REST RICTED  
  
WT/COMTD/RTA/M/ 8 
 
4 April 2017 
(17-1847 ) Page: 1/4 
Committee on Trade and Development  
Eighth  Dedicated Session on Regional Trade  
Agreements    
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 14 MARCH  2017 
Chairman: H.E. Mr. Christopher Onyanga Aparr (Uganda ) 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA ................................ ................................ ....................  1 
B. CONSIDERATIO N OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS  ................................ .............  1 
(i) Status of the work of the Dedicated Session - report by the Chairman  ..........................  1 
(ii) Free Trade Agre ement between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations 
(ASEAN) and India (Goods) (WT/COMTD/N/35, WT/COMTD/N/35/Add.1, 
WT/COMTD/RTA/8/1, WT/COMTD/RTA/8/2)  ................................ ................................ ...........  2 
C. OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4 
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGEN DA 
1. The draft agenda as contained in document WTO/AIR/COMTD/RTA/ 3 of 3 March 2017 was 
adopted . 
B. CONSIDERATION OF REG IONAL TRADE AGREEMEN TS 
(i) Status of the work of the Dedicated Session - report by the Chairman  
2. The Chairman  said that he wished to provide Members with a brief update on the regional 
trade agreements (RTAs) notified under the Enabling Clause that were to be considered in the 
Dedicated Sessions on RTAs of the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD). He indicated 
firstly that there had been one new notification under the Enabling Clause since his last report to 
the Committee  in November 2016 . This concerned  Egypt's accession to the Common Market for 
Eastern and Southern Africa, which  was notified on 3 Januar y 2017  in document WT/COMTD/N/51. 
The parties ha d been requested to provide the data for the preparation of the factual presentation 
by 6 June 2017.  Turning to the agreement between the Dominican Republic and Panama, he 
informed the Committee that the Secr etariat ha d begun drafting the factual presentation  on this 
agreement . As for the  South Asian Free Trade Agreement, he noted that the Secretariat ha d still 
not received the data from the parties, which was requested by 22 December 2016.  
3. Moving to the Arab Mediterranean Free Trade Agreement (Agadir Agreement ) between 
Egypt, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia, he said that data ha d been received from Egypt, Jordan and 
Morocco. The Secretariat was still waiting to receive data from Tunisia, which was requested by 
15 July 2016.  In the case of the agreement between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and 
Singapore, although a draft factual presentation ha d been sent to the parties, the Secretariat was 
still waiting to receive data from the GCC parties, which had been  requested by 
23 November  2015. The Secretariat was also still waiting to receive comments on the draft factual 
presentation relating to the accession of Rwanda and Burundi to the East African Community, 
which was sent to the parties in 2014. For a number of other RTAs – namely, RTAs between India 
and Nepal, India and Afghanistan, India and Bhutan, and Cuba and El Salvador – the full set of 
data needed to complete the factual presentations had not been submitted by the parties. He 
urged the parties to these ag reements to provide the data as soon as possible. He went on to say WT/COMTD/RTA/M/ 8 
 
