economy  and having been directly inv olved in the preparation and implementation of T rade 
Facilitation  projects, she was very familiar with the benefits of effective, efficient, smooth  and 
transparent trade.  
3.8.  Having carefully followed the discussions  in the recent  Committee meetings, she recogniz ed 
that a lot ha d been accomplished. At the same time, there still seemed quite a bit of work ahead. 
She counted upon Members' support, understanding , and cooperation in order to move things 
forward. Only by working collectively and constructively would it be possible to a chieve  tangible, G/TFA/M/4  
 
- 30 - 
 
  concrete results that were important to WTO Members, their traders , and the t rading community  as 
a whole . She looked forward to working with delegations.  
3.9.  She pledged to approach her duties with great seriousness, dedication and enthusiasm. She 
wished to take the opportunity  to express her appreciation for the excellent work done by the 
outgoing Chair as well as for the WTO Secretariat  and its knowledge, expertise, experience, goodwill 
and patience.  She invit ed all Members not to hesitate to reach  out on any TFA - or related matters.  
3.10.   The Committee took note  of the statements made under  agenda  item 3 . 
3.11.   The meeting wa s adjourned . 
 
__________