WT/REG314/M/1  
 
12 October 2015  
(15-5333)  Page: 1/5  
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Seventy-eighth Session   
 
FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND COLOMBIA,  
GOODS AND SERVICES 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 25 SEPTEMBER 2015 
Chairman: Ambassador Amr RAMADAN (Egypt) 
1.1.  The 78th Session of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (hereinafter 'CRTA' or the 
'Committee') was convened in Airgram WTO/AIR/RTA/3 dated 12 August 2015. 
1.2.  Under Agenda Item B.V of the session, the CRTA considered the Agreement between the 
United States and Colombia, goods and services (hereinafter "the Agreement"). 
1.3.  The Chairman said that the Agreement had entered into force on 15 May 2012. It had been 
notified to the WTO by the Parties on 8 May 2012 under Article XXIV:7(a) of the GATT 1994 and 
the Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV of GATT 1994 as an Agreement 
establishing a free trade area (document WT/REG314/N/1) and under GATS Article V:7(a) as an 
Agreement providing for the liberalization of trade in  services within the meaning of Article V of the 
GATS (document S/C/N/643). The text of the Agreement was available, together with its Annexes, 
on the Parties' official websites. The Factual Presentation on the goods and services aspects 
(document WT/REG314/1 dated 15 July 2015) had been prepared by the Secretariat on its own responsibility in full consultation with the Parties, in accordance with paragraph 7(b) of the Transparency Mechanism for Regional Trade Ag reements (document WT/L/671). In addition, 
written questions and replies on this Agreemen t had been distributed in document WT/REG314/2 
dated 17 September 2015. He proposed to organize the consideration of the Agreement by first asking the Parties and then other Members to give any general comments and then turn to the 
specifics of the Agreement. 
1.4.  The representative of Colombia greeted all WTO Members, governments and international 
organizations with observer status on the occasion of the 78th meeting of the CRTA and thanked 
and commended the Secretariat for document WT/REG314/1 containing the Factual Presentation 
on the Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Colombia. The report was complete 
and objective. He also thanked the delegation of the United States for its close and excellent cooperation in conducting the review, and Member s for their questions, which had already been 
answered and were extremely useful in shedding light on some of the specific issues that had 
arisen. 
1.5.  The United States had historically been Colombia's main trading partner. A considerable 
share of exports from Colombia had been directed to that market. The U.S. had also been one of 
the leading foreign investors in Colombia. This trade link was an important economic justification for eliminating barriers to substantially all trade in goods and services, a move which would result 
in increased trade.  
1.6.  The Agreement had entered into force on 15 May 2012, and had been concluded with the 
view to stimulating bilateral trade, promoting foreign investment in both countries and establishing clear trade rules between the parties. It also so ught stability in the preferences offered by the 
United States on a voluntary, temporary and unilateral basis through the Andean Trade Promotion 
and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA) with respect to certain tariff lines, while opening up new 
opportunities for products not covered by that Act. WT/REG314/M/1 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.7.  In addition to promoting comprehensive ec onomic development to reduce poverty and create 
new employment opportunities, the Agreement met the requirements of Article XXIV of the GATT 
1994. One of the compatibility criteria for free trade agreements under this Article was the "elimination of duties on substantially all trade". In this regard, paragraph 3.4 of the Secretariat's 
Factual Presentation stated that "the Agreement provided that duties on nearly all products would 
be eliminated upon entry into force of the Agreement or reduced over a maximum period of 17 years for the United States and 19 for Colombia". In the case of Colombia, it provided for the 
liberalization by 2021 of 7,406 lines, or 99.1% of all of its tariff lines, a figure which would 
increase to 100% by the end of implem entation of the Agreement in 2030.  
1.8.  The Agreement also met the requirements of Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 in respect of 
other regulations governing trade. A free trade area had been established that facilitated trade 
between the two territories without introducing more restrictive trade regulations vis-à-vis  third 
parties. The Agreement contained trade regulations that facilitated bilateral trade such as: prohibition of export restrictions and export duties and taxes; cumulation of origin for materials 
originating in the United States and inclusion of a clause for the development of regional 
cumulation for the textiles/clothing sector. Certain non-originating inputs might be used in that sector where it had been determined that they were not available in commercial quantities in a 
timely manner and were included in the short-supply list. Many questions had been received from 
delegations on this subject; simplification of the certification of origin procedure through self-certification by the exporter, importer or pr oducer; rules on conformity assessment, technical 
regulations, trade facilitation, transparency, an d information exchange; application of bilateral 
safeguards only during the transition period; transparent and non-discriminatory administration of 
the agreed quotas, with information available to the public; prohibition of export subsidies on agricultural products destined for the territory of the other Party; issuance of advance rulings on 
tariff classification and origin; inclusion of a specific chapter on the textiles/clothing sector with 
enforcement and anti-circumvention provisions for laws affecting trade and determination of the accuracy of claims of origin. 