- 2 - 
 
  that there remained one RTA notified under the Enabling Clause that had not been ratified by all 
the parties. This was the Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA). Following the 
procedures of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA), a factual presentation of an 
RTA falling in this category would only be drafted after the agreement had been ratified by all the 
parties. The parties to PICTA were urged to inform the Secretar iat as soon as all ratifications were 
complete.  
4. The representative of  the United States  noted that there were several data and information 
requests that r emain ed outstanding , and indicated her delegation's interest in hearing any updates 
from the parties to the RTAs in question. She urged the parties  to submit th e requested data  and 
information , so that the Committee could proceed with its work . 
5. The Committee took note  of the interventions.  
(ii) Free Trade Agreement between the Association of Southeast Asia n Nations (ASEAN) and 
India (Goods) (WT/COMTD/N/ 35, WT/COMTD/N/35/Add.1, WT/COMTD/RTA/8/1, 
WT/COMTD/RTA/8/2 ) 
6. The Chairman  said that the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in Goods between ASEAN and 
India – which was known as the Trade in Goods (TIG) Agreement – was signed on 
13 August  2009, and entered into force for the parties on various dates in 2010 and 2011. The 
Agreement was notified under paragraph 4(a) of the Enabling Clause. Notifications concerning the 
Agreement were made on 19 August 2010 in document WT/ COMTD/N/35, and subsequently on 
31 May 2012 in document WT/COMTD/N/35/Add.1.  The factual presentation on the Agreement – 
circulated as document WT/COMTD/RTA/ 8/1 on 1 4 December  2016 – had been prepared by the 
Secretariat on its own responsibility in full co nsultation with the parties, in accordance with 
paragraph 7(b) of the Transparency Mechanism for RTAs. Written questions received from Canada 
and the US, as well as the responses by the parties, had been circulated in document 
WT/COMTD/RTA/8/2. H e proposed  to organize the consideration of the Agreement by giving the 
parties, and then other Members, the opportunity to provide general comments. Members could 
then turn to the specifics of the Agreement.  
7. The representative of Viet Nam, on behalf of ASEAN , said that the TIG Agreement formed 
part of the ASEAN -India Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation, which  
also include d an Agreement on a Dispute Settlement Mechanism, a Protocol to Amend the 
Framework Agreement and an Understanding on Article  4 of the TIG Agreement. The TIG 
Agreement was signed on 13 August 2009 , along with the Protocol to Amend the Framework 
Agreement. The main amendments made by the Protocol include d changes to the periods for 
reduction and elimination of applied most-favour ed-nation ( MFN) rates among the parties, and a 
decision to discontinue the early harvest program me. The TIG Agreement , which  was ASEAN’s 
seventh RTA , entered  into force for India, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand on 1 January 2010; 
for Brunei Darussalam, M yanmar and Viet Nam on 1 June 2010; for Indonesia on 1 October 2010; 
for Lao People's Democratic Republic ( PDR) on 1 January 2011; for the Philippines on 
17 May 2011; and for Cambodia on 15 July 2011. According to the ASEAN statistic s database, 
ASEAN impor ts from India reached US$19.4 billion in 2015, while exports to India amounted to 
US$39.1 billion . India was ASEAN's eighth largest trading partner. Machinery was an important 
import for India from several ASEAN countries , most notably the Philippines, Si ngapore, Malaysia 
and Thailand. Exports of mi nerals to India were significant for Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei  
Darussalam  and Viet Nam.  The parties believed that the Agreement serve d as a building block to 
the multilateral trading system  – thereby  joining c ommon efforts to bring down protectionist 
measures and barriers to global trade , in accordance with WTO rules. In closing, he indicated  that 
any further written questions from Members would be transmitted to capitals, and respon ses 
would be provi ded in due  course.  
8. The representative of India said that  the year 2017 mark ed the 25th anniversary of the 
ASEAN -India Dialogue Partnership. He recalled that, on 28 January 1992 , at the 4th ASEAN Summit 
in Singapore , a decision was taken to establish a Sectoral Dial ogue Partnership between ASEAN 
and India. Since then, the relationship ha d progressed from strength to strength, with the two 
sides becoming full dialogue partners in 1996, Summit Partners in 2002 and Strategic Partners in 
2012. India’s "Look East " policy of the 1990s ha d matured into a dynamic and action -oriented "Act 
East" policy, which was enunciated by the Prime Minister of India at the 12th ASEAN -India Summit 
and the 9th East Asia Summit , held in Myanmar in November 2014.  At present, there were 30 WT/COMTD/RTA/M/ 8 
 
