G/TBT/W/578  
 
10 December 2018  
(18-7777) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  Original: English  
 
EUROPEAN UNION — REGULATION OF THE EU ROPEAN PARLIAMENT AN D OF THE 
COUNCIL LAYING DOWN R ULES AND PROCEDURES FOR COMPLIANCE WITH AND 
ENFORCEMENT OF UNION  HARMONIZATION LEGIS LATION ON PRODUCTS A ND 
AMENDING RELEVANT RE GULATIONS  
STATEMENT BY CHINA TO THE COMMITTEE ON TECHNIC AL BARRIERS TO TRADE  
14 AND 15  NOVEMBER  2018 
The f ollowing communication, dated 7 December  2018, is being circulated at th e request of the 
delegation of China . 
_______________  
1  PROPOSALS TO PROVIDE  SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR  E-COMMERCE   
1.  The p rovision is discriminatory against emerging busines s models such as cross border 
e-commerce. Cross -border e -commerce, by which goods are sold via parcels to consumers around 
the world, is a rapidly growing area of the economy. By simplifying trade, cross -border e -commerce 
provides EU consumers significant benefits from access to a greater variety of goods at low prices. 
Requiring every merchant around the world who sells any goods into the EU via cross -border 
ecommerce to designate a compliance person withi n the EU, will severely restrict benefits to EU 
consumers from cross -border e -commerce, as well as SMEs worldwide.  
2.  It is quit e difficult for E -commerce sector and small -size companies to designate an economic 
operator in EU. EU require certification to ensure the safety of products, it  is not necessary to require 
additional measure which will make unaffordable cost to e -commerce operator and small -sized 
companies.  
2  PROPOSALS TO STRENGT HEN THE POWER CONSTR AINTS OF MARKET SURV EILLANCE 
AUTHORITIES AND CORP ORATE  TRADE SECRET PROTEC TION  
3.  Article  14.3(b) gives the market surveillance authorities the power to audit the system, but this 
power is beyond the surveillance for the product itself ; nor does it clearly state the objective, criteria 
and procedure for audit, and it is difficult to ensure that so many EU market surveillance authorities 
can exercise this power in a fair and effective m anner, manufacturers will have great difficulties in 
responding to the system audits of so many EU market surveillance authorities.  
4.  According to the draft, market surveillance authorities can unconditionally enter the economic 
operators' workplace and exam ine, seize, take or obtain copies of information, data or documents, 
irrespective of their storage medium ; and even seal any premises or seize any information, data or 
documents (Articles 14.3(d), 14.3(e)), which are relevant to economic operators Trade se crets, 
information security risks, etc. The articles extend too much power of law enforcement to the power 
of judicial adjudication. Most European market surveillance authorities are non -government 
agencies. Although they are authorized by the government, the power to close the premises and 
seize the information, data and documents of the operators is only the jurisdiction of the state 
authority. Otherwise, it will lead to the abuse of power and the chaos of the market.  G/TBT/W/578  
 
- 2 - 
 
  5.  So we propose to delete Article 14.3 (b), 14.3(d), 14.3(e)(2) and 14.3(e)(3) and emphasize in 
articles of Chapter 5 that market surveillance authorities are required to the most strict 
implementation of laws and regulations, the principle of professional business confidentiality.  
__________