 
1.9.  The Agreement also met the requirements of  Article V of the General Agreement on Trade in 
Services. Liberalization of trade in services had substantial sectoral coverage and the absence of discriminatory measures was bound, with a few exceptions, across the services sectors that 
formed part of the Agreement. Table 4.2 of the Secretariat's Factual Presentation had compared 
the United States' commitments in the Agreement with its WTO commitments. It showed that there had been a general improvement in the commitm ents for a significant number of sectors. At 
the sub-sectoral level, there were a large number of specific improvements leading to the 
elimination of restrictions in sectors which had previously been unbound. Table 4.3 of the Secretariat's Factual Presentation had made a similar comparison for Colombia. It showed that 
Colombia had improved its specific commitments compared to those set out in the WTO schedules 
for almost all services sectors, and in many of them it had made commitments without limitations. The Agreement, through a negative list structure co vered the totality of services sectors. Colombia 
had only made specific exceptions in the application of certain obligations in Annexes I and II 
(non-conforming measures). 
1.10.  The Agreement had exceeded the scope of  the GATS. In addition to the actual GATS 
obligations, the chapters covering cross-border supply of services and establishment included 
additional obligations which had extended the degr ee of liberalization bound by each country. It 
also included specific chapters for financial services and telecommunications, which established other obligations relating to transparency, rules of competition, and aspects specific to each 
sector, such as how to ensure interconnection and the preservation of prudential measures.  
1.11.  Disciplines on sanitary and phytosanitary measures went beyond the WTO disciplines. In 
addition to the reaffirmation of the Parties' ri ghts and obligations under the WTO SPS Agreement, 
a Standing Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Matters would be set up to address and 
resolve trade issues with a view to expanding trade opportunities. Disciplines on technical barriers 
to trade went further than the WTO in the areas of conformity assessment, technical regulations, trade facilitation, transparency, and information exchange. The Agreement had introduced 
cooperation and transparency mechanisms. A Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade had been 
created whose functions included implementing the provisions of the chapter, ensuring that rules 
and regulations did not act as obstacles to trade,  promoting the convergence and harmonization of 
standards and improving systems for the verification of compliance with standards and 
regulations. WT/REG314/M/1 
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.12.  The parties had committed to improve a ccess to and transparency in the procurement 
covered by each party. Specifically, the U.S. commitments were similar to those assumed under 
the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement. Disciplines had been laid down on the essential elements of the notice of intended procurement, the time-periods for the submission of tenders, 
the notice of award and the tender documentat ion. Market access commitments on government 
procurement covered goods, services and construction services. 
1.13.  The Agreement contained disciplines on labour and the environment in two separate 
chapters. With regard to labour, the Agreement reaffirmed the obligations of the parties as 
members of the International Labour Organization. A Labour Action Plan had been signed in 2011 
and had achieved progress, inter alia , in optimizing labour inspection, further combatting and 
drastically sanctioning the misuse of cooperatives and other employment relationships, achieving 
greater formalization of jobs, making citizens aw are of the active role of unions, and fighting 
against violence and impunity. Colombia had fulfilled the actions set forth in the Labour Action Plan and would continue to work with the U.S. to come up with a joint cooperation agenda. Chapter 18 
on environmental matters recognized the sovereign right of Parties and their responsibilities with 
respect to natural resources. Building on this Chapter, Colombia and the U.S. had concluded an 
Environmental Cooperation Agreement (ECA) to strengthen environmental cooperation between 
the Parties and improve environmental protection, conservation and the sustainable use of natural 
resources. Finally, the Agreement recognized the sovereign right of countries to take measures for the conservation and sustainable use of biolog ical diversity and to ensure the respect and 
preservation of the traditional knowledge and prac tices of Colombia's indigenous Afro-Colombian 
and local communities. 