- 3 - 
 
  dialogue mechanisms between ASEAN and India, including a Summit and seven  Ministerial 
meetings covering a wide range of areas  such as Foreign Affairs, Commerce, Tourism, Agriculture, 
Environment, Renewable Energy and Telecommunications.  India’s trade with ASEA N had increased 
from US$45 .34 billion in the 2008-2009 period to US$65 .06 billion in 2015 -2016, and constituted  
10.12% of India’s total trade with the world. ASEAN was India's fourth  largest tra ding partner. 
Investment flows were also substantial both ways , with ASEAN accounting for approximately 
12.5% of investment flows into India since 2000. Foreign direct investment  (FDI) flows into India 
from ASEAN countries between April 2000 and May 2016 stood at US$49.40 billion, while FDI 
outflows from India to ASE AN countries  between  April 2007 and March 2015  amounted to  
US$38.67 billion.   
9. He went on to provide an overview of the TIG Agreement , and noted in this context that 
the regulatory provisions of the Agreement – including with respect to technical barriers t o trade, 
sanitary and phytosanitary measures , and safeguards  – were in conformity with the relevant WTO 
Agreements.  Tariffs were to be gradually liberalized according to the schedule of tariff 
commitments set out in Annex 1 of the Agreement. The parties wo uld reduce or eliminate their 
tariffs under a Normal Track – which was divided into Normal Tracks 1 and 2 – a Sensitive Track, 
Special Products, Highly Sensitive lists and Exclusion lists. A party could not institute or maintain 
any non -tariff measures on imports of goods from the other parties – or on exports to , or sale for 
export to, the other parties – except in accordance with its WTO rights and obligations , or other 
provisions in the Agreement. He also noted that India was the first developing Member to extend 
duty-free and quota -free (DFQF) market access to LDCs, in line with the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Decision of December 2005. India’s Duty-Free Tariff Preference Scheme (DFTP) Scheme for LDCs 
now provide d duty-free or preferential market access on 98. 2% of India’s tariff lines at the 6 -digit 
level of the Harmonized System . Only 1.8% of the tariff lines ha d been retained in the exclusion 
list, with no tariff concessions.  Cambodia, Lao  PDR and Myanmar were the three ASEAN countries  
benefitting from the DFTP S cheme. In addition, he informed the Committee that India was 
participating in the negotiation s to establish the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership 
(RCEP) , which involv ed ASEAN and its six FTA partners . The c onclusion of a balanced R CEP would 
further boost India's trade and investment ties with the region. In concluding, he noted that there 
was substantial scope for India and the ASEAN countries  to explore complementarities , and to 
harness the full potential of trade and investment ties.  
10. The r epresentative of the United States  appreciated that the parties had notified the TIG 
Agreement. She noted that t able 4.1 of the factual presentation listed other agreements that India 
and the ASEAN countries were party to , some of which had not been notifi ed. She called on the 
parties to notify these agreements  as well , and in this regard expressed appreciation to Malaysia 
and Turkey for having recently circulated the notification of their agreement . 
11. The representative of Canada  thanked the parties  for their written responses to her 
delegation's questions , which had been circulated in document WT/COMTD/RTA/8/2 .  
12. The representative of the European Union  said that her delegation wished  to draw 
attention to  the low coverage of the TIG A greement, particularly in  the case of Viet Nam and 
Brunei Darussalam. She invited the parties to consider r eview ing the concessions with the goal of 
broadening the coverage in the future, and in particular to address the current asymmetric 
situation. Taking into account the overal l limited coverage of the Agreement , she indicated her 
delegation's interest to hear from the parties on how they assess ed the impact it would  have on 
their bilateral trade. She also indicated her delegation's interest to know why some of the RTAs 
listed i n table 4.1 of the factual presentation  had not been notified .   
13. The representative of Japan  appreciated that the parties had submitted notifications of 
both the Framework Agreement and the TIG Agreement. His delegation believed that  it was 
important  for the WTO  to examine RTAs where new schedules of concessions or commitments 
were created  – even under framework agreements  – as this enable d Members to review the 
commitments made , and to consider the systemic implications for the multilateral trading system.  
He also expressed concern that a significant number of tariff lines would  still be subject to dut ies 
after the implementation of the TIG Agreement , and noted in particular in this regard that 49.6% 
of Indonesia’s tariff lines w ould remain dutiable. He enc ourage d the parties to make further 
liberalization efforts in ongoing and future RTA negotiations, including in the context of t he RCEP.  WT/COMTD/RTA/M/ 8 
 
- 4 - 
 
  14. The representative of the United States  referred to her delegation's questions that had 
been circulated  in document WT/ COMTD/RTA/8/2. She recalled that, i n question 12, her delegation 
had drawn attention to the data that showed that trade between some of the parties actually 
appeared to decrease after the TIG A greement entered into force.  In their response, the parties 
had indicated that sometimes an increase in trade could not be the single yardstick to measure the 
performance of an FTA, as there could be several factors impacting trade. In follow -up to this, she 
inquired  what other yardsticks the parties  used to measure t he effect of the Agreement , which 
only covered trade in goods. She asked if the p arties could  provide some illustration of th ese other 
yardsticks and share them with the Committee , so as to help better understand how the success of 
the Agreement was being measured . 
15. The representative of India requested Members to submit their questions  in writing, so 
that they could be forwarded to capitals  for consideration . 
16. The Chairman  said that oral discussion of the FTA in Goods between ASEAN and India 
could be conclud ed in accordance with paragraph 11 of the Transparency Mechanism for RTAs. 
Further questions by Members would need to be submitted in writing to the Secretariat within one 
week, by 21 March 2017.  The parties would then be given two weeks to submit written  replies, by 
no later than 4 April 2017. In accordance with paragraph 13 of the Transparency Mechanism, all 
written submissions as well as the minutes of the meeting would be circulated promptly in all WTO 
official languages, and would be made available on  the WTO website.  
17. The Committee took note  of all interventions.  
C. OTHER BUSINESS  
18. No matter was raised under "Other Business".  
19. The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________