1.14.  In concluding, he reiterated that the Agreement had eliminated customs duties on 
substantially all trade, contained bilateral trade facilitation provisions that went beyond those set 
out in the WTO Agreements, did not introduce more restrictive trade regulations vis-à-vis  third 
parties, and the specific commitments on trade in services had substantial coverage. The delegation was ready to answer any questions Members might have. 
1.15.  The representative of the United States thanked the Government of the Republic of 
Colombia for its statement and their excellent cooperation in preparing for the meeting, the 
Chairman for his introduction and the Secretariat for its efforts to produce the Factual Presentation. He welcomed the consideration of  the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion 
Agreement, by the Committee and thanked delega tions that had provided written questions in 
advance of the meetings, for their interest in the Agreement.  
1.16.  The Agreement had strengthened the long-standing alliance and growing commercial ties 
between the United States and Colombia, and had ex panded economic opportunities for citizens in 
both countries. It was a key component of the United States' commitment to deepen commercial and economic engagement in the Western Hemisphere. Twelve of the 20 current U.S. FTA partners 
were in the Western Hemisphere. 
1.17.  The Agreement had entered into force on 15 May 2012. As of 2014, Colombia had become 
the 23
rd largest export destination for U.S. goods, and was its 25th largest supplier of goods. 
Two-way trade in goods had totalled US$38.4 billion in 2014. The Agreement was comprehensive 
– reflecting the United States and Colombia's commitment to fostering a favourable environment 
for free trade, investment, openness, and tr ansparency. Already, it had generated new 
opportunities for farmers, ranchers, businesses, se rvice providers, workers and consumers in both 
countries, further reaffirming their commitment to open-markets and trade liberalization.  
1.18.  Upon entry-into-force of the Agreement, du ties on U.S. consumer and industrial goods for 
more than 75% of Colombian tariff lines had been  eliminated, accounting for 80% of U.S. exports. 
On 1 January 2016, over 83% of tariff lines on U.S. consumer and industrial products would be 
duty-free, and all remaining tariffs would be lifted  by 2021. More than half of U.S. agricultural 
products had become duty-free upon entry into force, with the majority becoming duty-free by 2026. Likewise, nearly 98% of U.S. tariff lines had become duty-free for Colombian products. The 
Agreement had not only maintained the preferential tariff treatment previously accorded to 
Colombia under unilateral U.S. preference programs , but had also provided preferential treatment 
for additional tariff lines.   WT/REG314/M/1 
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.19.  With respect to services, the Agreement had accorded meaningful market access 
commitments, national treatment, and regulatory transparency across all major services sectors. 
To meet the high standards of the Agreement, Colombia had eliminated a range of services 
barriers, including in the supply of cable televisi on services, professional services, and portfolio 
management services. The Agreement provided bene fits for businesses wishing to supply services 
cross-border, such as through electronic means, as well as businesses wishing to establish a presence locally in the other country. It also ensu red a secure and predictable legal and regulatory 
environment in both countries, a priority of foreign investors. 
1.20.  Through the Agreement, the United States and Colombia had both demonstrated their 
commitment to high standards for the protection of intellectual property by recognizing the 
importance of strong and effective intellectual property protection for the economies of both 
countries. The Agreement called on Colombia to implement improved standards for the protection 
and enforcement of a broad range of intellectual property rights, consistent with emerging international standards. When fully implemented,  such improvements would include requirements 
for IPR protections for copyrighted works like music, movies, and software from piracy in the 
digital environment; deterrent criminal pena lties against copyright piracy and trademark 
counterfeiting; robust patent and test data protection that respect the Doha Declaration on the 
TRIPS Agreement and Public Health; and state-of-the-art protection for trademarks. 
1.21.  The Agreement's multiple, cross-cutting transparency obligations, both in a separate 
chapter devoted to regulatory transparency an d spread throughout other chapters of the 
Agreement, had substantially improved upon previo us policies and practices, and were facilitating 
the flow of trade and investment between the United States and the Republic of Colombia. The 
Agreement had reaffirmed and expanded upon the WTO's Government Procurement Agreement 
(GPA) to provide for non-discriminatory treatment of goods and services of each party across a 
broad range of the other's government procurement market, both at the federal level and the sub-
regional level. The Agreement required the use of fair and transparent procurement procedures, 
such as advance notice of purchases and timely and effective bid review procedures.  
1.22.  The United States believed that the strong growth in foreign investment seen in the 
Colombian market had been enhanced by its commitment to open its market, as well as the transparent, predictable business climate resulting from stronger regulatory and trade facilitation 
provisions, enhanced intellectual property rights  protections, improved business services, and the 
pro-liberalization position signalled by the Agr eement. The reforms undertaken to implement the 
Agreement made Colombia a more attractive place for investors and were creating new opportunities for the Colombian people. Finally, th e U.S. looked forward to Members' questions. 
1.23.  The representative of the European Un ion thanked the parties for the review and the 
Secretariat for its work in preparing the Factual Presentation. The EU appreciated the 
presentations delivered by the Parties which had brought interesting insights into the Agreement 
and noted its comprehensive nature and the commendable tariff liberalization across all sectors. 
On services, the EU had noted the improvements on the level of commitments by both parties 
compared with their respective GATS commitments. The EU had submitted a few questions seeking clarifications on the degree of liberaliza tion by sector as presented in Table 4.2 of the 
Factual Presentation. In the case of the U.S., the EU welcomed the clarification that it did not have 
limitations regarding future sub federal measures inconsistent with national treatment. She also noted that the U.S. had not listed existing non-conforming measures at State level in the 
Agreement as stated in paragraph 4.21 of the Factual Presentation. This raised a transparency 
issue especially as legislation was mainly at State level in several sectors such as insurance, professional services, business services. She also requested an update on the developments that 
might have occurred in services since entry into force of the Agreement. According to the side 
letter on State measures the U.S. had committed to inform Colombia on State measures related to 
residency and nationality requirements in certain professional services in selected States. The EU understood this review had been completed in 20 February 2014 on a number of sectors and 
asked if there been any follow up to this re view. Concerning paragraph 4.5 of the Factual 
Presentation, an Annex also provided for the creati on of a working group on professional services 
and requested an update on the work of that working group. 
1.24.  The representative of Canada thanked the parties for their prompt response to Canada's 
questions presented in writing. He had a specific follow-up question which could be related to the 
EU's request for an update on developments in se rvices. Concerning paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 of the WT/REG314/M/1 
 
- 5 - 
 
  Factual Presentation on Colombia's exception for measures relating to the taxation of alcoholic 
beverages until four years after the date of entry into force of the Agreement, he asked how Colombia intended to address this issues specifically and by when. The response discussed efforts by the Office of the President and the Ministries of Finance and Trade to create a new proposal for 
submission to Congress for approval. Canada requ ested Colombia to provide some details and the 
timeline of this new process. 
1.25.  The representative of Chile thanked the parties for their responses to Chile's written 
questions and wished them success in the review. 1.26.  The representative of the United States thanked Members for their interest, their feed-back 
and comments. On the question by the EU on the Professional Services Working Group, he said 
that the Group had met in May 2014. At that meeting, it had agreed to undertake work on a 
questionnaire based plan for collecting and shar ing information on their respective licensing 
systems for engineers. Following the meeting, th e parties had finalized the questionnaire, had 
completed it for their respective country and had shared the results with each other. The 
information was being assessed to identify pragmatic future work. He asked the EU to provide its 
first question in writing and the U.S. wo uld endeavour to provide a prompt answer. 
1.27.  The representative of Colombia thanked Members again for all questions on the Agreement. 
Concerning the question by Canada, in the responses provided, the intention to implement the 
commitments in this area under the GATS had been clearly stated, particularly taking into account 
additional commitments undertaken by Colombia under the Agreement. This issue had encountered internal political problems. Colombia had tried to have conformity measures approved 
by Congress in the framework of the National Development Plan without success. Consultations 
with the interested parties had been requested an d the problem had been taken to the level of the 
Presidency for resolution. A consensus building process with all interested parties was taking place 
and it would be presented to Congress as soon as possible. The specific date had not yet been 
fixed. 
1.28.  The Chairman said that the considerat ion of the Goods and Services Aspects of the 
Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Colombia had allowed the Committee to 
clarify a number of questions and the oral discussion  of the RTA could be concluded in accordance 
with paragraph 11 of the Transparency Mechanism. If any delegations wished to ask follow-up questions they were invited to forward submission s in writing to the Secretariat by 1 October 2015 
and Parties were asked to submit replies  in writing by no later than 15 October 2015. In 
accordance with paragraph 13 of the Transparency Mechanism all written submissions, as well as minutes of the meeting would be circulated promptly, in all WTO official languages, and would be 
made available on the WTO website. 
1.29.  The Committee took note of the comments made.  
__________